You are here

NARSOL to GoFundMe: Take down that campaign

By Sandy . . . “Hero punches pedophile.” That’s the name of a campaign on GoFundMe, a campaign designed to raise money for the defense and as a “thank you” for Kevin Smith, a man who, in best vigilante style, leapt across the courtroom at the sentencing of Donnie Briggs in Medford, Oregon, who was being sentenced on a conviction of child pornography.

Mr. Smith proceeded to pummel Mr. Briggs in the face and continued until courtroom security pulled him off. Briggs’ injuries included broken bones and required hospitalization.

Mr. Smith’s two daughters were among those whom Mr. Briggs had surreptitiously photographed. One can sympathize with his feelings of outrage without condoning his own inappropriate, criminal behavior.

But most inappropriate of all is this campaign. It glorifies and promotes violent vigilantism. The campaign was created by one Jacob Elkin, a first-hand observer of Smith’s courtroom assault of Briggs and an obvious fan of vigilantism.

Smith’s actions do not make him a hero but rather a criminal who broke the law and used physical violence against another. It is totally inappropriate to allow him to benefit from his criminal violence. Furthermore, this campaign not only encourages vigilante activity but also enables and promotes public hatred and violence, as evidenced by the comments of the donors.  Mr. Briggs has committed a crime which is being handled in the justice system. Mr. Smith committed a crime and should not be allowed to benefit from it.

Newspaper articles about the incident glorify Smith, furthering the legitimacy of vigilantism and furthering the perception that those who commit sexual crimes are beyond the pale of rights due those accused of any other category of crime. See here and here.

The appeal to stereotypes is rampant. The GoFundMe page features a huge image of Superman, fists at the ready, to further the “hero” image of Smith, and at least two media outlets, as well as the GoFundMe page, feature the word “pedophile” prominently in their headlines.

Once again, in matters of sexual crimes, we see reason thrown out the window in favor of sensationalism and the public’s apparently insatiable need for blood-letting.

This campaign exemplifies all that is wrong with our nation’s approach to dealing with sexual offending. Absolutely nothing connected with it is helpful in terms of understanding, treating, or preventing.

And Kevin Patrick Smith is no hero.


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

Sandy Rozek

Sandy is communications director for NARSOL, editor-in-chief of the Digest, and a writer for the Digest and the NARSOL website. Additionally, she participates in updating and managing the website and assisting with a variety of organizational tasks.

This topic contains 56 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Peter 5 months, 1 week ago.

  • Author
  • #45841 Reply
    Sandy Rozek
    Sandy Rozek

    By Sandy . . . “Hero punches pedophile.” That’s the name of a campaign on GoFundMe, a campaign designed to raise money for the defense and as a “thank
    [See the full post at: NARSOL to GoFundMe: Take down that campaign]

  • #45843 Reply

    My biggest concern is that this will create a wave of vigilantes who see an opportunity to make money by attacking those on the registry.

    • #46000 Reply


      Hi Fred, hope you’re doing well. My apology, in advance, but I’m not sure where else to post this but I feel it may apply to many NC registrants.

      Recently, an attorney (Sneha Shah) with the ACLU contacted me regarding a complaint that I had filed. My complaint was regarding compliance checks by county officers, inwhich they are telling registrants they must come inside their homes (check their closets to see if they have clothes in them, see if there are pictures of the registrants inside the home, etc) to verify that they actually do live there. This has happened to me on several occasions. When I have contested, they have insisted and say that they are required to. I’m not on probation, parole, etc. My charge occured 17 years ago, and my probation term was completed 2 years later.

      In any event, the attorney from ACLU is asking if anyone else here in NC is experiencing similar forced searches. If so, please contact her at a brief discription of your experience.

      Again, Fred I apologize but I’m just not sure where else to post this. Thank you.

      • #46023 Reply

        @Glen It’s good to hear from you.

