# Michigan State Police Turning Away Pre-2011 Registrants

• Author
Posts

Fred

Last week it came to NARSOL’s attention that there had been a sudden new development in the Does v. Snyder case. Michigan State Police have decided th
[See the full post at: Michigan State Police Turning Away Pre-2011 Registrants]

d

Sounds like a setup to me. If the law gets changed and still includes them I would not be surprised it they are arrested and charged If the police refuse to give them prof they attempted to register and were denied then i would be twice as worried to be one of these guys. One thing this disaster in my life has taught me is the government does not care about you at all. This is just one big government overreach meant to create a subgroup of citizens with less rights.

1. Report your address yearly or be punished = compelled speech a Constitutional violation

2. Determination that you are a Danger and classifying you as such without due process = no Due Processes a constitutional violation

3. If any of these laws are done to punish or are found to be punitive = Double Jeopardy a constitutional violation

4. Coming to your house to see if you live there = Illegal search a constitutional violation

Everything they are doing is against our rights and they know this. They are not doing it for the children they are putting children in the registry now. They might do it for votes, but i believe it is for control, and creating citizens without rights the real government agenda!

Dr.

You want to know what they’re planning?
Michigan. Gov. Sor ,,,,,,,,,contract with
Coplogic out of Georgia,

Tim in WI

Turning registrants away while the law still hasn’t actually been rewritten. One more example of selective enforcement by LEO. Sure they are doing the right thing adjusting to courts determination, but 3 years after the first decision & after the blatant lack constitutional integrity of MI congress exposed bear.

Chicago Illinois had issues of registrants attempting to register but being turned away for other reasons, like staff availability. Turning folks away after they show up willingly to register is a form of affirmative restraint on liberty and examples rule by fiat disposition law enforcement agencies advantage have today.

aurelius

Out of the pan and into the fire, They set it up this way with the intent of pulling a “gotcha”, it’s typical tactics and doesn’t surprise me. Expect arrests of SOs to increase soon.

aurelius

It is VERY clear that the State of Michigan continues to refuse to grant SOs the relief they fought so hard for and won, Constitutionally I might add. When will it actually happen? When will it end? Will we ever see relief? I’m only asking what everyone else wants to know. I know there has been progress, but it seems like one step forward and 3/4 step right back at every turn. Now the State wants a mulligan on the original Snyder case, and we ALL know what that would entail, as well as the outcome.

Bob

Actually not at all shocked that MSP has taken this stance. Once a year every year (couple times twice) they’ve been at my doorstep to “check in” and each and every time well as this very last time the troopers have never once been shy in voicing just how much of a pain and drain on resources this whole registry thing has become to them. One that showed up recently was the best one yet as when I stated my disdain for politics, politicians, current state (more like sate of confusion) of the registry and the affects it was having on us registrants and even more so the LEO’s who are stuck in the middle having no choice but to do the door to door details and enforce laws that even they know don’t work and were long deemed unconstitutional by the courts, he didn’t hesitate in agreeing with me “off the record” with a laugh and several head nods. Ask any reputable LEO (who’s off duty of course) how they feel about the law and they’ll give you an earful and tell you how they themselves don’t even use the public SOR.

DON HENKEN

In light of the decision reached by the courts in Michigan can or will the National ACLU bring a a similar case on a national level that would effect all registrants in the United States?

aurelius

@Bob I wouldn’t let what your local officers say fool you, 2+ million dollars a year extorted from SOs is a considerable amount of income for the State Police, they aren’t about to let it go without a fight.

Don

Oh man, not this shit again.

First, Bob is right on point. MSP HATES enforcing that law. Every time I have ever been “checked in on” by a MSP Trooper, the FIRST THING out of their mouth is “I’m very sorry, I don’t like this and the State is making me do it.”

