- This topic has 24 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 months ago by Phil.
May 21, 2020 at 7:57 am #72712
By Sydnie Holzfaster . . . A shooting in North Omaha has sparked concerns over the state sex offender registry. Following the death of Mattieo Condol
[See the full post at: NARSOL’s Vander Wall quoted in aftermath of Omaha registrant murder]
May 21, 2020 at 10:44 am #72718
Exactly. This entire sex offender registry as a whole is by all means ineffective. The only use for the registry is to harass registrants. It is not used to promote positive safety and security. It is used to harass and cause more harm to those on it than anything else. I believe that sex offenders should register but that the registry should be for police only and the public shouldn’t have any knowledge of it or anyone on it. Registrants would have a better and normal life if public had no knowledge of them to harass and harm them.
May 21, 2020 at 2:52 pm #72728
The KKK was not defeated until they hung a man, and sued for all the KKK money.
Then, and only then, did the KKK start to die off.
This is the only way to stop these murders… sue those who created this “hit list”, who publish this hit list, and those who execute the people on this hit list.
On the night of March 21, 1981, a cross crackled and burned on the lawn
of the Mobile County courthouse—the Ku Klux Klan’s grim protest of the
outcome of a local murder trial. It was just the beginning of the terror
that would take place that night.
The cross burned out, but the Klan’s anger didn’t. Later that night, two
men roamed Mobile looking for a black man to kill. They found him:
19-year-old Michael Donald. Before the night was through, Donald had
been murdered and his body hung from a tree.
Sounds pretty close to Nebraska! “just looking for a black man to kill”. Change that to “just looking for a registrant to kill”.
May 21, 2020 at 4:41 pm #72735
There is not a single hit list; there are 50 plus; one for each state and one each for the territories and many of the Native American nations. Suits in every state are exactly what NARSOL encourages and joins where wanted, where possible within our limited legal fund donations, and where the situation is one that has the potential for impacting a number of registrants. But suits must be brought by an individual or individuals who have standing within the state to seek relief through the courts.
May 21, 2020 at 4:41 pm #72734
I lived in Omaha for almost 25 years. Before 2009 the registry wasn’t public but the Nebraska legislators wanted to be compliant to get that $$$. Nebraska legislators have blood on their hands and should be sued for accessory to murder. Nebraska legislators need to abolish the registry altogether before more people are attacked for past crimes. Enough is enough of this criminal behavior encouraged by our government!!
May 22, 2020 at 1:53 am #72739
I live in central Nebraska. This story was on the local radio station’s morning talk show. I heard the host saying that the murder was justified. I could not believe that host said vigilantism is allowable because he was a sex offender. Maybe NARSOL should contact the Nebraska radio stations.
May 22, 2020 at 1:54 am #72738
There is no such thing as a “normal life” if the registry is kept private. Even a private registry will still have the local police doing check ups, still have your passport branded, still keep you out of places like amusement parks, state parks, beaches etc. Law enforcement are just as much a team of harassing a-holes as the average person is with a public registry. There was no sex offender registry prior to the 1990’s and there doesn’t need to be one now. Period.
May 22, 2020 at 1:56 am #72737
nobody in particular
ve been perusing articles on this thing for a while now, and usually don’t bother to reply, because I don’t believe I have much to add. However, after checking out this recent event, and a few others that seem to follow the same pattern, an interesting point occurs to me: most people seem to hold this strange notion that, in spite of all evidence and logic to the contrary, *only* individuals on the “Sacred Registry” are any “real danger” to them or their children, and as such, literally *anything* a registrant does is somehow “suspect” (even so much as waiting for a bus, mowing their lawn, washing their car, etc). While I was on pre-trial, I would frequently go to the librarly, being a somewhat avid reader, and my P.O. often thought I must have had some “ulterior motive”, often “testing” me by “inspecting” my selections, and then “quizzing” me to see if I were actually reading them. However, there were no conditions that prohibited me from frequenting the library, and I even told him he could follow me around in there to make sure I wasn’t “trawling for kiddies”. All the registry does is propagate irrational hatred, fear, and paranoia. I have no doubt James Fairbanks believed he was protecting children by killing the “creepy pedo next door”. However, if people are going to go around murdering anyone they suspect of “eyeballing” or “plotting to lure” minors, they will need a lot more bullets, because the vast majority of those who committ sex crimes are often trusted, respected members of their communities, who are very close and known to their victims, and are *not* listed as RSOs or SVPs.
May 22, 2020 at 7:59 am #72749
Tim in WI
I’m thinking an effort needs to be made to expose the fact no charge of misuse of the itself has been made against Mr. Fairbanks.