        If you are not on probation or parole you are under absolutely no obligations to allow any law enforcement officer into your home unless they show you a warrant or have probable cause. I don’t see how this circumstance can amount to probable cause. Probable cause would be a report of someone calling for help from inside your home, not a simple compliance check. I am not an attorney, but I feel very strongly about that. If you are saying this happened to you several times, I can think of a few people in NARSOL who would like to hear more about this, including some legal professionals.

        I haven’t heard anything about this happening before, but I will bring the matter to the attention of our N.C. people.

        • #46031 Reply


          Thanks Fred. That’s what I was thinking as well. It’s not just happened to me either. Another guy that I work with, also a registrant, tells me they do the same at his house when they do compliance checks. I’ve nothing to hide, and I don’t want any trouble with the law but I also have lived long enough to know that an uninvited officer inside your home is rarely ever a good thing.

          Anywat, its happened to me on atleast 4 out of the last 6 compliance checks. And based on my coworkers confirmation it seems to be happening regularly here in my county, but I’m also wondering if it’s happening throughout NC as well?

          I filed a complaint with the ACLU, frankly just wondering if I must submit to these “In-home compliance checks”. The attorney and her paralegal with the ACLU contacted me yesterday afternoon. Her first inclination is that, no I do not have to comply but she said she is going to do some more research on laws regarding compliance checks and will get back with me asap. In the meantime, she’s asked if I could provide other registrants that may have experienced the same. I’ve given her my co-workers name and number as he has agreed to speak with her. I thought perhaps there may be some folks here as well.

          Frankly, it’s probably a damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation; my contesting this issue and elevating it could result in harassment via police, but I’m tired of it. I’ll keep you posted as to what the ACLU attorney finds. Thanks again Fred

        • #46037 Reply

          Robin is the Vice Chair of NARSOL and also the president of our North Carolina affiliate. He can send an alert to N.C. registrants on his mailing list and ask for others to come forward if they experienced this.
          Often local police departments make up their own rules out of pure ignorance of the law. It’s possible this is happening only in your county, but I think we all can see how it is a serious matter and a violation to your rights. I hope you will keep us updated on how it develops.

        • #46118 Reply


          Just so I’m clear, the attorney agreed and did feel the inside the home compliance checks constituted an illegal search.

          It’s just that, any real remedy might take either 1) a refusal by a registrant to allow such a search, possibly…potentially resulting a subsequent arrest as a consequence, and/or 2) a lawsuit seeking a “Declaratory Judgement” as a relief.

          In other words, it appears, a test case may be required. I’ll keep everyone posted.

        • #47141 Reply


          This also happened to me in Colorado ONCE. I emphasize once because when the officer told me that, I respectfully informed her that that was an illegal search unless she had a warrant, she insisted she had to, and again I respectfully informed her that it was illegal, but I would comply as I had nothing to hide. I let her in as far as the front door, told her she could see everything she needed to see from there. She glanced around, said OK, and left. As soon as she was back in her patrol car, I called the head of the SO unit in Arvada, explained it to him, he agreed with me, thanked me for being respectful, and he would take care of it. He did tell me later that he called her in from her duties, and relieved her of said duties. Yes, she was fired on the spot for conducting an illegal search on my premises. It helps to be on a good basis with those in charge.

          On a side note, sometime later the supervisor came to do the search. It was freezing cold in Colorado, and I asked him if he would like to step inside while he completed his paperwork, and he politely declined stating it was absolutely illegal for him to be in my house while conducting this search.

        • #46112 Reply


          Hi Fred,

          I wanted to provide an update with regards to the compliance checks situation. First, though, I wold like to say Thank you to both you and Robin for the concern and for referring me to an attorney that was both very sympathetic and as helpful as I feel possible. Thank you.

