VIDEO: Pennsylvania vs. Torsilieri Oral Arguments
“There is a difference between the conviction and the effect of the registry’s label of a ‘high risk of danger’ on individuals, particularly things like unemployment and joblessness, houselessness, depression, and even suicide are affected by the label. SORNA says that individuals on this registry pose a risk of sexual danger, not just at the time of conviction, but now and forever into the future as long as they are on the registry.”
Watch here or on YouTube.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If under 3% percent reoffend that is what our side quoted, is that considered “quite high” and does that warrant these rules from the legislature ? I think we proved our point in that we’re falsely label a danger for life without any due process.
There will always be people, groups of people who uses the registry for personal gain. And in politics they use it for fear mongering to seek re-election so of course there will never be true consensus from the legislature regarding our issues they will lose there fear mongering reelection ticket.
The court will have to step in to override the legislature and Governor and hopefully they gut Pennsylvania Sorna. The legislature still wants to use beliefs over facts. You decide the outcome of a case based on facts and evidence that is presented hopefully they put aside their beliefs and rule on facts presented to the court.
Yea, if youre locking up 20year old children putting them on the most intensive punitive monitoring program on the planet, id say theres a higher chance of recidivism when youve created the the program to produce recidivism.
I like how everyone is talking about “presumption” as if its definition is defined as “statistical fact”. The entire registry and its components are based on “presumptions” because if it was based on statistical data and facts Theye’d have nothing meaningful to support its implementation.
True, Gerald! We keep giving them real statistics, actual proof, and logical arguments.
They keep stating vague prognostications, biased and faulty logic, and suppositions.
I can say positively that the opposition is evil because they oppose the truth for personal gain!
Shame shame shame! As long as they have their boogyman/scapegoat class they are content to torture and abuse a million US Citizens in the name of retribution!
@JJJJ
I am no statistician, however, at the rate they are putting people on the registry, in 30 years half of the U.S population could be on the registry, especially if we all have to stay on for life. Ahh, but that means new jobs working in the field of registry compliance. Just think, that will become a new college course. Bachelor’s of Registry sciences.
It is disturbing that some of the justices were implying that a positive ruling in this case could mean that they will also have to use the same reasoning if a convicted felon brings suit claiming that the government can’t take away his right to bear arms. 2 very different issues, because the registry is a 24 hour a day punishment. Hopefully the majority of the justices will reject that argument.
Is this recording a new recent hearing?
It appears as though the Pennsylvania supreme court ruled on this 5 years ago. Although they left it open for the lower court to make some sort of decision based upon recidivism statistics they did not have.
https://mitchellhamline.edu/sex-offense-litigation-policy/2020/06/16/commonwealth-v-torsilieri-pa-2020/
https://mitchellhamline.edu/sex-offense-litigation-policy/wp-content/uploads/sites/61/2020/06/Trial-Court-Opinion.pdf
Is his a hearing to review the statistics?
even if they prevail, does any other states or US constitution protect the “right to reputation”
https://www.pietragallo.com/publications/simon-says-protect-my-reputation-understanding-pennsylvanias-constitutional-right-to-reputation/
Life on the registry is by law, not by sentence. Laws and sentences can be deemed unconstitutional.