Yes, this whole thing has been a massive drain on MSP, and local Sheriffs too. They don’t like the law, they cannot understand it, and often times have less of an understanding than an actual Registrant does. I have tutored many a Deputy and Detective on it since I often come into contact with them for professional reasons…I install camera systems at businesses in my free time and I will usually work with them on footage needs. I know just about every Macomb County Deputy and about 1/2 of their detectives.

Ok, so idiocy control:

NO, the State is not setting anybody up. The Governor and AG are most likely well aware that the MSP has thrown in the towel on pre-2011 Registrants just to reduce their workload.

If the Governor and AG are not fully aware, there is NO WAY they are going to consent to any kind of post-turn away round up as many here have speculated on. Not to mention, it would be in Court so fast that it would make your head spin. The ACLU would see to that, and so would I, working with them.

The most likely outcome for pre-2011 Registrants is they will remain on the Registry, but never be updated again. They might even simply come off the Registry after a time since the information will be progressively out of date. The argument will be “why keep it, if it is no longer accurate?”

So, PLEASE PLEASE stop the idol speculation and nonsense. What folks are suggesting here is some sort of SOR APOCOLYPSE. Not going to happen. Even if they wanted to (which they don’t) try something as outrageous as this, MI has no way of sending about 30,000 people up the river all at once. We cannot even get our roads fixed right, and Flint still has lead in the water. No money to fix it all. Anybody that thinks MI has the money to prosecute and imprison tens of thousands like this is living in fantasy land.

Peace out everybody.

J. Schultz

@Don, what makes you right.? I for one don’t agree with your OPINION. It is untrue, in my view, that the state wouldn’t love to lock every last one of us up, forever if possible, and I absolutely definitely believe this is real, not for one second will I ever trust ANY authority or government that openly persecutes innocent citizens. I consider myself to be a political prisoner, my rights ignored, my life destroyed, my safety threatened, my economic and social status less than that of dog. Perhaps you might educate yourself about how and why this little Registration snafu arose in the first place? Ever heard of Does v. Snyder? HOW about reading the Court’s opinion? Or maybe the MI AG brief? I find it infuriating and insulting, almost blasphemous, to read your uninformed incorrect and dangerous narrative. If you want to live with your head stuffed in the mud, see no evil, hear no evil, they wouldn’t ever do that, hey, be my guest, but don’t you for one goddamned second pretend to know what is true or real for the rest of us. You are the one who is delusional, I agree with the rest of us, watch your ass cause they ain’t gonna like losing.

patrick

Here is the biggest issue we have right now, these are all opinions (which we are entitled to) but the bottom line is the MSP is turning away pre 2011 registrants for whatever reason. the other bottom line is this until the law is written and we see something concrete in writing of what to expect as changes going forward we really know NOTHING. with that said can we not try to spread rumors and speculation about the law (yes we have all been patiently waiting I know) because until then we won’t know really anything.

Don

Hey J. Schultz.

I am one of the Class Action Representatives in Does II. One of 6.

So, uninformed I am not. I am pretty thoroughly tied into what the ACLU has done, what they are doing, and what their current take is of the Legislature, Governor, and AG.

Enough said.

Charles

I believe change and waiting patiently is difficult for all classes of people/human beings. Self control right now going forward is where it’s at. Do the job we are all supposed to that will allow our freedom to enjoy life in Michigan, USA or in another country/state etc. Basically life is still yours to make of it what you want. If we choose not to, someone will make the choice for us.
Our whole system of government is going to have to be reworked into a new SORA system. Not an easy task or quick either.
Thank you ACLU and those involved pushing for change. Persistence is paying off. I might not be able to do your job so I’ll just do mine. I’m happy with what’s being done so far! I can see the mountain shake, tremble and the ground is moving……its moving!
I’m sure it’s easier for some to talk about it then to be about it. Don’t forget that was a great Valentines day victory for all of us!!

Congratulations

aurelius

That’s great and all, but I suggest against any false sense of security, this is more “eye of the storm” than it being done and over with, relief might be short lived. Never rest.