          Ok…so, after speaking with the refered attorney via phone, my understandings regarding these compliance checks are detailed below:

          1) Officers stating they are required to come inside your home to verify that you, a registrant, actually live there MAY currently be legal simply because the law is vague, and has yet to be challenged. For example, the county sheriff is givendors authority to confirm residence. According to my understanding from the attorney, because that authority is vagugly defined they may request to come into your home to confirm residence. If you contest, you MAY…possibly – not sure be subjected to an arrest. If arrested, most likely, you may be able to have it dismissed based on an illegal search. Certainly, we have a right to challenge such a search via such a, presumably false, arrest; and perhaps even by a “Declaratory Judgement” lawsuit. Still, it sounded as if there would have to be someone willing to sacrifice a potential arrest for refusing an home invasive compliance check…

          2) I was recommended to stick with the ACLU attorney in the meantime while they research compliance check laws. That particular attorney stated she would get back to me as soon as she completed her research regarding what is permissible.

          Again, I thank Fred and Robin for their kind help, as well as the attorney I spoke with. Unfortunately, at this point based on my understanding after consulting with a referred attorney, it seems the law regarding compliance checks in NC is so vague and undefined, that any of us could potentially risk an arrest by refusing an “Inside the home compliance check”. No doubt, in my oppinion, such an arrest most likely would later result in a dismissal if contested; still, it’s a tough spot to be in.

          Anyway, ill update more when I hear back from the ACLU. In the mean time, it sounded to me like “Yes, we can refuse to let an officer inside our home during a compliance check; but, such a refusal may result in our arrest based simply on the vagueness of the compliance check law, and the fact it has never been challenged”.


        • #46227 Reply

          Thank you for the update. I must say I am confused by that answer you received from an attorney. I understand that a case must first be brought before the court and ruled on before it can be considered a violation to your rights. But, the issue of warrant-less searches of U.S. citizens has been decided and settled a long time ago.

        • #46306 Reply

          Timothy DA Lawver

          @Glen, robin, Fred, on compliance
          Unreasonable search or warrantless search?
          Is the email address?: 1), ‘key to the locked box’, or,
          2) ‘a combination to a wall safe’?
          Grady II- continuous searches.

        • #46459 Reply


          “. “In addition, the legitimacy of certain privacy expectations vis-à -vis the State may depend upon the individual’s legal relationship with the State.” Id.

          The Supreme Court has held that parolees and probationers have significantly diminished expectations of privacy as a result of their legal status. Samson, 547 U.S. at 852, 126 S.Ct. at 2199, 165 L.Ed.2d at 259; Knights, 534 U.S. at 119, 122 S.Ct. at 591–92, 151 L.Ed.2d at 505. These individuals “are on the ‘continuum’ of state-imposed punishments”

          -Straight out of the Grady II ruling.

          I feel, if arrested due to refusing a “In-home compliance ” (search, verification, whatever they want to call it) and I were to challenge it in court, it could be the state would argue the above and win. I’m neither on probation or parole, but I can see the argument being because of our legal status with the state, we have a diminished expectation of privacy?

          As Timothy mentioned, already being required to list online identifiers and email addresses, and the whole gamut of personal information… this might be a tough situation to expect any success with.

        • #46456 Reply


          No doubt Timothy; a good point.

        • #46455 Reply


          Hi Fred,

          I was a little confused too frankly. But, from what I gathered, first it would take a firm stand in refusing such a search. If, at that point, an officer were to improperly arrest you for refusing the search, then you would have grounds for filing suit. So, it appears it’s a grey issue until you have court recognized measurable harm. Even at that, the attorney stated the sheriff is empowered by law to confirm a registrants residence, yet the law is vague and undefined as to how the sheriff may go about confirming residence. So…seems a catch 22.

      • #46027 Reply
        Robin Vander Wall
        Robin Vander Wall

        Glen, Please contact me about this when it’s convenient.

        • #46113 Reply


          Thank you again Robin for your, and Fred’s help in this situation; and for all you both do here.



    • #45993 Reply


      Agreed. Meanwhile, in addition to the obvious endorseen of vigilantism, it encourages harrassment of offenders

  • #45842 Reply

    Diane Palladino

    This is vigilantism at it’s worse, and right in front of authority figures. How could this be allowed. So sad for the U.S court system.

    • #45851 Reply


      The really sad part is that people have contributed over $16,000. This is not just a case of one lone idiot, but hints at the extent of the problem.

