NARSOL to WV: “You have been warned”

Viewing 29 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #61720 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek
      Admin

      By Sandy . . . The primary message of NARSOL’s Halloween Marathon and the press release sent before the Marathon is spelled out explicitly in the last
      [See the full post at: NARSOL to WV: “You have been warned”]

    • #61728 Reply
      Avatar
      Ernest B Tucker

      Now if we could just get the courts and judges to uphold their oaths to support and defend the constitution and remove these unconstitutional statutes from the books, then we will be on our way toward reestablishing justice in this country.

    • #61730 Reply
      Avatar
      James Coghill

      Send officer Pettry a copy of this case and tell him he needs to do some research before he starts violating peoples rights because some of us aren’t going to take it anymore and will see you in court.

      Nichols v. United States, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) does not require an individual to update his registration after departing a state.[1]

      You are only required to tell them you are leaving the state and in the case of international travel it must be 21 days prior to departure. You are not required to tell them where you are going. You are not required to tell them what you are going to do when you get there. It is also improper for any government agency or official to ask you those questions. Know the law. Cite it regularly!

    • #61731 Reply
      Avatar
      ED

      First, I thank you for sending your letter to them.

      Second, I received this same letter from them and I’d like to add some info.

      1. The Annual Letter

      They send a letter each year when it’s time for my annual registration.

      That letter also contains a similar threat which is not part of actual state law. It says I have ten days to report for reregistration or I’m breaking the law. The actual law states I must reregister in the month of my birth; so, I have the entire month.

      Also, they require a signature to get the annual letter. No signature was required for this recent new letter; it arrived in my mailbox.

      After the first couple years I simply stopped signing for the annual letter. Then the Post Office is forced to do a return-to-sender. During the several years I’ve been ignoring the annual letter no one has ever contacted me about not signing for the letter, and not reregistering within ten days of receiving it.

      I’ve always been irritated with them for writing in false things in the letter which are not law.

      2. The form to sign which came with the new letter

      The form seems to be the same form we are required to sign each time we reregister. It’s been edited to contain the travel component.

      This makes me suspect it’s the new form we’ll have to sign when we go to reregister. That’s coming up soon for me.

      So, now I’m wondering, how should I handle signing that form when I reregister? If it has the non-legal part about the travel, should I cross it out and initial it before signing the form? I am legally binding myself to a non-legal requirement by signing it?

      3. Identifying Information via mail

      I appreciate your team noticing they are demanding we send our identifying information in the mail. I hadn’t even thought of that.

      That same info is on the form we sign each year. I still don’t understand why our SSN is on there. It seems like we could just use our ID number from their records.

    • #61732 Reply
      Avatar
      ED

      I forgot to mention, the letter says we have 15 days from the date of the letter, not from when we receive the letter. The postage on the envelope I received was dated November 6th, which is a full week after the date of the letter. Allowing three days for arrival would leave only 5 days to “comply.” Just one more ridiculous thing about it.

    • #61740 Reply
      Avatar
      Nike Hall

      I believe NARSOL is wrong on this one. International Megan’s Law (IML) requires that currently registered citizens are supposed to give their local authorities 21 days notice before travel. This includes reason for travel, flight schedule, where you will be staying and when you will be returning. NC doesn’t have anything in their statutes regarding this either, but unless I’m mistaken, that doesn’t matter. It’s Federal law that we are supposed to do this. I’m going to be doing it for a trip in January, and will give my local sheriff my itinerary in late December. I mentioned it to them yesterday when I registered. They said they would give me a letter to carry stating that they were aware of my itinerary, in case I had any difficulties during my trip. More posts on this topic can be seen on the RTAG,ORG website.

      • #61742 Reply
        Avatar
        Mike Hall

        Mike–not Nike — didn’t proof my own post! 🙁

    • #61744 Reply
      Fred
      Fred
      Admin

      This feels really shady. If I didn’t know I would think it was another scam targetting registrants.

    • #61753 Reply
      Avatar
      Tyrus Young

      I have two funny stories regarding this matter…

      First… several years ago I worked and lived part time in New Orleans, so was registered there. I reported to them that I was permanently moving to Honolulu, HI the following week. The Marshall had a conniption fit and shouted at me that didn’t I know that I had to give 21 days notice to move to a foreign country! It was all I could do not to bust out laughing.

