Forced self-incrimination

Viewing 19 reply threads
  • Author
    • #55578 Reply
      Larry Neely
      Larry Neely

      By Larry . . . Maybe authorities will finally accept that the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution really protects individuals from compe
      [See the full post at: Forced self-incrimination]

    • #55580 Reply

      It Should be a kick in the groin. To an abusive system that tries to lie about what they have and are doing to prisoners and after prison violates many rights that never should and are taking place !!
      If the tables were turned would the other legal team have the same lead way to get away with so much legal or I should say illegal crap !

    • #55581 Reply

      Perhaps reminding SCOTUS that speech was deprived upon promulgation of the SOR regime. SOR forms always acted as agents demanding update information about irrelevant changes in personal dispostion. Much of the new information demanded via AWA has been deemed unconstitutional on overbroad terms. I have refused and openly tell SOR Agents to file the complaint, I will demand trial. Trials can provide to necessary record.

    • #55616 Reply
      wrongfully registered person

      I too found this to be good news. I find it interesting however that they do not consider talking in sex offender classes and Lie detector tests compelled by probation violation, resulting in more prison time is not compelled speech. They do not think this is compelled speech or they will not admit it is? Yes we had a victory, but there is still unconstitutional violations occurring in another area in the form of compelled speech. They follow the rules when it suits them this is all. I’m glad you read the opinion it is defiantly a win.

      • #55715 Reply

        A lot of these positive decisions are being made a the state or district level. This creating a hodgepodge of verging SOR restrictions, enforcement and requirements. Sadly, few get to the US Supreme Court where real change can happen

        • #55961 Reply

          Precisely why it was so important to appoint a man sympathetic to the big data\ Federal Surveillance saints Agenda to the top seat on SCOTUS. It has always been the primary duty of the Chief Justice of the United States of America to establish that court’s docket. Our current Chief Justice fit that bill. He was nominated by George Bush. Oil money has long played a role in American politics. We may recall it was ” our Intel agencys” that played up the WMD threat from an imp like Saddam Hussein that lead to Iraq and the loss of a few thousand American soldiers. The point is agendas must be tended, like gardens lest weeds appear and eventually take over the entirety.

          A truth is the U.S. LEO needed a way to gain unfettered use of the databases and infrastructure to monitor the whole of domestic internet traffic. They found their scapegoat in the child sex offender and began the indenture of humans to government database properties and the maintenance of same. If a nation can do that – with respect, and mindful to individual liberty -then no moral legal bar exists. The states began to utilize the electronic infrastructure to allow the people to monitor the people via the SORs, DOC websites. Photos were not part of the original plan, instead general descriptions were used, but the electronic digital camera made photos cheap so then soon demanded registrants “show up in person.” Truth is, forcing the first batch to show up was unconstitutional , thus I refused! The effect of that decision found me in jail, only to have the case dismissed without prejudice. That jail time was for the qualifying offense logically since I was not convicted for failure to provide.

          At another FTR trial I put the following line of Qs to agent.

          Agent when you receive the signed SOR form in you office now sure are you the registrant has completely and totally complied?
          A: I don’t know they completely complied really.
          Q, In fact there is no way for WIDOCSOR can reliably presume compliance via the form correct agent?
          A: No we merely presume because of the signature.

          There is a huge difference between intermediate scrutiny and trial scrutiny during cross. To bad NACDL are a bunch of cowards.

    • #55647 Reply
      James Coghill

      I had a similar problem after defeating 14 out of 15 counts in my second trial for which I was sentenced to 10 years probation and cookie cutter terms of probation. I instantly recognized that group and the polygraph were going to be a constitutional issue. I tried to get the court to address the matter right there and then but the results were far from satisfactory or constitutional. Essentially the court sidestepped it. 6 years later and still appealing my case it became a problem and I solved the matter for them by going back to prison. Because I was given a fixed sentence and had already served 2.5 years I knew I would be given credit for I calculated I would get another 2.5 years. It was the only part of 18 years of hell that went as expected. It’s really weird to me that the only way to keep my rights was to change my address to prison. I still can’t wrap my head around that one 2 years later. I try not to think about it because I’m actually terrified that prison may be the only place left in this country where you are free. I don’t want to find out if I’m right.