      • #45907 Reply


        Mob mortality supported by database. Nothing new really.

  • #45845 Reply


    Oh wow! Is there anything to be done about this? Too much freedom online for people to spead untruths.

    • #45920 Reply

      a man without a country

      William K. Clifford (of algebra fame) wrote something in his 1877 “The Ethics of Belief” which would serve everyone well to remember in 2018:

      “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for everyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence… If a man, holding a belief which he was taught in childhood or persuaded of afterwards, keeps down and pushes away any doubts which arise about it in his mind, purposely avoids the reading of books and the company of men that call into question or discuss it, and regards as impious those questions which cannot easily be asked without disturbing it—the life of that man is one long sin against mankind.”

  • #45846 Reply

    NH Registrant

    What causes this to happen?

    The media.

    They sensationalize sex offenses because the public has a sick fascination with it. Guilt or innocence are meaningless to those conditioned to find monsters around every corner. They have a ‘look’ according to the brainwashed. When I was in prison, I was targeted more than once because of my appearance. I once asked another inmate why I was being singled out. He said: “Because you LOOK like a sex offender.” (He used a different term for ‘sex offender’. But, I’m not going to repeat it here because it’s vile.)

    So, when a brainwashed person like the assaulter sees someone in court being convicted, his first reaction is to attack. It doesn’t matter if the guy is innocent or guilty. The decision is quick and without thought.

    I blame the media for it as well as the government who profit from it. They perpetuate the moral panic and public paranoia by reporting on sex offenses constantly for ratings. In my state, our news has a sex offense story 5-6 nights a week. One time, when I was still watching the local news, I saw them report on the same school bus driver who got caught with child pornography 5 times that week. They ran the same story every single night. I was in prison at the time and stuck in a big room with other inmates while they were running that story. They all knew what I was in for : the same thing the bus driver allegedly did. So, all eyes would turn toward me. If they could get away with it, they would have tortured and killed me. Of that, I have absolutely no doubt. I didn’t do what I was convicted of. But, that didn’t matter. The media controlled how they thought.

    It took me 5 years after being paroled to stop having nightmares several times a week about prison. They were usually about the same thing: being put back in prison and not being told why.

    • #45855 Reply


      NH Registrant, let me hazard a guess: You look like a baby raper. That’s the term I heard and was called routinely. Also chomo.

  • #45854 Reply


    I have already went to GoFundMe and reported the campaign. I have yet to hear back from them. Derek Logue of OnceFallen has done the same. I urge every one of you to report that campaign for spreading libelous misinformation (all sex offenders are pedophiles) and rewarding acts of violent felonious assault. I hope the man gets thrown in jail, but not the same jail as the convicted because no doubt this dad will rally other inmates to kill the accused, if they haven’t heard already and have murder waiting on him once he is out of the hospital.

  • #45868 Reply

    Gini Aland

    Here is something everyone can do today! Go to this GoFundMe page and report it:


    Scroll to the bottom of the page, just above the site links, is a square button that says “Report Campaign”, you’ll be sent to a FAQ segment, scrol down, hit “Report Campaign” again, and fill out the form.

    When it asks you some multiple choice questions regarding your involvement in the campaign, I responded with the following answers:

    “I am an individual concerned about this campaign”


    “This Campaign Includes Libelous Statements”

    You’ll have to fill in some personal info and write a brief description of the complaint.

    I pointed out that he fundraiser promotes vigilante violence and assumes all “sex offenders” are “pedophiles”, and the beneficiary committed a violent assault.

    We need to stop vigilantism before anyone else is injured or killed! Report this campaign NOW!

  • #45869 Reply

    Derek Logue

    GO TO GOFUNDME and do the following

    Scroll to the bottom of the page, just above the site links, is a square button that says “Report Campaign”, you’ll be sent to a FAQ segment, scroll down, hit “Report Campaign” again, and fill out the form.

    When it asks you some multiple choice questions regarding your involvement in the campaign, I responded with the following answers:

    “I am an individual concerned about this campaign”


    “This Campaign Includes Libelous Statements”

    You’ll have to fill in some personal info and write a brief description of the complaint.