      Second… after I moved to Honolulu, I applied for the right to visit Japan (where my spouse was deported to under the AWA)… once I received it, I immediately booked travel there. The next morning it occurred to me that I was exactly 21 days from departure… and ran to the SO registry at the Police station. They referred me to the Criminal Data Center and provided a phone number. I called them in a minor panic to meet the law… they were cool about it. Said that I just needed to mail them an itineray… I reminded her that we were 21 days out that day and the mail would make me out of compliance. She said not to worry… as long as they got the letter 3 days before departure, they were okay with it.

    • #61756 Reply
      Avatar
      Nate Rinken

      Now you have me thinking about Iowa. I don’t think they have the 21 days in their statue. You better believe I am going to double check.

    • #61758 Reply
      Avatar
      Rena Ellis

      I too am confused. I’m referencing Mike Hall’s response 11/14/2019.
      He states that he was under the impression that it was federal law and a requirement to notify local authorities about international travel 21 days in advance. I would love some clarification on this matter. My family and I are planning international travel in March 2020 and we need to understand the correct steps. I look forward to a response.

    • #61761 Reply
      Avatar
      Tim in WI

      Truth is SOR broadcasts and IML do the same job – inform world wide. Our founders had hoped for efficient gov but jurisdictional sovereignty has been compromised via the electronic infrastructure. Oddly the private sector has utilized the internet infrastructure and data to decrease dramatically the need for labor while precisely the opposite occurs when gov adopts and utilizes the same machines. Far more gov labor becomes necessary.

    • #61762 Reply
      Avatar
      ron

      I am in New Hampshire. Every 3 months I go to register as everyone else I guess. I also see that travel sign tapped to the window when I go there. It states I must give them 21 days before any out of country travel. It used to be I only had to tell them I was leaving the Country. Now they are telling me I need to notify them 21 days prior. Also, with the passport being noted that we are SO’s, the Country we plan on going to will block us from entering their Country so we’re doomed not matter what we do until we can get the Courts to do something about this.

    • #61763 Reply
      Avatar
      R Bishop

      I have a big problem with people that say that federal law over rules state law. My understanding of the US Constitution federal law is only for interstate commerce and such and cant make laws to over rule state laws. I mean it is pretty clear cut in the body of the Constitution itself. The federal government can make laws to protect civil rights and interstate commerce and a few other things, not sure how it can do more and still be aligned with the US Constitution. The International Megans law ‘might’ be ok constitutionally but I think even that could be challenged.

    • #61764 Reply
      Avatar
      SkyPilot

      Though this is federally codified, several states had informed me that a person can leave earlier under “qualified, exigent/emergency situations”. Who determines that?. I am still trying to get an answer on what they mean as “qualified, exigent/emergency” situations. In Florida, I inquired with the State Police (Florida Department of Law Enforcement / “FDLE”) and the local County Sheriff’s Office about this. Their reply from both offices: “if you have to go, you have to go, just notify us when you are leaving and your destination, because we really do not care where you go and and what you do as to registration when you get their. That is the other jurisdictions problem.”

      West Virginia, like Georgia and North and South Carolina, are among a myriad of myopic states and are dogs of a different color. NARSOL did the correct thing here. Kudos to the work of Sandy & Fred and their Staff (NARSOL), Janice Bellucci and her Staff (ACSOL), and Gail Colletta and her Staff (FAC).

      PA: Keep and eye on Commonwealth v. LaCombe. Defendant’s Motion to Terminate Sexual Registration and Notification “SORNA” requirements GRANTED by Judge, finding the revised statute enacted in February, 2018 (Act 10) and enhanced July, 2019 (Act 29) to be punitive, severable and unconstitutional. (Montgomery County). It is now on appeal by the State, and follows Commonwealth v. Muniz, 164 A.3d 1189 (Pa. 2017) (finding its predecessor SORNA to be unconstitutionally retroactive and punative). Basically, all five or six of their “Megan’s Law / SORNAs were found to be unconstitutional in some for or fashion, but primarily on ex post facto and punishment grounds and had to be repealed and or the let the law expire and enacted a new law to correct the former law – which they failed at… miserably! And, every time they enact a replacement law, it is worse and voluminous, bigger than the former, and more difficult to understand by by judges, prosecutors and lawyers. And, always found to be unconstitutional for basically the same reasons – punishment and ex post facto. They just do not get it!