      • #55751 Reply
        Timothy Davich

        At no time is prison “free” yes you may find that you have more rights / less ability to do things but NEVER look at the option of prison as freedom. The wheels of justice turn very slow when it comes to change, (especially when it’s to fix a wrong) but in time that change will come. What is important to remember is that we all have nothing but time, it just depends on how and where we want to spend that time.
        I like you choose to return to prison to complete my sentence, so that when I was released I was “free” again, yes I still have to register and that I find to be easy to do here in MN. It’s not much different then registering my vehicles license tabs, or other such information. I don’t feel I should have to do these things but it is not overly difficult for me to do. I find it less a burden then going back to prison, I have found out what it’s like to have no rights or very limited rights in prison to a plethora of rights as a “free” citizen. It’s not perfect but at least out here I am able to do more to help those still incarcerated as well as those on supervision dealing with their rights being violated by the parole / probation departments.

    • #55694 Reply
      Ernest B Tucker

      Just last night I spent one and a half hours sitting in the “group” Counseling session. We discussed this and how a number of our probation officers make us pay an exorbitant amount if we fail the polygraph test in any manner.
      The first thing out of the mouths of those that had been tested in the last two weeks was, “I passed the polygraph this time!!!!!” Don’t you find it a little counterproductive that a person is more focused and fearful of the polygraph test than on getting over their addiction? I see the polygraph as a punitive distraction and a deterrent to actual recovery as it brings so much fear into one’s life.
      I, for one am glad to see this decision, but, I question whether it will have any impact on the way the probation officers treated sex offenders. I know for a fact that my po has a hatred for sex offenders and does all in his power to make us as miserable as possible. I have been visited four times in the last two weeks. I have been told that if I don’t pass the upcoming polygraph exam that I will be charged $1200 and be subject to going back to prison. How can anyone who has critical thinking skills even think that this behavior can in any way be positive and productive?

      I believe that the decision of the 7th circuit needs to be published if not in the media, then in documents to the DOJ and it’s subsidiaries such as the probation officers.

      SORNA places us under enough of a threat. We don’t need any more from the people who are supposedly here to help us reintegrate into society.

      Thanks Larry.

      • #55716 Reply

        “Critical thinking skills” are not typically required to be a PO. Sadly. These skills are also not requirement to be a legislator.

    • #55689 Reply

      A man must only address the ” conviction itself” in treatment settings. Most the rapists will settle for ” admitting a conviction” father than ” behavioral description” of events. Most men fall into that trap.

    • #55693 Reply
      Daniel Silverman

      In the state of Virginia, sex offenders are required to attend treatment after being released from prison/jail. However, treatment is a part of probation. If an offender fails to comply with all the requirements of treatment then they face either not getting off of probation or violating probation altogether, which could send them back to jail. While in treatment, you are required to take responsibility for the crime for which you were convicted, even if you had maintained your innocence throughout. Failure to take responsibility will cause you to fail your treatment and, therefore, becomes a probation violation which, as mentioned already, will send you back to jail. Not only that, but you are forced to take mandatory lie detector tests where the examiner asks you to list all your previous sexual contacts throughout your entire life, asks about any sexual fantasies you’ve had, and asks you to tell about any illegal sexual activities you may have engaged in. Refusing to take this test or refusing to answer these questions in full is considered a violation of probation and you will be sent back to jail. Failure to take the lie detector test is considered a violation of probation and you will be sent back to jail. Failing the lie detector test could be considered a violation of probation and you could be sent back to jail.

      The point here is that “violation of probation” is used as a cudgel to force offenders to comply, even if the offender has maintained their innocence throughout. They will not rest until they force you to admit you are a monster, even if you’re not.

      • #58337 Reply

        It’s funny, in California former DA Mike Ramos pushed for AB 433 probation notice to victim. Much of the actual bill pertains to restitution and admission of responsibility…while still on probation before a court closes the case.

