NARSOL warns law enforcement that they are being watched

Sometimes a new event occurs almost before we can react to the previous one. That is what it has felt like with everything going on in Georgia in regard to county sheriffs and persons on the registry and warning signs.

No sooner did the matter come before a U.S. District Court in Georgia when we received word that another Georgia county sheriff was placing signs. No sooner had NARSOL hand-delivered a warning letter to that sheriff, Sheriff Lee Cone in Ben Hill County, when the court ruled in favor of the Butts County registrants, causing the signs on their properties to be removed.

We need a scorecard.

2018: Signs are placed in Butts and in Spalding Counties; NARSOL formally protests; the signs remained.

2019:

NARSOL joins a suit against officials of both counties seeking damages and requesting an injunction against the signs; Spalding County capitulates and says they will not place the signs for 2019; Butts County persists; a hearing date is set;

NARSOL sends a warning letter to Sheriff Cone in Ben Hill County and issued a press release about it;

The court granted the injunction against placing signs on the litigants’ property in Butts County;

NARSOL issued a press release warning law enforcement everywhere that we would be monitoring their behaviors toward persons on the registry for actions or requirements that seem to infringe on constitutional protections; read that press release here.

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

Avatar

  • This topic has 7 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks, 1 day ago by AvatarTime for a change of S.O. requirements!.
Viewing 7 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #61200 Reply
      Avatar
      admin

      Sometimes a new event occurs almost before we can reacts to the previous one. That is what it has felt like with everything going on in Georgia in reg
      [See the full post at: NARSOL warns law enforcement that they are being watched]

    • #61207 Reply
      Avatar
      WC_TN

      St. Tammany Parish in LA is planning on placing signs on registrants’ property is LA.

    • #61210 Reply
      Avatar
      Michael Miller

      In Maryland this year I am standing my ground! Now that I am not on any kind of supervision, I contacted the Sheriff’s depart head who handles the registry here and ask point blank what restrictions I have and the statue’s that pertains to me. After 3 weeks she wrote me back stating she could find no restrictions. She advised that someone will be stopping by to check on me. I asked her what if I’m not home? She said nothing will happen it’s just like a random check. Of course I’m not giving out candy but I’m not turning the light out for safety reasons. We will see how it goes!

    • #61211 Reply
      Avatar
      Perry

      I prayerfully, and patiently await the day when Registry Requirements are finally eradicated as being not only Unconstitutional, but also Inhumane and seen as the fuel for ‘Vigilante Sanctioned So-Called Justice!’

    • #61221 Reply
      Avatar
      Ed C

      I would be all for registries if there was evidence that they enhanced public safety. So far, I’ve found no research showing a positive correlation between registries and sex crime reduction. I’ve even asked my probation officer, my sex offender therapist and the deputies at the registration office for references. Nada! I’ve asked for definitive research showing high sexual recidivism rates. Nothing!

      I realize this is a biased audience, but does anyone have references to literature indicating results contrary to those espoused by NARSOL? If so, please post them here. I’m only after objective truth.

      Veritas.

    • #61224 Reply
      Avatar
      mut

      made my day.

    • #61229 Reply
      Avatar
      Tim in WI

      I can appreciate NARSOL stopping the common variety surveillance saint from exercising his ego unconstitutional. I’m doing the same but in the FTR venue. DOC agent is on the record requiring in person reporting from pretrial hearing. The complaint has now changed. The reason notice of convictions DOC form-20 are stamped by the clerk is enforceability. It must by law state all strict liability assessed and acknowledged due. Without that stamped and signed form no lawful obligation can exists to DOC. The need for that form can be waived however and most do by plea & acquiescence.

    • #61263 Reply
      Avatar
      Time for a change of S.O. requirements!

      A highly paid CA. parole agent in ’98 destroyed my life as a father, he ordered me
      “not allowed to be around children”
      including my 5 yr son at that time because
      I’d a non violent lewd act on female minor back in ’78 & illegally made me register for life
      “I was a danger to Society”.
      Eventually the wife left, taking my son who is now gone from my life, that nightmare made me permanent mental disabled.
      A system that destroyed families and individuals by putting a big red X on your head for life especially on Halloween has to be stopped.
      I’ll be dead before any changes happen but at least Narsol is stopping them one step at a time.

Viewing 7 reply threads
Reply To: NARSOL warns law enforcement that they are being watched
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must be 18 or older to comment.
  • *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 contact information for yourself or another person.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.

  • *DO NOT POST LINKS TO OTHER WEBSITES
Your information:





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