      I am in constant contact with the law firm in Lacombe and may file an action for Declaratory Judgment and Mandamus on 12 or more grounds, in PA before the end of the year. To date, the Memorandum of Law is about 60 pages – the focal point is the Federal DOJ Report on Recidivism and the reason to enact the SORNA in the first place was premised on false facts and information, thus, making the enactment of the law unconstitutional, and the fact that citizens are not protected from non-sex-felons who have a higher recidivism and violence rate and have now a propensity to commit a sex crime, but they created a law at low-level risk category which is not a threat. Does not make a whole lotta legal sense. We have not decided on who (law firm or attorney) will represent us but are working with several law firms in drafting the complaint. This is all based on the PA constitution.

      FL: We are making a similar draft for Florida. This is all based on the FL constitution.

    • #61785 Reply
      Avatar
      Donna

      I am in awe at this. Some people must stay up 24 hours a day to come up with such outrageous schemes. They are certainly not very bright because the day is coming and they will all have “egg on their faces”.

    • #61789 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek
      Admin

      If you have questions or concerns about what may be required of you as a registrant, please see an attorney in your state who specializes in sexual crime and registry issues.
      It is important to remember that the registry in each state is managed by the state, not the federal government. States that have adopted the AWA as their standard are bound by the AWA requirements if the state wishes to remain compliant with AWA. Some states have what is considered “substantial compliance,” meaning that they have adopted AWA but not every single requirement. A significant number of states have a 21-day advance notice legal requirement for international travel, but a significant number of states do not. If it is not codified into the state law, then there is no legal authority for a state entity to require the advance notice. The danger in challenging this, of course, is that challenging the states that are requiring it illegally may motivate someone to introduce legislation instituting the requirement. But we feel that requirements demanded by the state when there is no authority for the state to make the demand should be challenged.
      Again, as an individual, please do not take action that you are concerned about or uncomfortable with without first consulting an attorney.

    • #61788 Reply
      Avatar
      Ray

      Good day everyone,
      Pardon me if I seem to be off topic, but I just wanted to share that it has recently come to my attention that S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A. is stating that their agency has been in full congressional effect since 1996, thereby granting them the authority to disregard the Ex Post Facto laws; as well as the 5th, 6th, 8th, 11th, 14th (just to mention a few) Amendment Rights of the U. S. Constitution and Bill of Rights of the many S. O. registrants whose convictions were recorded in affect prior to December 20, 2012.
      This has been allowing S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A. to impose continued registration for up to a Lifetime, with complete disregard for honoring a registrants original length and terms of sentence (End of Registration Date) imposed decades before December 20, 2012.

      Also note that many attorneys are unfamiliar with the practice/protocol of S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A.
      Attorneys are demanding outrageous retainer/representation fees from registrants that have been left economically/financially challenged/distressed, unable to obtain gainful employment and adequate housing due to the continued public shamming and ostracizing practices by S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A.

      Attorneys are reluctant/refusing to take these cases on Pro Bono; regardless of the American Bar Association Model Rule 6.1: A lawyer is obligated to offer at least 50 hours of free legal services every year to prospective clients that are economically challenged, distressed or unable to pay for services.

      Attorneys are also reluctant to take on these cases because of their unfamiliarity with this process, as well as their own concerns of how representing a S. O. registrant(s) will reflect on their own professional future growth in the field of Law & Politics.

      I would appreciate if anyone could confirm the concerns stated in the first paragraph, and also hopefully productively utilize the shared acknowledgment in the rest of this correspondence to help address the legal challenges that many S. O. registrants are facing everyday.

      Thank you for all of your hard, diligent work and support in these matters.
      Genuinely sincere,
      P. Ray C., Pa.

    • #61790 Reply
      Avatar
      Svejk

      Outstanding! Let ’em know we have TEETH and aren’t afraid to use them!
      Svejk

    • #61794 Reply
      Avatar
      Gregory Welker

      The problem with the scammers targeting registrants is they are so hard to prove. Then let us not forget that organized groups with deep pockets supporting them. What is so troubling in this case is that a law enforcement person miss interpreted..

    • #61798 Reply
      Avatar
      AA

      You guys ROCK!!!!

    • #61787 Reply
      Avatar
      Ray

      Good day everyone,
      Pardon me if I seem to be off topic, but I just wanted to share that it has recently come to my attention that S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A. is stating that their agency has been in full congressional effect since 1996, thereby granting them the authority to disregard the Ex Post Facto laws; as well as the 5th, 6th, 8th, 11th, 14th (just to mention a few) Amendment Rights of the U. S. Constitution and Bill of Rights of the many S. O. registrants whose convictions were recorded in affect prior to December 20, 2012.
      This has been allowing S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A. to impose continued registration for up to a Lifetime, with complete disregard for honoring a registrants original length and terms of sentence (End of Registration Date) imposed decades before December 20, 2012.