Tim P

While no one knows the final out come of this issue. I can be fairly sure that arrest will NOT take place if you are a member of the pre April 12, 2011 class in this action. If for some reason a local Police Dept. or Sheriffs Dept. did make an arrest the case would be thrown out once the Judge saw the order from the MSP. And while the MSP can not tell local jurisdictions what to do the memo itself would be proof of the reason the Registered Citizen did not register. (those who’s conviction happen prior to April 12,2011). While the MSP did make many mistakes in the order itself, for example not saying what things are no longer required from post April 12,2011 members of that class. (people who’s conviction happen after April 12,2011) we are confident that once the order is signed and on the record in the court this will be cleared up and that signing could take place today or soon this week. I should note that the order will NOT go into effect for 60 days from the date it is on the record in the court. Of course there is a slim chance the State will start working to rewrite the law and then of course it will have to be constitutional.

Tim P ACLU of Michigan SOR Specialist

Josh

@Don….I argued with you about the possible outcome on another thread on this site…..this time I’m going to agree with you. My experience with every officer doing my verifications or compliance checks at my residence has told me exactly the same things…..they KNOW it’s bullshit and a waste of time. I do have a question for you though….why do you think we’d remain on the registry after this is resolved? I’m starting to be convinced more strongly everyday that there is no chance they can get a new law done before 60 days is up…..especially given the current crisis and the fact that these legislators can’t possibly have a registry re-write on the top of their to do lists while they’re working via video conferencing from home. I do believe they may attempt something down the road after this virus situation is resolved…..thoughts?

BM

All -IMO this crisis we are facing with Covid may work in our favor.
1. Probable 60 days will lapse and potentially much longer.
2. If this does play out past the 60 days, there’s little urgency to fix it since the legislature has court cover and can blame the virus also for inaction.
3. It gets kicked past the election, which politically is better for us to get the best outcome.

Anyone else see this angle?

Russ

I went to register today. And was turned away. I’m literally scared shitless right now.

Fred

You don’t need to be. This whole “Document your visit” thing is just a precaution. Honestly those of us in the know, know this a good thing and that you are basically free of your registering obligations. Unless the legislators find a way to rewrite the law and include you, but from what I am hearing that is very unlikely. If they do, you are not going to be in trouble for being turned away.

Bobby S.

