It’s nice to hear from you James.

Its time now to stand up each and every one of you all on here. Each person needs to stand up for True Justice. Most all these cases are a fear factor mind thing to some. Be brave and have courage.

Submitting email addresses is so the offender’s online tracks can be followed if an investigation ever needs to be started.
Since most forums require either a username or email address to post (like here), the offender’s address can be used to track the doings of the person being investigated.. I am, in no way, saying that it’s fair.

I tried to explain to him that that condition is too broad even for parole and it could most likely be challenged and won. I also explained that having something that broad severely limits my ability to reintegrate into society and that the length of parole/probation for registrants in NC (5 years) makes this overly excessive. On top of that I said based on the wording its basically impossible for me to know what websites are off limits or which ones are ok. (Basically cant use the internet) Based on what he said, essentially the statute that got shot down by the scotus is still in effect for ppo. I will state for the record my ppo is a pretty stand up guy who maintains a good professional relationship and is fair. He offered to assist or facilitate a meeting with his supervisor or help with any legal process if I wanted to try to get this condition removed.

I would think they would try to narrowly tailor the ban for those on paper. I know those on paper have limited rights, but you would think the ppo dept would shy away from a blanket ban for those on paper.

When they ask for email addresses but have no intention to communicate with the offender via the email, then what was the purpose of asking?

When I ask for an email address I do so with the intent of using it to communicate. At my 2011 registry violation trial I asked my attorney to ask that question to my accuser, he refused!

Obviously they have a reason for asking, but it is not for communication purposes. That begs the question. Why are you asking for my email when you have no intention of using it for its original intended purpose?

I have just been informed today my probation officer and the sex treatment instructor decided I no longer need to come to class. They feel that it would be more harmful than helpful in my case. While I wasn’t quite sure and a bit confused when presented this opportunity last week it seems I went ahead with their decision.

What started in 2012 with this little internet deception and than the treatment program and down the road no treatment program and than later on back to treatment program, not to mention a little violation for not complying and a bit of interference during the polygraph test which resulted me back into court with the result of complying with the sex offender treatment program and now they feel they don’t want me into the class for their reasons I was a bit confused but took the offer anyway.

Now I have always been against these sex sting operations via the internet and deception is deception and I don’t care if the supreme court says they can do these things. We all know I am sure who they are going above.

While all the money spent has gone down the drain to fight in these ordeals it is water over the bridge. It could be said its all about money and it hurts me to see those in class hand their money or fee to those sex offender instructor during each class as I had to do in the past.

While the old saying ” don’t look a gift horse in the mouth” I still believe their is other motives in all this that are very crafty as these sting opportunities are. I would still like everyone to keep on pushing for these operations to go away as it is no more than man’s crafty scheme to dupe those into all this endeavor.

I hope everybody is doing well on here and NARSOL keep up the good work and each individual on here hang in their and fight this injustice as I am still doing.

Ok, eenie meeny miney moe, I will put this reply here….

So something that has struck me recently, is that when all the decisions that registration was not punitive were made, registration was different. It was simply a list that you had to keep the information current on, true it still felt a little punitive, but in reality, it was just administrative. Then started the restrictions. You can’t live here, you can’t go there, you can’t you can’t you can’t. This has made registration punitive, and someone needs to bring this up to the idiots that still believe it is not punitive. I have personally told the police when I registered, and they started telling me what I could and could not do, that they would not do that. I will do what I want, when I want, and if they have a problem with it, then we will go to court. And so far, nothing has happened. I even stuck in their face when a good friend of mine lived with me and the police tried to tell me to so’s could not live together. I reminded them that makes it punitive and therefore unconstitutional. They left, we continued to live together for 6 months until he got married.

When I was convicted, I gave up three rights, the right to bear arms, the right to vote and the right to be on a jury. Now, 25 years later, they have restore 2 of those rights, and if I really wanted to own a gun I would go after the third. That being said, my rights to travel, and especially to seek life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have not been given up and will not be given up. It may be a battle, but I have been fighting it for 25 years now.

Yes, I am on a tirade this morning, but I am right. Make restrictions, and the registration becomes punitive, and if the registration becomes punitive, then ex post facto jumps in. It is really that simple.

And btw, I do have an attorney now working on this very thing to not only get me off registration, but to make it as if I was never on it. Let’s hope for the best.

So far there is only an annual fee of $50.00, but I am sure they would love to charge us every time.

So if you are driving down the road and a school bus is in the oncoming lane heading towards you, if you don’t veer off the road in a hurry are you in violation of the law?

Madness, but I don’t wouldn’t put it past them.

I agree. I won’t make a move until some sort of “official” statement is made.
There were 18 RSO’s arrested in a Louisiana city a couple of years ago for using social media. I wonder how slow the state will be to toss out those convictions/charges
Did you know that Louisiana Tier 2 and Tier 3 RSO’s cannot be within 1000 feet of a school bus? Does this mean that those RSO’s are provided with school bus schedules so they will know where they CANNOT be? How do legislators think that makes anyone safer? Would they pass a law that bank robbers cannot be within 1000 feet of an armored car? And if they did, do you think the armored car companies would be willing to give their schedules to convicted bank robbers in order for those bank robbers to know where they CANNOT be? Same logic with the school bus… if the state wants RSO’s to stay at least 1000 feet from a school bus then that means the RSO’s are supposed to know where the school buses are. Right? How would parents of the kids on those school buses feel if they knew that RSO’s state-wide had the bus schedules? Do they feel safer now? Just a thought and an illustration about how ridiculous the law makers are. Last year there was a bill in Louisiana putting this same 1000 foot distance between RSO’s and any home school residence. If this would have become law, then each and every RSO would be entitled to the addresses of each and every home school residence in the state of Louisiana. Fortunately, the bill was withdrawn. Maybe someone came to their senses.
Keep in mind that these distances do not just apply to residing in that zone… in includes a RSO’s PRESENCE in that zone. This includes hospitals, airports, Walmart, etc. I made a map of my city and it is absolutely impossible for a Tier 2 or 3 RSO to even drive through on the Interstate. He/she would have to exit the Interstate and drive through residential neighborhoods at 15-25mph in order to comply with the 1000 foot restriction because there are two high schools on the Interstate here. Do parents that think they are “safer” actually know that the “evil and dangerous” RSO’s are not allowed to drive on the Interstate at 65mph, but instead must drive through their neighborhoods. Hey Mr. Legislator… do you still think your law makes people “safer”?
Keep in mind, if you are a RSO from any other state and you drive through my city on the Interstate, you must exit and drive through residential neighborhoods in order to be in compliance.