        I believe this is in response to judges who closed cases as a big f u to Ramos’ “Victim bill of rights” amendment and how accusers would be guaranteed restitution in exchange for their testimony at trial. Which had led to some false convictions.

    • #55703 Reply

      Can this be applied to federal probation’s standard requirement for bi-annual polygraphs? These highly subjective machines are used to compel confessions that lead to investigations, violations, and inevitable incarceration. If so, how? Good work, great article!

      • #55734 Reply

        I have the same question regarding the semi-annual maintenance polygraphs required by the state of TN for registrants subject to the sentence of community supervision for life. These maintenance polygraphs are a component of treatment and yet only 1 question addresses treatment. That one question relates to if or how many times one has masturbated to deviant sexual fantasies. All other questions deal with any violations of the “Specialized Parole Conditions for Sex Offenders”. This polygraph is nothing more than a fishing expedition for chargeable violations of supervision. According to TCA 39-13-526, a knowing violation of the terms of community supervision is punished as a Class A misdemeanor, meaning a maximum of 11 months 29 days in county lock-up and a fine not to exceed $2500.
        That means these polygraphs are patent violations of the 5th Amendment’s protection against compelled self-incrimination. The threat of prosecution is concrete and immediate since violations of supervision constitute a new misdemeanor crime. There is a growing body of case law:

        1. United States v. Lawrence Antelope (9th Circuit Court of Appeals-January 27, 2005)
        2. United States v. Von Behren (10th Circuit Court of Appeals – May 10, 2016)
        3. United States v. Bahr (9th Circuit Court of Appeals – Sept. 16, 2013)
        4. People v. Roberson (Colorado Supreme Court – May 16, 2016)
        5. People v. Guatney (Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. III No. 06CA0704 – November 1, 2007)
        6. Dansby v. Texas (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, No. PD-0149-14 – November 26, 2014)

        All uphold a registrant’s 5th Amendment protection against compelled self-incrimination.

        • #55768 Reply

          I’m going to play my own devil’s advocate with regard to the ability to successfully challenge these semi-annual compliance polygraphs required by federal and state authorities as applied to supervised registrants.

          Facts that could militate against a favorable ruling:

          1. We pretty much know up front what behaviors are going to be covered during these compliance polygraphs. These polygraphs would only seek self-incriminating testimony if an offender was knowingly violating the terms of his or her supervision. (Example: Someone with offenses involving a child spending time alone with a minor)
          Therefore, whether or not the polygraph becomes self-incriminating is totally dependent upon the supervised registrant’s level of compliance.

          2. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (New York) ruled that the polygraph can be used as a tool to administer probation and parole supervision.

          2nd Circuit Approves Post-Release Use of Polygraph

      • #55873 Reply
        Ed C

        Yes, it does apply to federal supervised release. I take polygraphs about twice a year. The only questions I’ve been asked have to do with my conditions of release. My strategy for passing is not to do anything that I would have to lie about. When I’ve had doubts about ambiguous concepts such as what constitutes “incidental contact”, I’ve talked to my PO about a specific incident for clarity. The related polygraph question only asked whether there was any contact that I’d not revealed to my PO. So far, it has been no problem.

        None of the polygraph court decisions gives a person the right to refuse the test. Under Von Behren in the 10th Circuit, one must explicitly invoke the right against self incrimination for a specific question that has criminal implications. This is not the same thing as refusing to answer a question involving conditions of release. This only involves the time period since the last polygraph test. That is what is meant by a maintenance polygraph. A comprehensive sexual history polygraph (which I wasn’t required to take) can’t be refused either. However, 5th Amendment protections do apply to specific incriminating questions.

        I think the bottom line is 1) adhere to conditions of release, and 2) selectively invoke your rights after understanding precedent in your jurisdiction. Nothing decided in one circuit applies in another. It is only persuasive, not precedent. I applaud all those such as Von Behren who have the courage to stand up with no supporting court decision. They are the ones who risked much.