@Fred

Have you by chance heard if the Judgment was filed on the 13th,? I have heard or been able to find anything on it yet
I even emailed, Tim from the MI ACLU and have not heard back from him as of yet. I did register on the 2nd at my local cop shop, and they did take my $50, but that was before the memo went out, the one I sent you. I’m just wondering if it was filed on Friday and what the status is now. • #69744 Reply Fred Admin We don’t usually hear about that. That is just paperwork being signed and filed. We might be able to find it online, if the circuit court maintains a website for documents, but even then, the website still has to be updated and the frequency of that can vary. Like Tim P. said, if it wasn’t filed yesterday, it will be this week. That will definitely get done as he has already ruled on the case and will file the judgement in the usual time frame. • #69745 Reply Josh @Fred….somebody with a pacer account reported on ACSOL that there was a one week mutually agreed upon extension approved by judge Cleland. The order is supposed to be entered by no later then 3/20 now…I don’t have a pacer account so no way to verify this but hopefully it answers the question • #69757 Reply blaek uhm they have a bill on the legislator website and it is literaly the opposite of what i think the judge wanted. nothing changed and we are still being forced ex post facto to almost all the 2011 and 2006 rules. I am hoping the ACLU is not ok with this bill. • #69760 Reply Fred Admin @black, Part of the judge’s order is that the legislators work with ACLU in rewriting the law. Whatever you read, I don’t think it means what you think it means. What Bill? What website? • #69761 Reply blaek michigans website for bills introduced yesterday. • #69766 Reply Fred Admin @black, Thank you, I am reviewing it and sent it to some others to review. What I can tell you so far is that he only introduced it. It hasn’t passed the first hurdle yet. Remember that what has been struck down is the residency restrictions, and the requirement to report certain things within a certain amount of time, along with the ex post facto issue. So far I am not seeing any mention of those things in this bill and no mention of proximity to school and parks, ect.. I am still reading, but so far it looks like an attempt to carve out those obvious constitutional violations, but it cannot just ignore the ex post facto clause. • #69767 Reply Fred Admin Okay I see those things I mentioned above. He is removing some of the vagueness of the current law. I hope to hear from someone else who has better understanding of what this means and who it applies to. I will update this when I know. • #69768 Reply blaek im really hoping judge cleland and the aclu didnt sign off on this. I hope this is not the bill we are waiting for. No way this took this long to do plus it doesnt look like a rewrite of anything. • #69770 Reply Fred Admin @black I confident they didn’t and won’t sign off on it. It was only introduced yesterday. Nobody has read it yet. • #69771 Reply blaek ok i wasnt understanding why someone would try to introduce this bill. After everything the aclu has fought for this couldnt be the final product. • #69773 Reply Fred Admin @black That is what politicians do. I just confirmed with our person in ACLU that they are aware of this. It is NOT what they are negotiating for. It hasn’t gotten to committee yet. If it makes it that far ACLU will be there. • #69774 Reply blaek ok thank you for the updates. Hopefully michigan can get their stuff together. • #69888 Reply Brandon I Just seen on pacer there is another extension of March 27th to submit the joint judgment. • #69938 Reply Bobby @Brandon, Thank you, for the update, but all these extensions being given to the state is getting out of control. Just sign the damn order and start removing pre- 2006-2011 people. • #69945 Reply aurelius And here we go once again, they will any and every excuse in the book to extend, delay, be granted a stay, until it goes their way and we are all kept on the registry. It wouldn’t surprise me if they used the Corona virus as an excuse to continue to enforce these laws that were RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE now. Anyone keeping score here? Mark my words, our victories will be in name only, the State will make sure of it. • #70160 Reply Russ I just don’t understand this. I was turned away when I went to register at the state police on St. Patrick’s day. I asked for something in writing. He said there is no need for that due to the “fact” that no agency is enforcing the law. Well. The law is still in effect. Meaning I am going to be non-compliant very soon. I called the Lakeview post. The Sgt. I spoke with was very aggressive and rude. And told me I’m supposed to get a letter. Telling me what to do next. And that I am “in limbo” and really didn’t answer any of my very valid concerns. I called the kent county sheriff’s Dept. They said they were still registering individuals. But the office was closed due to this Corona virus. So that has me very worried I’m going to receive a knock at my door. Or