      Also note that many attorneys are unfamiliar with the practice/protocol of S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A.
      Attorneys are demanding outrageous retainer/representation fees from registrants that have been left economically/financially challenged/distressed, unable to obtain gainful employment and adequate housing due to the continued public shamming and ostracizing practices by S.O.R.A./S.O.R.N.A.

      Attorneys are reluctant/refusing to take these cases on Pro Bono; regardless of the American Bar Association Model Rule 6.1: A lawyer is obligated to offer at least 50 hours of free legal services every year to prospective clients that are economically challenged, distressed or unable to pay for services.

      Attorneys are also reluctant to take on these cases because of their unfamiliarity with this process, as well as their own concerns of how representing a S. O. registrant(s) will reflect on their own professional future growth in the field of Law & Politics.

      I would appreciate if anyone could confirm the concerns stated in the first paragraph, and also hopefully productively utilize the shared acknowledgment in the rest of this correspondence to help address the legal challenges that many S. O. registrants are facing everyday.

      Thank you for all of your hard, diligent work and support in these matters.
      Genuinely sincere,
      P. Ray C., Pa.

    • #61811 Reply
      Avatar
      Frank Stuart

      Ron,

      Question – If you know that you will be blocked by the country you are planning to visit, why spend the money and heartache in aking the trip?

      I don’t want to get off-topic, but I know of very few countries that will let us into their borders. I have even heard of some country embassies giving out visas to RSO’s who requested it and then, even with the visa in hand are put on the first plane back to the US (anywhere).

      I realize that we have to push back somewhere, but why this. As I said before – why invest time, money and emotions into a trip that you know will fail and you and your entire family will suffer the humiliation and consequences of the end results.

    • #61840 Reply
      Avatar
      Will Allen

      I have yet to see a single law enforcement (LE) agency (of hundreds) that is capable of operating within the law. They seem obligated to be dumb and just make things up.

      The letter from this criminal regime has the normal offensive tone from a criminal regime. I don’t think they have enough sense to do better. Having said that, the main intent of the letter could be viewed as a service to the people forced to Register (RPs).

      I do think that all RPs in the U.S. have a legal obligation to attempt to report international travel 21 days in advance. Of course, even though the reporting is supposed to be attempted to W. Virginia, they themselves have no legal authority to force that. It is an issue between an RP and the federal criminal regime.

      But it was nice of W. Virginia to tell RPs of the procedure to use if they want to comply with the federal law. So that was a nice service. Even if they did do it like the rude, criminal douche bags that they are.

      Regarding all of the rest of the letter, RPs should ignore it. I would never respond to any government agency unless it benefited me personally or I was forced by at the point of a gun (i.e. by some “law”).

      There are tens of millions of people in the U.S. who do not trust, respect, or support LE. That matters. People should take letters such as this as even more reasons to neutralize LE. They should be attacked by every legal avenue available, every day. There are plenty of groups that work to limit their resources. Join your local groups. Fight them, they are enemies.

      Registries may exist only at the highest cost and destruction possible. War is compelled.

    • #61841 Reply
      Avatar
      Will Allen

      The entirety of the Registries is a scam targeting Americans. None of it should ever be trusted.

      The thing that cracks me up about this letter and these criminal regimes in general is that they don’t appear to be capable of understanding much and not being a$$holes. That is their special skill.

      If these criminals want to send a letter to Registered People, they should try to find a human to write it. It would serve them so much better. They might actually accomplish their goals, whatever they are.

      Registries can exist only at the highest cost and destruction possible. War is compelled.

    • #61855 Reply
      Avatar
      John

      I’m Massachusetts they have been sending the registration letter annually and this last time they have included “email” on the form. To my knowledge this is new and not in the law anywhere. Then they add a second page that asks for all internet identifiers along with passport information. Again Massachusetts does not require to my knowledge and social media stuff…. clearly the passport piece is disturbing as well asking for a passport number and then warning about the 21 days.

      Thoughts?

    • #61859 Reply
      Avatar
      Will Allen

      @John (November 15, 2019 at 10:23 am):

      Every government that has Registries is a corrupt criminal regime. I have yet to see a single law enforcement agency (of hundreds), not one, that is capable of operating within the law. All of them that I have seen try to operate outside of the law.

