CA-RSOL challenges Halloween sign requirement for sex offenders

By Marty Graham [Reuters] . . .

A paroled sex offender in Southern California sued the state’s Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections on Thursday, arguing that rules imposed on sex offenders during Halloween trick or treating violate his constitutional rights.

The complaint, which was filed in federal court and identifies the parolee only as John Doe from San Diego County, challenges a requirement that sex offenders post a sign on their front doors during Halloween that reads: “We do not participate in Trick or Treating. Please do NOT disturb.”

The lawsuit, brought by the parolee and a nonprofit group called California Reform Sex Offender Laws, argues that the rules violate his First Amendment right by forcing him to post the sign, and his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process.

The complaint also says the rules put offenders and their families in danger.

According to Doe’s lawyer, Janice Bellucci, he was convicted of one sex crime more than 30 years ago and has not committed a sex offense nor been arrested for one since. He is on parole for a drug offense, she said. He is still required to post the sign.

“This is a solution without a problem,” Bellucci said. “(The corrections department’s) sign requirement is based upon myth, not facts. The facts are there are no reports in California of a sexual assault upon a child who goes trick or treating.”

Bellucci said it puts Doe and every member of his household at risk. “This is like drawing a target on his house,” she said. (Please see full Reuters article here)

Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

2 Thoughts to “CA-RSOL challenges Halloween sign requirement for sex offenders”

Leave a Comment

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone and language of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Refrain from comments containing references to religion unless it clearly relates to the post being commented on.
  • Do not post in all caps.
  • We will generally not allow links; the moderator may consider the value of a link.
  • We will not post lengthy comments.
  • Please do not go into details about your story; post these on our Tales from the Registry.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites.
  • Please do not solicit funds.
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them. It will not be displayed on the site.

  1. david

    Has a stranger ever committed a sexual assault on a child during trick-or-treating? Like many laws governing sex offenders, there’s no data to suggest it’s effective. In fact, it’s quite possibly harmful by further excluding S.O.’s from society. It’s so…..DUMB!!!

    Doe committed his crime 30 years ago and hasn’t re-offended. Give the guy a break. He’s obviously not dangerous to children. No more than any other “stranger”. Halloween is great time to meet the neighbors. Locking away S.O.’s in their homes on just perpetuates the pointless fear and paranoia under nation is suffering from. It’s like our nation is suffering from psychosis when it comes to the whole “stranger danger” thing.

  2. Phil

    What no one ever mentions in these articles is that along with the “registered” sex offenders, there are people out there who have NO SUCH CRIMINAL RECORD AT ALL and are very capable of committing a sex crime aqt any given moment.
    No one ever takes a moment to use their BRAINS and say “Hey, wait a minute…so this person is on the registry but obviously was not BORN on the registry. So why should I trust ANYONE?”
    Further use of one’s BRAIN would also tell them that NO ONE IS GOING TO SNATCH UP THEIR CHILD RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEIR FACE. So what’s the big ‘fright factor’ really all about? The ONLY people who should be concerned with their child’s safety are the morons who were allowed to pro-create but send their little kids out ALONE. Doesn’t take rocket science to know that if you’re WITH YOUR KID, THINGS SHOULD BE FINE. Unless you live in the ghetto and the only thing you should worry about are stray bullets from a bad drug deal. Good grief, people make me sick.