an officer is going to show up to my work. To arrest me for a felony for literally doing nothing. And trying to go above and beyond to stay compliant. This is in my opinion a complete mess. And very very dangerous for us. • #70163 Reply Fred Admin @Russ First don’t worry. You will not get a knock on your door. The state police manage the registry. The local police might take your information, but the registry is still managed by the state police. It is an official order that says pre 2011 registrants do not need to register and non compliance charges cannot be filed. That applies to both state and local police. I have the order that was passed down to the state police, I will upload it and post a link to it shortly. If you are still nervous, you can print it and show it to any police officer who didn’t get the memo. • #70167 Reply Fred Admin @Russ UPDATE AND CLARIFICATION – Enforcement of Michigan Sex Offender Registry Act. https://narsol.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EnforcementMemo.pdf • #70170 Reply Russ Fred. Thanks for all you do. • #70172 Reply Russ Fred you are very knowledgeable with all this. In your opinion. What is your gut feeling on where this whole situation is going to go? It seems like a confusing mess that has the future of alot of individuals just dangling in very thin air. These pre 2011 registrants are in quite particular circumstances. Being convicted as a juvenile back in 2002. I always thought it was highly unconstitutional to take me from 25 years of requirement. To life. And I am not the only one. And I feel for all individuals caught up in this mess. So what should pre 2011 registrants. And juvenile sentenced offenders expect? Thanks again Fred. • #70178 Reply Fred Admin I think it will be very difficult for Michigan lawmakers to rewrite the law in a way that puts pre2011 restraints back under the same rules and restrictions. At this time I don’t see how they can do it without it being struck down. They might try though, but my impression is they are not putting a lot of effort into it. • #70191 Reply Bobby @Fred, I was just wondering if you heard or might possibly know if court was held today in Judge Cleland’s court room. If so was the judgement finally finalized or is it on hold because of covid-19. • #70201 Reply Brandon @Bobby there was a teleconference on Thursday. Something was filed on Friday but for some reason pacer won’t let me read it. Next action on the dockets is memorandum due 3/30 • #70205 Reply Phil Grimes Fred, please clarify the April 11, 2011 date in reference to this subject. The letter in the link you posted clearly references the offense occuring prior to this date, but others in this and other forums talk of the conviction date or the date the individual was placed on the registry. My offense occurred in December 2010, however my conviction was in July 2011. Am I part of the group this court decision refers to? • #70213 Reply Fred Admin @Phil Grimes My understanding is that the ruling applies to pre April 12 2011 registrants in Michigan. That should include you if you are in Michigan. • #70209 Reply Bobby @Brandon, Thank you for the update and if you don’t mind me asking what memorandum is on the docket and suppose to be filed on 3/30. Please keep checking your PACER, and keeping us updated. Thank you again for the updates. • #70216 Reply Brandon @Bobby it’s still not downloading for me put but my understanding from I have heard memorandum is just how both sides wish to proceed during coronavirus. Anyone can sign up pacer.gov it just shows court records. The case number for this case is 16-13137 easier to find if filter by civil cases. If you don’t wish sign up or pay for searches Courtlistener provides must of the same info https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6092769/john-doe-v-snyder/ • #70297 Reply Dewan Today is 3-30…any updates? I am a pre 2011 registrant and actually my offence occured prior to 94 but registration was given as part of a plea agreement when brought to light in 2003. The hoops sure have piled up since….Am I coming off? • #70412 Reply Dewan update? • #70414 Reply Fred Admin @Dewan @All ****** This email is to inform you about a webinar which is being hosted by the ACLU and going to be held this coming Friday at Noon. Since many of us are home, it is a good time to connect and find out what is going on and what we can all do to help, moving forward. We want to mobilize as many people as possible to fight Michigan’s SORA and defeat the legislative proposed revision: HB 5679. You are invited to a Zoom webinar. When: Apr 3, 2020 12:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Topic: SORA Legal and Legislative Update and Call to Action Register in advance for this webinar: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_cvyc9sFVSnev4wTR1ViB8A Webinar participants are being asked to sign up in advance so that we know where people are calling in from, geographically. Your information will not be used for anything other than direct communication about opportunities to get involved in SORA advocacy. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Just a note that pre-registration is requiring first name, email address & zip code. When you receive your confirmation email there will be a link to use on the day of the webinar or, if you prefer, there will be phone numbers listed at the bottom of the email, along with a Webinar ID (149 543 251) that you can use to connect. If you prefer to call and do not want your phone number to be visible to others, enter *67 before typing in the phone number. I will be sending out in the next day or two. • #70422 Reply aurelius Might as well let people see just what Michigan is up to, see: *** Correct link approved by Admin http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2020-HB-5679 • #70429 Reply Michael Thackston I called my local police post in niles mi i am pre 2011 and i still had to go in pay my fee this month. • #70448 Reply Ken After a quick and dirty skim of the proposed bill, The best that I can figure is that we’re all going to get hosed on this. Is there someone that can put the proposed bill into plain English? • #70462 Reply Josh @Fred…..I like your level headed approach to developments as they happen. That being said, I’d like your opinion on this bill. I’ve read it several times and had my attorney review it as well. My attorney said the bill is a convoluted mess and thinks it was a less then sincere effort to comply with Judge Cleland’s ruling. I’m not a legal mind but from what I can understand of that Bill it goes against much of what needs to be corrected. I understand the ACLU needing to fight this bill on principle but I guess I don’t see why there is real concern here. The bill is still sitting in the judiciary committee. My attorney has a decent relationship with Miriam & the ACLU. You have sources there too apparently. Your assessment of this bill and insight about why the ACLU is so concerned about it, is what I’m asking your opinion for? Thanks in advance…. • #70468 Reply Fred Admin @Josh I agree with your attorney. It is a less than sincere attempt to comply with the court orders. It is basically the exact same law with some language revises to clean up the vagueness that was found unconstitutional. The problem for them is that wasn’t the only thing that was found unconstitutional. This bill was introduced by a freshman legislator who doesn’t seem to have a good grasp on how much of the original law the courts disagreed with. He is barely scratching the surface on what must be changed. I don’t think ACLU is so worried, but they are prepared to challenge it every step of the way if it gets any traction. Bad bills have a way of sailing through the chambers and landing on the Governors desk if nobody outside of the legislature opposes them. So this is not something to scoff at. It needs to be killed or it will probably move. If you didn’t notice, there is a conference call Friday afternoon with ACLU on this issue. The information is a few comments above. • #70503 Reply Mac I read the bill. I don’t see how it would pass muster with Judge Cleland. • #70574 Reply BM Fred: Was the ACLU conference recorded by chance? I was unable to attend and probably not the only one who is curious. Thank you! • #70607 Reply Fred Admin @BM They didn’t say, but if they did record it, I will post it here when it’s available. I listened to the call and I found it very encouraging. The ACLU Lawyer spelled out all the reasons why he thinks the new bill that was introduced does not come close to fixing what the court ruled unconstitutional. He seemed to think it is unlikely to pass. He did say that the 60 day deadline will likely be pushed back considerably due to the coronavirus pandemic. • #70593 Reply Bobby S. @all Michigan Please correct me if I am wrong, but from what I understood, and the parts I am concerned with along with many others in the same boat as I am is this, all pre 2011 registrants will eventually be removed ,unless your conviction was after 2006 but before 2011, you will still have to follow 2006 amendments, but NOT 2011 amendments. Those of us that are pre-2006 and 2011 will come off , and those of us that are even pre-registry, meaning before the registry even existed, will definitely be removed, as soon as the injunction is put into place or a new law is written, either way we have to try and be patient, and we will eventually come of the registry sound about right, again correct me if I misunderstood anything, Thanks in advance. • #70614 Reply BM Fred- Do you mind summarizing some of the points? I see Bobby has taken some things he heard and made a comment. Just curious what you thought specifically and if you mind hitting some topics for those who couldn’t attend. I wish I could’ve made it today! My offense date was 91 (juvenile) and plead in 05. So for me the date is extremely important offense vs conviction. Thank you! • #70667 Reply Rex Thanks to all of you and the ACLU for all their help in this. I called the Alpena State Police and was told I no longer had to verify. I did not get the officers name. I ask if I needed to pay my$50.00 and he said I no longer had to comply.
It is all a bit scary.