    • #55707 Reply

      This is great news!!
      What infuriates me is how some of the legislative and executive branches of some states literally ‘spit’ on the Constitution and its literal clauses by trying to make sex offenders into a class separate from the Constitution.
      The fifth amendment says ‘No person…….!
      How can you even begin to escape such a literal beginning of the Fifth Amendment????
      ‘No person’ is no person, literally, which would include sex offenders as well as all other offenders.
      The Fifth Amendment does NOT say ‘No person, except sex offenders shall…….be deprived, etc.
      The only way to bypass this is to make a sex offender not a person, or make a state wide/country wide classification of all sex offenders as second class citizens of the United States and therefore not entitled to the protection of the Constitution.
      Many Legislators and City/State Councils are doing their very best to ‘unofficially and underhandedly’ make sex offenders into second-class citizens of the United States and ONLY sex-offenders, so that they will fall into a protocol of judgement different from other offenders thereby disabling the protection of the Constitution.
      This is exactly what is going on!

    • #55709 Reply

      Doubt it! But this is a great baby step in the right direction! Thanks for digesting it for us!!! Is it weird that I feel like a baby bird eating legal food from Larry’s open beak! Yum!!!! [Sorry for the visual]

    • #55714 Reply

      Well I am really impressed with this article that Larry has brought to our attention. Are we all at times induced with this legal justice system or the illegal nature of all this in many cases. Talk about inducing one or provoking one.

      Sure we all have our battles, our ups and downs. Even divorces can be a bit naughty and down right pretty degrading, such as who gets the kids, visiting rights, money issues, things of that nature.

      I actually come from WVA but live in VA and a lot of this whole sex offender sounds like a Hatfield and McCoy feud in many ways not to mention who’s covering us his or her actions Narsol and the other advocate sites are on the right track to help in a lot of this sex offenders stuff and yes people do want to seek justice.

      Now I know that we all have our ups and downs and bringing a bit of the gospel into all this may not have been the best way to go about true understanding but for me in many of these cases who’s protecting and who’s serving deceptively or is a sting operation of this type unconstutional in many ways? Don’t get me wrong its good to have a bit of biblical knowledge.

      At times its difficult for one being involved in all this sex offender stuff but its people like NARSOL and others that are helping in the fight in a lot of this and helping others is what its all about.

    • #55733 Reply

      Hi there. Trying to get help here in the AZ. I tried legal aid, ACLU, and nadda!!! I got my only felony, failure to register. The AZ Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional. I cant find anyone to take it off my record.

    • #55730 Reply
      Mark Goodenow

      In the State of Oregon, we have mandatory sex offender treatment after release. The first thing up is a forced signing of the treatment contract. Refusal is jail. Everything is based on the police reports (not the conviction) if you dispute anything in the police reports you can pay for a “specific issue poly” if you pass this poly eliminating someone From being a victim they still remain a victim as far as the State is concerned anyway. The next thing is putting together the SHD (sexual history disclosure) a forced admission of every sexual event since birth (also includes criminal history as well) This document is verified by polygraph test at your expense. Failure to cooperate is called “failure to advance in treatment” and is a probation/parole jail sanction. Then there’s the “maintance polygraph every 6 months (at your expense) and also the bookmark and reporting requirements.. And a 50.00 per week group to attend throughout..
      Mark Goodenow; Oregon Voices.

      • #55769 Reply

        I am a supervised registered citizen in the state of TN. We have the same set-up. Treatment is mandated even if one is not subject to lifetime community supervision. Polygraphs, including the sexual history with full victim disclosure requirements are standard for both supervised and unsupervised sexual offenders. Depending on which condition of supervision is violated, the punishment can be anything from “administrative sanctions” which can include things like revocation of Internet privileges permanently, G.P.S. monitoring, increasing frequency of reporting to officer, upping overall risk level, etc. to 11 months 29 days’ confinement and a $2500 fine for a class A misdemeanor.

        We take polygraphs every 6 months to verify “progress in treatment” based on rule compliance. Our treatment provider’s rationale is “If you’re serious about your treatment, you’ll follow the rules you’ve been given.”

