Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

#36311
Avatar
terry brunson

The New Law of ACT 10 needs “judicial determination” to challenge it in court. The lower courts do not understand the civil \ criminal option like the PASC. The PASC will ask one question during oral arguments of ACT 10 . . WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO Pre- SORNA PEOPLE if they violate ACT-10 requirements?

If the Commonwealth says – JAIL –

The PASC will deem ACT 10 criminal and the MUNIZ – DECISION will live on to free 10,000 Pa. Sex Offenders. The PAG they will try what DA Freed tried and failed to do by Cert To The SCOTUS on ACT 10 – The SCOTUS will deny them and the Pa. Assembly will try a new avenue of attack. By a new HB or SB law to stop the PASC from up setting Megan’s Law in Pa.

The PASC is in place for a reason and the Justices are weary of hearing civil claim with criminal result at the end. You want a civil result of Sex Offender violations? Talk about a fine but even that would be taken as crimnal at result.

Those of you reading this post may not have grasp the big picture yet. The Pa. Assembly is loosing the good old boy behind the senses influence of the PASC. They are not on board with the old school Civil Collateral Consequence – in needing a punitive element in the retroactive application of putting New Law on Old Law people were the Old Law has been expired instead of repealed. There is a difference. Any comments? It all your getting get understanding of what is really going on. I found the key – I am off the registry and still in court ready to go to the next level to protect the rights of all Pre-SORNA Muniz – decision people – in the same boat with me- I have your case in mind to help win by fighting my case. T.P.B. v PSP will be the next Muniz case to give victory to all my friends and unknowns in this fight who need help to get off the registry NOW not in 18 Months and told to wait. Injunction rights are before all now by Nuc Pro Tunc action by Mandamus – You don’t move because you think you need a Lawyer. NOT SO. . . . PRO-SE OKAY?