Rex

I was convicted of attempted aggravated sexual battery in Oct. 1994. from Tennessee. A class C felony, I moved back to Mich May 1999. Mich, turned my class C into a class A making a lifetime registration. I called the Mich. State Police in
in Alpena Mich on April 1, 2020 and was told by the officer on the phone that I did not have to verify anymore. I did not get his name. Like the rest of you, I am very concerned. I ask if I had to pay my $50.00 and he said I no longer had \to verify. How do I get the$50.00 to them? If they do reinstate the registry which I pray they do not, why do they use a tier system instead of using the class of the felony? Thank you all for keeping up on this.

BM

There has been an interim order. Got it in my email from Tim P at ACLU.

Effectively states:
The order does the following:
Law enforcement must immediately stop enforcing registration, verification, school zone violations, and fee violations in connected with Michigan’s sex offender registry law from February 14, 2020 until the COVID-19 crisis has ended. NOTE: this order enjoins the enforcement of the registry but does NOT stop law enforcement from continuing to use the registry.
The COVID-19 crisis is considered ended:
When there is no longer an operative federal or state executive order or legislative act declaring a state of emergency, or
When the Court determines that the conditions giving rise to the need for this Order no longer apply, and
Registrants are notified of their duties under Michigan’s registry law going forward.
Within seven (7) days of this Order (April 13, 2020):
Michigan State Police shall post notice of this Order on their website and other locations where it can be seen widely by registrants.
The Prosecuting Attorneys Association Coordinating Council must provide notice of this Order to all Michigan’s Prosecuting Attorneys.
Michigan State Police must provide notice of this Order to the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police and to the Michigan Sheriffs’ Association, who must send notice to all law enforcement personnel who are responsible for registry enforcement matters.
The attorneys involved in this case must report to the court every 30 days on the progress of this order.

Bobby

@BM, so is this just a temporary order? to suspend things for now, or is this order also to start removing people from the registry once the Covid-19 emergency order is over. Thank you for the update.

Shayne Hodges

Good morning all. I was convicted in 1997 of attempted CSC 3rd degree I have since been in trouble a few times and now find myself on the registry for life. When I was sentenced in 1997 the judge ordered 25 years my 25 years is up in a couple more years does that mean I’ll stay on the registry until that time is up or will I be removed right away I’m hoping for a miracle thanks everyone.

Fred

@All

As some of you are already hearing, yesterday, District Court Judge Robert Cleland issued an order that effectively enjoins enforcement of Michigan’s sex offender registery act until the coronavirus crisis has ended.

The order does the following:

1. Law enforcement must immediately stop enforcing registration, verification, school zone violations, and fee violations in connected with Michigan’s sex offender registry law from February 14, 2020 until the COVID-19 crisis has ended. NOTE: this order enjoins the enforcement of the registry but does NOT stop law enforcement from continuing to use the registry.

2. The COVID-19 crisis is considered ended:
a.) When there is no longer an operative federal or state executive order or legislative act declaring a state of emergency, or
b.) When the Court determines that the conditions giving rise to the need for this Order no longer apply, and
c.) Registrants are notified of their duties under Michigan’s registry law going forward.

3. Within seven (7) days of this Order (April 13, 2020):
a.) Michigan State Police shall post notice of this Order on their website and other locations where it can be seen widely by registrants.
b.) The Prosecuting Attorneys Association Coordinating Council must provide notice of this Order to all Michigan’s Prosecuting Attorneys.
c.) Michigan State Police must provide notice of this Order to the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police and to the Michigan Sheriffs’ Association, who must send notice to all law enforcement personnel who are responsible for registry enforcement matters.

4. The attorneys involved in this case must report to the court every 30 days on the progress of this order.

Bobby

@All, I know I asked this in the other post, but since I’m a Pollock and trying to rap my head around some of the wording in the order, I will ask again and apologize for the repeat. I know it’s a temp order, but in some of the wording like ” thanks and void” and when they say people will be sent letters in the mail to what there duties are after the covid 19 emergency is over. So when all is said and done does the order also mean that all pre-2011 registrants will finally be removed from this unjust registry, while they revise the registry to make it constitutional for all post 2011 registrants or I miss interpreting the order.?. It just sounds to me that after the covid 19 emergency is over, that all pre-2011 registrants will be done with the registry once we are sent letters in the mail. Please correct me if I am wrong and completely miss reading the order. Thank you in advance.

Joe

Fred,

Do you know if during all of this stuff, if the MSP are supposed to remove the pre-2011 registrants from the registry or are they leaving everyone on the registry for now until a final decision is made?

If they are supposed to suspend pre-2011 registrants from the registry and you are a pre-2011 registrant and still on the registry, what actions should be taken to be taken off or suspended during this time?

I look forward to hearing back from you.

Thank You,

Fred

@BM
Here is that recording you were waiting for.

Mac

Thanks Fred, very informative.

