Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

terry brunson

The story read in the paper about Skip being vote in as DA – is good interest point but – the Muniz case is already done. The PASC has last word on the remand command to remove name as ordered. Freed Cert is on;y a review of the record to see if Freed heard correct that the PASC used the U.S. Constitution as the independent document to make the decision on Muniz decision. The PASC did mention that the U.S. Constitution and the Pa. Constitution say the same thing on Ex Post Facto applications but the decision was made on the State Constitution side. Freed thinks he heard something different.

Freed ready knows what he heard – his real objective was to time delay the remand to the PSP to remove names in mass numbers. He want the Judicial Committee to make a fix before the the PASC mandate. The Cert is not about a win – too many states have gone down in a Cert denial on this same issue of Ex Post Facto app;ications of SORNA.

Freed sees the light – He has his baby now in HB 1952 but it is a half hearted win for him, but that is if when HB 1952 becomes law it will have to me Pa. Constitutional challenge to muster pass the PASC.

The HB 1952 will meet its doom at the PASC because it targets by prejudice a group that Muniz has given a clear win to all. when HB 1952 only gives a win to some. Muniz – Reed – Nieman -and the PASC decisons will cut down HB 1952

HB 1952 is a revert every one back to where they were on 20 December 2012 – But that revert stands only on HB 1952 acceptance. It vote into law would only apply to people from the date it is sign into law forward. . . . .NOT backward too. That would be Muniz – Reed and Ex Posrt Facto application all over again.

Now I will say this slow as I can – In HB 1952 there is a Judicial Determination clause – Many think that it is MUNIZ – If it is Muniz then why not say that in the Bill? A judicial determination is a fight against being under the rules of HB 1952 because of Muniz being taken like it never happened. That makes no sense at all. HB 1952 is dubbed a Muniz fix. The PSP and the DA and AG take it as a new law to apply to all pre-SORNA people. It hurts when pre SORNA people have to go to court case by case and get a JUDICIAL DETERMINATION against being under the rules of HB 1952 when Muniz is just fine. If you cannot see this yet I cannot make it no more clear. HB 1952 is a help to pre-Sorna people that have an out date at ten years- and was given 15 or 25 or life tire 3. HB 1952 will get these off at their out date. BUT Muniz will get all off that are Pre-SORNA [.]

Pre-SORNA people that had life will still have life without quarterly updates under HB 1952. But they are still stuck on the registry with reduced requirements. When by Muniz they would be off with no reduced nothing. They have to fight this in court under HB 1952 to get the Muniz decision help when that should be automatic.

Do you ever understand what I am saying people?