    I pointed out that he fundraiser promotes vigilante violence and assumes all “sex offenders” are “pedophiles”, and the beneficiary committed a violent assault.

  • #45862 Reply

    Timothy D.A. Lawvrr

    Alas the people follow their leadership. Very poor leadership indeed.
    A social compact distorted by double tongues yet very politically and financially profitable for some. We can certainly expect more mob mentality where bystanders will be hurt.

    • #45887 Reply

      Former Offender

      In terms of reporting the GoFundMe Page you should be citing this as the reason it should be pulled:

      “campaigns deemed by GoFundMe, in its sole discretion, to be in support of, or for the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender or gender identity, or serious disabilities or diseases;”

  • #45863 Reply

    Dr. Michael Christianson

    If anyone in the local community is able and willing, I hope they will stand with the defendant and begin a civil battery suit against the individual responsible for the battery. We shouldn’t permit this to happen in a court of law without civil vindication.

  • #45864 Reply

    James Coghill

    “Anger is always the shortest distance to a mistake.” (Doctor Who)

    I guess the destruction of a persons life without killing them by the courts wasn’t enough. I guess Kevin Smith had to put his personal mark on the man. All for a photograph. Now if he had published it online that would have been different, but there is no mention he did that.

    I know human nature pretty well. Once a consensus is reached in any group bad things are about to happen and we are very nearly there.

    • #45883 Reply


      I think you are right, which is very disturbing. Even people that are for “justice reform” or “human rights” sometimes draw the line at sex offenders.

  • #45865 Reply


    Seems like a good case to point to for restoration of our gun ownership rights. They want to group every sex offender together into one pool. The least we should be able to do is defend ourselves

    • #45884 Reply


      And that’s exactly how they want us.

      Remove the ability to use the internet or meet with other SO’s.
      Disallow the right to use anything that might be used to harm others, including a 2×4. *I’m pointing to you North Dakota!
      Remove the right to vote.

      Essentially making us powerless and voiceless, with no protections in sight.

  • #45880 Reply


    In response to Paul, Yes we can have guns! Primitive fire arms, Black Powder pistols and rifles. I have a few 44 caliber army revolvers and a 50 cal rifle. Both black powder and legal for ANYONE to own. I also have a sign on my property that says ” You are entering an Armed citizens property. Enter unannounced at your own risk.” There are many ways to defend ourselves. Be ready for anything, be able to defend yourself, don’t be afraid of anyone and have a plan to do this. We cant rely on the police or courts to do anything because even if they want to help their hands are tied by the public and they are more worried about looking good to the misinformed public so they don’t get voted out. This government did the same thing to the Native Americans and African Americans, Japanese and now are paying billions in restitution to all, research it. We will be next in line for this restitution but will take a while. This country has always had a need to step on people and have a reason to bully people they don’t understand and right now it is us. Stand Up And Protect Yourself! If someone jumps over a courtroom wall and tries to pummel you TAKE THEM DOWN! Don’t lie there and take it. This is my advice and what I do because I don’t rely on any person but myself. Time to fight back in a reliable way DEFENCE!

    • #45994 Reply



      I also have a black powder “assortment”. When I was first charged with my offense, back 17 years ago, I was quite the gun collector. I grew up hunting, was ex military, etc. I had to transfer all my inherited cartridge guns to my brother.

      I was very concerned about loosing my 2nd ammendment rights and ability to hunt. But after research, I did find I was able to have blackpowder arms. At first, I was not very excited about it, but after experiencing them I found I love them. I have a couple of 12 guage side by side shotguns for bird hunting, a couple of rifles good to 200 yds for deer hunting, and a couple of 44 cap and ball revolvers – a 1858 remington, and a 51 yank snubnose with birdshead grips. They are slower to reload, however, i actually enjoy them more than cartridge guns now. I can grouse, quail, dove, and rabbit hunt again with my German shorthaired pointer. And, pray I never need too…I have the ability to defend myself and my family.