Every registry has the disclaimers on the registry database website. I’m curious how many times those laws have been enforced? Perhaps proving Fairbanks’ use of the database registry & internet should be put on the court’s record.
It’s not for me to say it such a charge will hold up to a jury but the change should be made. By letting prosecutors & offender off the hook on that point contributes to the lack of evidence against the rationale underpinning the regime.
May 22, 2020 at 8:07 am #72751
What Maestro says is accurate. The registry simply being offline would offer some relief to registrants in certain areas, but it would not abolish the registries nor their consequences or restrictions or requirements in any of the states.
NARSOL’s position and ultimate battle is the abolishment of shaming registries, period. The press release and Robin’s subsequent interview were narrowly tailored to the issue at hand, which is the fact that public registration provides vigilantes a well-marked path to their targets’ front doors.
May 22, 2020 at 12:58 pm #72766
I have to echo the curiosity about why no charge against the killer of misusing the registry in this instance. The fine print usually warns against using it for purposes beyond the original intent. Is the NEB state and local gov’ts going to condone this behavior as long as they have a registry? This is a question that needs to be asked by NARSOL and the NEB affiliate of NARSOL. You don’t give up any legal ground when you have a larger fish to fry with murder charges in play. If you do, then you lose credibility about being serious of registry misuse while trying to get rid of the registry overall, IMO.
May 22, 2020 at 12:58 pm #72765
Ironic thing, and very sad, this needless death was three days before the 26th Anniversary of Megan’s law being signed into law. A quarter century of this BS and lost lives due to it…
May 22, 2020 at 3:51 pm #72776
Several days ago I wrote the Douglas County D.A. urging him to treat the murder of Mr. Condoluci as that of any other citizen and not to be swayed by public opinion offered in support of the killer. Today after reading that Fairbanks has been charged with 1st degree murder and denied bail, I again wrote the Douglas County D.A. this message:
“Will Mr. Fairbanks also be charged according to this notice on the Nebraska registry?
‘Sex offender registry information shall not be used to retaliate against the registrants, their families, or their employers in any way. Vandalism, verbal or written threats of harm are illegal and will result in arrest and prosecution.’
The statement is very clear, and prosecution for this as well as for the murder should send a message to future would-be vigilantes that it is taken seriously.”
Now we will wait and see.
May 22, 2020 at 7:29 pm #72789
Kohli, every last affirmative restraint and disability inflicted by the registry (residency restrictions, work restrictions, and presence restrictions) need to be stripped away. All the in-person reporting requirements need to be stripped away because they are so onerous, they resemble parole. The strict liability clauses should be removed and an intent to knowingly violating the registry should have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt (mens rea). Unless a citizen forced to register has committed HANDS-ON CRIMES WHEREIN THE INTERNET WAS USED AS AN INSTRUMENT TO COMMIT SAID CRIME, there should be no requirements to hand over their on-line identifiers and passwords to law enforcement. Only then should law enforcement be allowed to monitor/audit a registrant’s Internet activity. The penalties for a proven intentional violation of the registry should be in line with the penalties for violating other civil regulatory schemes. Felonies with 10+ years in prison is so obviously disproportionate to the nature of the so-called “crime” of failure to do paperwork in a timely manner, which is exactly what a FTR charge actually is. Lastly, since the registry is a civil regulatory scheme, enforcement and management of the registry should be entirely in the hands of a civil, regulatory agency.
May 22, 2020 at 7:32 pm #72770
David V C
The registry is a modern day version of the 16th through 19th century ‘Stocks and Pillory’ where public corporal shaming took place in the town square while you were held fast by your hands or feet by fixed wooden handcuff-like instruments or chained to a post where you could be whipped.
The people would then hit you with stones, tomatoes, or rotten fruit or whatever they felt like doing to you while you were helpless to defend yourself.
Eventually, you were let go, but not so for many on the registry.
Ours is a lifetime of ‘second-stage punishment’ administered by the public after our first punishment in prison and it’s not just by the town square anymore- it’s by anyone who wants to throughout the inhabited world that has access to the registry, or for some their driver’s license or passport.
They try to say ‘it’s to protect the public’.
If public protection was really on their mind then first-time drunk drivers would have their license revoked in order to ‘protect the public’ and how many people die each year in the U.S from drunk driving.?
About 10,000!!! That’s one person every 50 minutes or 30 a day!!!
And how many die from sex offenses?
The number is so small that it is hard to find any statistics.
I found one year where there was 4 across the entire U. S. and that was a high.
So, all this about protecting the public is BALONEY!!!!!!!
What are they doing to protect the public from drunk driving???