    • #55727 Reply

      The whole issue here is that the constitution and bill of rights in this country are totally USELESS. The bill of rights new name is ” the bill of temporary privileges”. And the constitution has been trampled on so much that it has lost all meaning. Just the truth.

    • #55762 Reply
      Marlene Gruber

      Do other country’s do this ?? I read that they focus more on rehabilitation , not retaliation like here in the US .. my Son is a veteran of the Army
      He served his country with the believe he was protected our freedom . Now he is among the sex offenders who were also addicted to internet porn .. I see no help for those out there
      For many that are actually good people .
      I am ashamed of our country and what it is becoming .

    • #55781 Reply

      Hello now i don’t mean to sound like a butt, just don’t give them what they want, even if you have had fantasy while masturbating thats non of there business and i dont care what you say because how does admitting to a fantasy cause to send you to prison if thats the case how can polygraph be used in court to send you back to prison since a polygraph is inadmissible in court and if they want you to talk about any other past incidents which you were never charged then dont tell them about it only talk about the one you were charged for, i know in Ca. you sign a paper that you are protected by the 5th amendment so can someone tell me how is an offender protected under the 5th amendment but in other states your not? I know for a fact the polygraph tests do not work and how i know is someone in counciling with told me the had to take there child to school and had to walk on school grounds and thats one of the questions on the test and he answered no and passed, so what i want to know is the court says polygraph is inadmissible in court because it cannot be relied on why are they allowed for probation to use it and the other is the constitution is written for the entire United States not just Ca. and few other states an not those states thats discrimination, what i cant figure out is how can they claim supposed high rate of recidivism ( 80%) and to know that they are lying besides evidence is if sex offenders are such a high danger why are not keeping them in prison if they’re such a danger? Because they’re lying! Proof also is go on the Doj an website there is proof the federal government knew the truth before the enactment of the registry the government did several studies from 1994 to presnt and in 1994 that study shows recidivism rate at 9% every study after that done by the government is below 5%, there are study after study showing rates are below 5% from every state in the U.S. plus at least 100 other studies all done by government and states in the U.S. plus other reputable sources and on top of all of that the statement that judge Kennedy made about frightenly high recidivism is where is his proof the courts are supposed to follow the law and evidence, the only time it was ever stated that sex offenders have a recidivism rate of 80% is in an article in Psychology Today magazine that was co-written by Megan’s father without any proof and out of anger and enraged heart after what happen to his daughter, so the evidence is out there, i have only been searching for the past 2yrs and i have found a mountain of evidence that proves that sex offenders are Not a danger and have the second lowest rate of recidivism rate an murder is the lowest rate so what i would like to do is create a organization to gather all of this evidence and create an push for legislation to take down these laws however that needs to be done, i think it’s great for sites like this one but most of the people that see this site are offenders themselves, i had people in counciling that didn’t know about Rsol and i had councillors tell me not to mention Rsol in counciling so i told people about Rsol before and after, freedom of speech i love it. If you would like to help in creating something that will reach the public without revealing you individually but get the real evidence to the public and to legislation to take down these because they were put up under false allegations an false evidence then get in contact with me, we have to start somewhere, 90% of public have no idea what sex offenders have to put up with from the laws that are in place besides the false hatred from most of the public the same as Jewish people in Germany the Japanese Americans after the attack on pearl harbour on claims of witch’s in Salem the African American used as and for slavery plus many many more and they’re also going after Muslim Americans, Let’s Stop The Hatred. L.s.t.h.

      • #55787 Reply
        Daniel Silverman

        Hi Mike. They wouldn’t put you back in jail for failing a lie detector test. They would get you on the grounds that you failed or couldn’t complete treatment. The idea is that you need to be forthright and withhold nothing, else the offender is not getting treatment. In states like Virginia, failure to comply with treatment, including polygraph examinations, is a violation of probation. And that violation can send you back to jail/prison.

        • #55806 Reply

          hi daniel that is the same thing you are just dancing around it by failing the lie detector test does put you in jail because by failing puts you in noncompliance with probation which put in violation and off to jail you go so yes it does no matter how you doctor it up!