      Just a question though, do you catch much flak or questions from officers when they see your signs?

    • #45995 Reply


      Jim…also, one more thing I would add to anyone considering black powder arms…some , especially newer black powder rifles use 209 shotgun primers and/or rifle promers. These are prohibited items. If you are a convicted felon and have lost your rights to firearms, you are also specifically prohibited from possessing cartridges and even cartridge components such as 209 shotgun primers and rifle primers. You may only posses percussion and/or musket caps. I read just last year there was a gentleman with a prior felony conviction arrested while hunting in NC because he had in his possession 209 shotgun primers. Just a heads up…

  • #45881 Reply

    Thomas Darby

    I saw this first on Twitter, when it was reported by a regular Twitter Twit like myself. I couldn’t believe what I saw. I immediately tried to complain to GoFundMe, but they don’t make it easy. There seems to be no way to get directly in touch with the management. So both Derek Logue, myself, and SOSEN got in touch with NARSOL which immediately sent a complaint about that campaign. Everything in society is backwards. A couple of years ago, I tried to run a GoFundMe simply to get the funds to make the RV I was living in run again. I have minimal income. Unfortunately my ex-wife found it, posted that I was an RSO, and I started getting hate-filled posts. Had to stop the campaign. Here, this yay-hoo is posting hate, and getting money! Crazy.

  • #45882 Reply

    Larry Stephen Evans

    I’ve had 5 confrontations the first 3 I just punched them till they hit the ground they had enough but the last two I beat them till they couldn’t get up the last one his wife begged me to stop hitting him I spent 10 more minutes so he wouldn’t forget. The idiots making these laws and Law enforcement are to blame.

  • #45885 Reply

    Sunland Registrant

    Here is the response I got from them after submitting a complaint on Tuesday:

    Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Our Trust & Safety team will be investigating the page and taking appropriate action.

    If you donated to this campaign or are the intended recipient of the money raised, please fill out the appropriate GoFundMe Guarantee claim form. If you know any donors or the intended recipient of this campaign, please ask that they also submit a claim or contact our team directly.

    Claim forms for the GoFundMe Guarantee can be found here:

    Please note that:

    1. We will be unable to disclose any details about our investigation.
    2. Personal disputes will be ignored and should be settled outside of GoFundMe.
    3. Your personal information will be kept confidential from the campaign organizer.

    In addition to the report you have submitted to us, we encourage you to contact law enforcement officials in your area if you believe this user is committing fraud or breaking the law in any way.

    Our team will reach out to you if we have any further questions.

    If this is your campaign and you need assistance, please contact our support team here:

    From what I gather, they will not do anything particular unless you donated to the campaign. So the whole thing is about $$$$$. (what else is new, hey?)

  • #45901 Reply

    GoFundMe makes it clear that they have no rules and will ignore any complaints, unless the campaign is illegal or fraudulent. What we are doing is asking GoFundMe to change their policy.

    Keep in mind GoFundMe could be used to raise money to pay legal costs of someone charged with a sexual offense or a registry violation. Can you imagine the hordes or people who will try to get it shut down if that happened? Would we want them to be successful?

    As I said in the first comment, my biggest concern is that some people will see attacking registrants as a money making opportunity. That is very troubling, but other than that, I could care less if people want to throw away their money for that cause or if the guy gets the money.

    Instead I see this as evidence that we can use. I would like to see how much this campaign raises and how many more comments suggesting violence appear. I want to point to this as proof that some people want to see harm done to registrants so badly they are willing to pay a lot of money to support it and therefore those on the registry are in undeniable danger.

    This is my personal opinion, not NARSOL’s.

    • #45908 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek

      I don’t disagree with anything Fred has said.
      I have said in several places that to place a complaint that has a chance of being listened to, the claim must be that it is fraudulent. In my opinion, it is perpetuating a fraud to present someone who has illegally and violently attacked another person as a hero BECAUSE he illegally and violently attacked another person.