      I cannot count the number of Registration forms that I have seen that request additional information that very clearly is not authorized by law. Can’t tell you the number. The law will very clearly say that a Registered Person must provide information A, B, and C and yet the form from the law enforcement criminals will say A, B, and C and X, Y, and Z. Always.

      That is offensive and immoral. It ought to be illegal. In various jurisdictions, I have forced them to stop doing it.

      Obviously, these criminal regimes don’t have much sense. IF they wanted to be legal and actually moral, they could create a legal form and then just make an addendum that asks for anything additional. Then very clearly just write on the addendum something like, “We know this information is not required by law but we would appreciate it if you would provide it.” They could screw up the wording and try to make it sound more legal, official, or whatever, but that would be the intent. Then perhaps people might give them the information. And if they want to FORCE people to give the information, at the point of a gun, then they simply need to have their criminal regime add that into their “laws”.

      Personally, when I see a form asking for extra information, I just mark it all out. Every time.

      But … if you are not VERY sure if the information is required or not, write a letter to them. Include the county attorneys and executives (or whomever the legal authority is over the Registering office). And ask for a clarification in writing. Just keep it very simple. Say something like, “I don’t think X, Y, and Z is legally required. If it is, please help me and inform me of the code statute which says that it is.” That has worked for me over and over and over again. I have also included demands to have the forms amended if the information is not required and they have complied. I did have to have an attorney re-send the correspondence once. I intended to sue them.

      Lastly, there is a federal law requiring 21 day advance notice of international travel (OR as much advance notice as possible). If you find out tonight that you have to leave tomorrow, then you can’t tell them until tomorrow and that is good enough. However, I thought that requirement applied to all Registered People in America. NARSOL (I believe) is saying that it only applies if your state has codified its inclusion in some way into their own laws.

    • #61902 Reply
      Avatar
      Tim in WI

      Nike Hall,
      States are not compelled to do anything UNTIL it is state law!
      He will merely claim benevolent action ” to inform. ” Case over.
      Can he take the letter back given it been sent? Can he retract the authority he did really have in the first place? No harm no foul. Still appreciate NARSOL advocacy here given at least some one watches the watchers.

      Me I prefer FTR I find it cathartic.

    • #61947 Reply
      Avatar
      Saddles

      You have been warned? I’m sure no one loves sneak attack’s. Sure actions speak lower than words but when government goes about the norm in many of these callous registry ordeals than its up to the people to say wait a minute. One wonders who’s naked in this unorthoxed method of enslaving.

      If one tosses away a lot of biblical principals, what does a person have left in a defensive measure? My dad use to tell me before he pasted away in the 80’s, that good intentions are paved in heaven but honesty is the best policy. Yes dad was an accountant so one shouldn’t juggle the book if one wants to gain confidence in the public realm. Is someone juggling the books in this most or many of these sex offender ordeals?

      All these comments on here seem to take action and are good views. Many are great but its up to each and everyone of us to understand these unjust schemes. Yes NARSOL and many others are striving in this goal and yes we all give them credit, and yes we all have a voice and a true voice of reasoning. This stranger danger ordeal appears to overshadow with this invent of this computer ordeal in many or much of these callous endeavors.

      So put in this common denominator of this sex invitations by this means and government has this unethical goal of taking advantage of even biblical understand of bearing the sword in vain in this callous ordeal. Are many of these ordeals carried out lawfully. To instill this type of injustice on others with this teenage inducement is very ackward for any police personal and unjust in many ways or are we all carnal by nature. So who is taking advantage of who?

    • #61983 Reply
      Avatar
      ron

      Why isn’t the date of our offense on our records so when we are posted on the official site of SO’s everyone can see when our offense occured. Mine was in 1990 and I’m still being persecuted for it. Even after I turned myself in for help. Vt tried me on a L&L charge but NH stuck right up where the sun don’t shine. I must say it’s easy living here in NH and it’s easy to do most everything I want. But I wanted to go to the Phils and meet a Lady there I’ve been talking to for the last 20 years. But that’s out of the question now. I was wondering if the date of our offense would have any bearing on our being allowed to enter the Country. Seeing the offense was so long ago.

    • #62375 Reply
      Avatar
      nope

      i get them annual ones every year not one time did i ever have to sign for them.

Viewing 29 reply threads
Reply To: NARSOL to WV: “You have been warned”
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
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="">