          • #55813 Reply
            Daniel Silverman

            Hi Mike. What you originally wrote was long and had no paragraph breaks, so I might have missed something you wrote. If so, I apologize. But I wasn’t ‘doctoring up’ anything. I was stating a fact. In Virginia, at least, you wouldn’t go to jail for failing a lie detector test. You would go to jail for violating probation and part of probation, in this case, is attending treatment and complying with treatment requirements (and probation requirements, since probation here requires a polygraph). Whatever the language they use, if you fail to comply, you violate probation, you go back to jail. The requirements are the issue, the polygraph being a part of this.

          • #55826 Reply

            It does not matter how you are wording it is the same thing if you fail the polygraph test then you are in violation of probation, what your doing is called circular reasoning one answers the other and the other answers the other, they can say its not the polygraph that puts you in jail but its the violation but if you didnt fail the polygraph you wouldn’t be in violation in this case, just like just because the court says registry is not a punishment it is a civil commitment does not make it true, im done arguing with you, i know what the truth is.

      • #56502 Reply
        Susan Daley

        Yes, I agree. And I’m also terrified that there are real Nazis in this country that are getting into our government and are trying to take it over and who could very easily use the sex offender lists as a way to round up all of those on the list and exterminate them like they did to the Jews in Nazi Germany. These American bigots and fear obsessed people also want to exterminate all the LGBTQ people, just like Hitler did, so we Americans had better wake up soon and stop this nonsense! We all too easily forget that although Hitler did exterminate 6 million Jews in their Holocost, there was also another Holocost of 5 million other people, who were gays, LGBTQ people, sex offenders, gypsies, the mentally ill, the disabled, and even disabled children, the senile elderly, and those who opposed Hitler politically, even nuns and priests. What’s to stop these types from doing this again right here in America? Most Americans hate and fear everyone on the list, believing that everyone on the list is an actual or potential baby rapist, even though they actually know very little about who is actually on these lists, or what those on these lists have actually done. There are many innocent people on these lists, and many who have done very little to nothing to worry about, like e-mailing a picture of their kids playing in the bathtub to grandma, or a teenager e-mailing a picture of their own boob to their boyfriend. Most Americans have no idea! The cops, prosecutors, and judges involved in these cases seem way too anxious just to get convictions like bean counters, just to make it look like they are actually doing their jobs, so much that they don’t care at all about any justice or even any common sense! There is too much money involved and there is too much corruption in the system.

        Most Americans also don’t realize what a really slippery slope this all is, because just about ANYONE in America can actually be falsely charged and convicted of having child porn on their computer that they don’t even know is there, or even if it might not even be there. The charge of it being there is simply enough for most juries to convict just to protect children they think. This is exactly what happened during the witch hunts of the Middle Ages. All it took was for someone to falsely accuse a person of being a witch and that was it and they burned you at the stake. These computer child porn accusations and convictions are almost as bad, very few people ever beat it. I truly don’t think that ever convicting any truly innocent people of possessing child porn actually can or does protect ANY children, but the predjudice against child porn is so strong that it is almost impossible to overcome. We are living in a post truth world, where common ignorant prejudice is just as believed as actual well researched facts. In fact the real facts might even be less believable than the lies and prejudice these days. We Americans are no longer the human species called Homo sapiens, the wise ape anymore, we have now truly become Homo loco, the crazy ape! I hope that this dire situation changes pretty soon but I’m not holding my breath! We Americans are all in very deep trouble these days and so only scrupulous honesty, starting first by being honest with oneself and then by being truly honest with others, and by using a truly honest and sincere search for the dispassionate truth, can we ever find our way out of the terrible mess that we are all in. God help us!

    • #55812 Reply

      Actually folks Larry brought up a dynamic point. if not a dynamic principal. I even wonder if I was right to even bring the bible into all this? Do we all question ourselves or our wisdom.
      Larry , if you are the same Larry with his side kick Andy you guys on the right track and so is NARSOL and also Sandy.
      Sometimes I think I’m listening to the Amos and Andy show or the Leverin & Shirly show with lenny and squiggy. sorry for the pun but a lot of this sex offender issue is confusing and unconstutional at its best.