      I have just read something that intersects with another issue I am following, the risk one takes for speaking at a sentencing hearing in support of a person convicted of a sexual crime. Smith said that what enraged him to the extent that he assaulted Briggs was hearing a witness at the sentencing hearing say something favorable about Briggs.

      I guess that anyone giving testimony favorable to a convicted sexual offender at a hearing now must consider the possibility of losing his job AND being physically assaulted. Smith could have gone for the witness instead of Briggs.

    • #45955 Reply


      Yes Fred I think you are onto something. This could be used against the registry. At the very least as an example of the dangers of exposing the addresses of the offenders.

    • #46080 Reply


      Wow, Fred!! Great idea!! If you know who the attorneys are that will be litigating the 10th Circuit case where the Colorado Sex Offender Registry was ruled unconstitutional please send it to them so that they have a concrete example of public sentiment toward sex offenders and how they are willing to pay big bucks to see a sex offender get hurt.

      That would be a hard piece of evidence to ignore or discount in any way.

  • #45932 Reply

    PA Priest that is Holier than all

    Larry Stephen Evans, you have been extremely blessed that you have not caught a bullet, knife, or other blunt object by your attackers in any of your 5 confrontations or even after by angry family members or friends, which is why I have refrained from ever physically defending myself. Dont know how long that will last though for it has been nearly 25 yeras of abuse at all levels imaginable, but whatever, we are not even people just like the slaves were nothing except property upon the founding of this shameful “greatest” country in the world.

    By the way… on the news…

    Chinese billionaire Liu of arrested in Minneapolis
    MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — Chinese billionaire Liu Qiangdong, also known as Richard Liu, the founder of the Beijing-based e-commerce site, was arrested in Minneapolis on suspicion of criminal sexual conduct, jail records show.

    Liu, 45, was arrested late Friday night and released Saturday afternoon pending possible criminal charges, Hennepin County Jail records show. The jail records don’t provide details of the alleged incident.

  • #45938 Reply


    I registered a complaint against the GoFundMe campaign just now. I will post their response….if they even bother.

  • #45949 Reply


    In order to strengthen our complaints for this campaign, we also need to point out that this campaign does indeed violate GoFundMe’s Terms & Conditions under Conditions of Use > User Conduct.

    “…you agree to not use the Services to:”

    Section A. 7. states: campaigns deemed by GoFundMe, in its sole discretion, to be in support of, or for the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender or gender identity, or serious disabilities or diseases

    Section A. 9. states: funding ransom, human trafficking or exploitation, vigilantism, bribes or bounty

    We must let GoFundMe know that their platform should not be a way to make quick and easy money off of violence.

  • #45953 Reply


    I have written to GoFundMe, pointing out that this campaign violates their own terms of use, and have received a response that says they are “investigating.”

    It might be more effective to write to DC Comics and report a trademark infringement. I used the contact form at to do so, but if anyone knows of a direct email address to their legal department, that would probably be helpful. I can’t imagine they would appreciate having the character of Superman connected with hate speech, vigilantism, and a campaign of that sort.

  • #45960 Reply


    … and this is why those having served 100% of their sentence should have second amendment rights restored. This right is a natural right, a God given right to protect ourselves.

  • #45968 Reply

    Mother of a sex offender

    I did reported… it makes my blood boil… when is this nonsense going to stop? Not only do they ruin the life of our children but it’s totally unfair and unnecessary.. make this girls accountable if they are teens and participate in the picture taken. Why does it always have to be this young adult boys fault???

    • #45978 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek

      In the interest of facts, the pictures were taken without the knowledge or permission of the girls. Regardless of the actions of the defendant, vigilante actions are always criminal and must not be tolerated.

  • #45969 Reply

    Mother of a sex offender

    Do I give my real email? I’m so skeptical in doing so because I already get emails about looking up for sex offenders in my neighborhood.

    • #45977 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek

      After reporting, I didn’t receive any unwanted emails, or any emails at all except one from GoFundMe acknowledging my report, that were the result of my having made the report.