BM

@Fred

Appreciate it! Thank you very much for posting. I’m sure others are curious as well.

Dewan

Thanks Fred!
What happened with delay order in video post from 4-10? I am pre 2011. Wondering about the latest with covid.

Mika

What would be the process for someone with a case from MI, but living in another state currently. The state is trying to make him be subject to their laws when the case is originally from Michigan. Trying to make him continue reporting he is pre-2011

Mac

@Mika

What state? I hope it is not Florida. As far as I know you have to comply with the state laws you live in regardless that the conviction was in Michigan.

Mika

@mac, the Carolinas subject to their laws he wouldn’t have been registering in the first place. So im just wondering how this will play out.

aurelius

@ Dewan we might find out soon, Whitmer is starting to ease the quarantine up a bit.

Dewan

Looks like they’re gonna stick us and push it through while under restrictions. Sound accurate?

Michael

I was turned away in March and told to wait for a letter in the mail. I have received nothing so far and I’m getting really nervous. I don’t have any solid proof that I tried to register or of what I was told. My crime was before 2011. I was really hoping I’d get let off early but I knew that was a long shot. I just hope they don’t make it tougher or worse somehow. As the days tick by I feel like I’m just going to get tricked and put back in jail.

Ken

May is my verification month and, I’d have to say I’m getting a bit antsy myself. Nothing in the mail yet… @Fred, would you say we continue to sit on our hands?

Rex

Food for thought. Today, May 6, 2020 at appx. 2.10pm I went to the Michigan state police dept. in Alpena Mich.. with my wife and we talked to an officer named Tucker. I ask if there was any requirements yet to register. His response was ” you do not have to report anymore and if you want to, you can go to any state you want to go to and you do not have to report to any of them. There is nothing they can do because as of now you are not required to verify in this state.”
He said until this goes to the Mich. supreme court, you are free of having to register anywhere.
He also said if and when this changes to where we once again have to register, we will all be notified by the state or the state police as to our requirements.
This is all a bit scary. Thank you Fred for all you are doing. Oh ya, the officer did say anyone convicted in 2011 and
foreword would still have to verify.
For the record, I will not be leaving the state until all if this is said and done.

Glitterfairy

@Rex – thanks for sharing. May is my husband’s month to register and we are antsy and anxious feeling like somehow they’ll pull a fast one on us.

I was contacted today via email by a group of registrants in my area and the ACLU asking to work together after this mornings house judiciary meeting regarding HB 5679. The counties are working together to strategize getting the attention of our legislators.

Super nervous over here and trying to stay hopeful. There has to be a light….

aurelius

One could say we are well and quite in the eye of the storm right now…

Dewan

How can they be crafting law right now in Michigan that is going to apply to what I did in 1994? Its already been ruled as punitive….how can they do anything to it at all? Isn’t even fixing it ex-post facto?
Hasn’t the judge ruled that it has been unconstitutional and that our rights were even violated so that it’s null? Yet he is giving them an opportunity to tweak it. Seems to me they already blew it and that any changes they make cannot be applied or made to be applied to me since my punishment has been mete.
Is there anything to what I am saying after this is done? Is this a valid argument after they tweak my punishment yet again?
I wish I could get the same second chance to fix what I had done wrong.

aurelius

They have no qualms about taking our fates under their pens, and then sending their mindless enforcers to make sure we are properly dehumanized. All for extra dollars in their pockets and extra votes in their ballots. This stopped being about “public safety” years ago.

Tim

Hello,
I believe the fear of arrest at the end of this is unwarrated. I too have heard from leos doing my registration that they hate this part of their job, i have also had discussions with neighbors of mine trying to address their questions for me and have found that with patience and total transparency, that people are always willing to give a person a chance once the questions and information they were seeking. Was given. My hats off to all the people involved with gettting us back some sort of life.

aurelius

I was just visited by my county Sheriff for a compliance check. Seems like it’s back to business as usual.

Reply To: Michigan State Police Turning Away Pre-2011 Registrants
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

<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="">