      Sure we have run-ins with people all the time and in all walks of life. Even Robin mentioned one time I can’t go to church. Well when you get your chaperone’s and get approved they want you to sign a form stating that you knew you were talking to a teenage gal. So who’s inducing?

      Actually NARSOL is doing the best they can to bring a bit of true justice and understanding to all this affair we are all are going thru so one has to Respect them. I think Diana Ross said it better and respect goes a long way.

      Even Pence said this country is getting into the shape of what the bible talks about in Daniel I even wonder why I at times brought up the subject. Shouldn’t someone on here bring up the Gospel or Good News. Sure we all have view’s and principalos but when others want to take that away from someone how does that make a country grow. Look at how the Indian’s were treated and that should be a key source. Sure one can say blessed are the poor in Spirit but who is leading one astray?

      Sure there is good and bad in every thing but who is tresspassing on another in this Sex offender ordeal in so many ways with this masquarade of justice. I even believe Robin and all the others on NARSOL board would agree to that. When someone says one can’t go to church or sign a wavor saying they knew that they were talking to a teenage gal, that in itself is a bit of vain glory. Now I’m for justice and this type of sexual endeavor is very unjust and bearing the sword in vain.

      So I have to applaud Larry and even Sandy, Robin and all of NARSOL. Thinking of others is whaat its all about. I wonder what’s better in life – Love or rejection?

    • #55888 Reply

      This article actually is very impressive and it should be a wake up call for all to understand that are on the registry. Even the articles with the words”Due Process” have meaning if one look for the truth. I sometimes wonder as I’m sure others do also if America was built on truth and justice.

      Sure a lot of this internet stuff is a bit of a garden of Eden seneiro or should two wrongs make a right. I read one article on here about a man killing himself over this sex offender stress. I am in agreement with Fred that a lot of this sex offender hijinks should be banned.

      Stipulations that one can’t use the internet and lifetime supervision seems a bit callous for anyone. Who Railroads another. While probation has its ups and downs what does true justice provide one in many of these audacious acts of this sex offender endeavor.

      One can either go with truth, trust, or accountibility but railroading someone is not the way for “due process” My dad was a character wittness in a famous Appalachian trail of the Mamie Thurman ordeal and he told all us kids that that black man was railroaded. Are a lot of these sex offender ordeal’s twisted by these Misters of Justice.

      While NARSOL has its challanges to help others its up to all of us to put a stop to many of these internet ordeals that are out of line in many area’s. Don’t get me wrong internet is good if one uses it right but man seems to want to either seduce or induce and creat a snare for those in many of these cases. In this ordeal that we all face one wonders what is true justice.

    • #56537 Reply

      Now I would like to get a bit of feedback about due process. While at times we are all scared to death when we all get involved in all this sex offender ordeal with intimidation and and deception plus lying. Now the truth is better than fact or is truth better than being under all this stress. Two or three agreeing to give one a plea bargain doesn’t appear constutional in a “Due Process” ordeal.

      Today I just got finished seeing my probation officer. He ask me to come into his office so from NARSOL’s article on due process I got to thinking… a lot of times in situations we all don’t think. Due process in a court of law is necessary for a lot of reasons, and with the sex offender thing it is of the utmost importance. I’m sure a jury of 12 can see right thru all of a lot of this hi-jinks. Now the supreme seems to wants to deprive those involved in a lot of this stuff and thats why they offer a plea deal.

      In reality while two wrongs don’t make a right but the law want to make a wrong a right. While their are different ways to skin a cat it seems public safety can encounter many area’s of public even one’s right to go on the internet if one dicides to do so. We all should think of others better than ourself.YEs NARSOL is right in this ratification of a lot of these sex law’s.

      We all face challanges daily but when someone is trying to duel it out with you, who is doing the mind bending on another with this type of inducement on an adult site or do we all pretend to be someone we are not.

Viewing 19 reply threads
Reply To: Forced self-incrimination
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.
  • *Comments arguing about political or religious preferences will be deleted.
  • *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.

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="">