  • #46030 Reply


    You know Sandy and the Team do a great job in helping those on the sex registry. While this article was way out of line and with the guy taking sort of hillbilly revenge in court by knocking the guy out it goes to show all of us that vengance is not the way.

    Sure anyone would be upsset if they took pictures of someone’s kids as that isn’t appropate for anyone to do in any case. I feel for the parents that have kids girls or boys that are treated like this by someone doing such a thing. I’m sure it was shocking in court that the person punched one and none of us need vigiliantism as we all have enough to deal with. I do have to give thinks for NARSOL bring this to our attention.

  • #46038 Reply


    Back in 2010 our local sheriffs department did a sex offender round up where they came to the houses of so’s and asked if they could come in and look around the house, check computers etc. I let them in my house because I was afraid that if I didn’t they would come back with a warrant and search anyway. Luckily they didn’t find anything, but some others weren’t so lucky. Fortunately they can’t do that anymore with a warrant or without probable cause.

    • #46099 Reply


      Hi Peter.

      In my case, here in western NC, the officers didn’t ask permission to come in. Rather, they informed me that they were required to come inside my home to “verify” that I actually lived here. While I contested it, I was never confrontatonal about it; I simply stated I don’t agree with it and did not feel comfortable with it, “but, Ok”…

      Ignorantly, and still, I had no idea if I was required to submit to such an – what I felt was an invasion of privacy – but with all the restrictions that we are already subject to, I thought perhaps there may have been some new requirement. The officers werent rude, nor was I, but they were adamant that just merely seeing me at my residence was not enough evidence for them to confirm I lived there. So, I didn’t put up a fuss…Maybe I should have, but I wasn’t sure what might happen if I refused. So, I allowed them in. One officer stayed in my living room looking around, while the other went to my bedroom and looked inside my closet. They never asked to look at computers, cell phones, tablets, or anything else though. Next time, I’m going to record the event, but I’m sure that will infuriate them. I’ve done my best to stay respectful of officers and obey the laws since my charge from 2003. Today, I don’t have anything to hide, but I well know that a pissed off policeman uninvited inside your home will often try vindictively to find anything to escalate a charge if they feel slighted in the least. And, that is my concern by elevating this to the ACLU. But, I feel if I don’t take a stand, it won’t get any better either. Damned if I do, damned if I dont. So…I imagine this could get tense, but l guess I’ve just had enough. At what point, does it end?

      At this point, I still really don’t know if this is permissible, if this is a county sheriffs policy, or this is just the deputys taking it on their own to “say” this is a requirement when, in fact, they are just making it up…I aim to find out though; hence, I filed a complaint with the ACLU.

      Just three weeks ago, another bizarre event happened. At 830 am, there was a knock at my door. It was a county deputy who stated that he had received a call that I was on the registry and that there was reportedly a minor living in the home. I said, “Yes sir, I am on the registry and there is a minor in the home. I don’t understand what the problem is, or why are your here?”
      He stated, he had received an “anonymous” call reporting that and he was required to check it out and refused to tell me who called. I told him, my charge was from 2003, it was a non-contact charge (peeping tom 1st offense) and there were never any allegations of physical abuse. I told him I was not on probation, parole, and I had no restictions preventing me from living in a home where a minor also resided, so I don’t understand why you are here. He stated he had received a call and was required to check on it…such bullshit. It’s simply harassment plain and simple.

      Are you in NC also?

  • #46110 Reply

    B. Webb

    I read about this and last time I checked vigilantism was a CRIME, so I don’t understand how they can say a Violent Criminal is a hero. The man needs to be in jail, and serve time for assault and battery.

  • #46649 Reply


    Hey glen, I live in western nc too. When they asked to come in and look around I agreed thinking that if I didn’t they would think I was hiding something and come back with a warrant. Like I said before they didn’t find anything and since then they have pretty much left me alone. Its been at least 10 years since they came out and took my picture.

Reply To: NARSOL to GoFundMe: Take down that campaign
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Stay on topic.
  • *Do not post links or email addresses..
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.
Your information:

<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre> <em> <strong> <del datetime=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">