Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

#24768
Avatar
Anonymous

@Brian
Hi! First of all please make sure you read terry’s reply at the other NARSOL article from today if you have not already!

…You make total sense to me. I get like that too sometimes where I feel I make no sense to anyone. And yes, John Walsh should still be charged! (but he won’t be) Everyone else is subject to being charged for a crime committed right? Statutes of limitation do not seem to matter much now a days with “sex crimes” So, what makes him better (besides lots and lots of money, connections, power)?

Yes, you might want to save your money in case this LEO’s want to start a compliance check and start finding RSO’s magically/suddenly “non-compliant.”

Here since you are one of the few that actually “reads” (not glance) my posts you might like these if the Moderators allow (do not see why not!).

These ones come from NARSOL posts originally:
If the person reading it has not shed any bit of tears by the end, he/she in my opinion, is heartless.

WHY do we register children as sexual criminals?

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/14/when-kids-are-accused-of-sex-crimes

This one I came across after a Patch Outlet search from reading another NARSOL article:

http://www.oncefallen.com/

YOU can help save Halloween!

This Blog is more of a researching tool:
Sex Offender Research & State News
http://sexoffenderresearch.blogspot.com/2017/08/rock-sheriffs-office-to-share-in-money.html

I have one more thing to share, but will wait a bit to give Moderators a chance to read/sort thru my post. (I do not want to make the post too long without real necessity)