May 22, 2020 at 7:35 pm #72775
The radio host in central Nebraska should be more worried about farmers than giving his opinion of what he considers justification for unlawful murder. Sounds like the host isn’t even qualified to work at a radio station. Maybe a slaughterhouse would suit him better; since he justifies murder.
May 22, 2020 at 9:34 pm #72800
Hello sandy I don’t understand how all these states are in trouble with the registry but I have heard nothing of New York City where there are thousands of sex offenders that are harassed on a daily basis and nothing is done. And we are pin pointed easily because we cannot move anywhere while we are on parole which makes it easier to find us we can not hide. Where I live we are a shelter for sex offenders and thanks to parole coming in and out people have gotten curious which led to people asking about the building and then looked the building up and now it’s just harassment after harassment. You don’t even have people working here to help is no one does anything everyone looks the other way nyc needs NARSOL BADLY
May 22, 2020 at 9:58 pm #72807
@ Vasquez: The states that are “in trouble” over the registry are states where people in those states found attorneys, and/or formed organizations who hired attorneys, and filed suits. And they persisted. And they persisted some more. New York has some onerous laws. While, from time to time, there have been a few isolated individuals in New York who have served as contacts for NARSOL, there has not been an attempt, or at least not a successful one that I am aware of, at forming an organization or of bringing a suit there. NARSOL can not do this. I have said it over and over, and the truth of it will never change. No one on the NARSOL board lives in New York. Most of us are not on any registry, certainly not the registry in New York. None of us can claim with any legitimacy that the New York registry scheme has harmed us or caused us to suffer harm or damage or deprivation in any way. Without a case being put forward by someone who has such a claim, a case that, if successful, would benefit a number of registrants, a case that NARSOL could assist with, our hands are tied. We cannot force people in New York to form an organization or to file suits. If you or someone you know there has a situation that you or someone is willing and able to consult an attorney about and file a suit over, and it is a case that the situation has implications for a significant number of registrants, get in touch with our regional director for Region I, which is the region for New York. You can do that by using our contact page here: https://narsol.org/contact/
May 23, 2020 at 1:17 pm #72813
Another detrimental aspect of the published registry: a website publishes the information on the realtor websites. People looking for a house to buy will see that a sex offender is living on that street. To people with children, they will not want to buy it. Put in the address of a house for sale on a registrant’s street and up the information pops.
May 23, 2020 at 1:18 pm #72814
Thank you @Sandy for asking the DA if they are going to pursue a charge of misusing the registry. I realize a vigilante would not care about such a thing if they accomplished their larger objective, but it is the principle of the thing even if a death did not occur. May the DA charge for misuse.
May 23, 2020 at 6:08 pm #72820
Maybe get the federal government involved. If they could revoke NE’s funding for not “properly” using their registry, maybe NE would use that as a means to ditch it entirely.
May 23, 2020 at 6:10 pm #72818
Trying this yet again: Okay, I can’t get My Point across other than to say it like this and hope it gets Posted. Legislators at the Federal and State Levels MUST BE MADE, to see how The Registry is Killing Us, and harming our Extended Family Members most especially Our kids! Officials MUST KNOW, that turning a Blind Eye, is Murderous in and of itself when they do nothing to stop People like that guy in Nebraska!
May 24, 2020 at 7:03 am #72825
Tim in WI
Thank you for insisting the misuse of the government database known as a sex offender registry be enforced by state’s DA. Exploitation comes in many forms.
A considerable amount of power rests in the prosecution ‘s lap given a scenario whereby “enforcement” or “not” for the misuse charge reflects a certain truth of self evidence.
In case 1: where Fairbanks remains uncharged- benefit to database existence remains as contrary efficacy evidence is omitted from the record.
In case 2: where Fairbanks is indicted- benefit to the database remaining- via disclaimer conviction + enforcement as apparent (yet unprovable) validation of benevolence in the public broadcast of the disclaimer itself as part of the registry.
Congressional underlying intent gets to import good faith from obvious malfeasance in broadcast. There would be no need for a disclaimer if Congress was ignorant of potential negative outcome in deliberation of bills.
What I’ve described here rests not on whether Mr. Fairbanks is convicted or not; It is the relative disposition that counts. This is precisely how the true nature of the electronic infrastructure is misunderstood and vastly underestimated by the people with respect to corrosive use. Either way liberty suffers infringement via the inherent abridging of traditional notions of sovereignty built into the database infrastructure itself.
Conveniently ATTORNEYS GENERAL come out roses either way.
May 25, 2020 at 3:50 pm #72858
Police have no use for the registry. They already have the information they may require for an investigation from NCIC and the state counterparts that feed it. It’s only current use is to solicit larger SORNA grants, the majority of which is NOT spent on the registry or its upkeep.
The only “crime” the registry plays even the smallest role in investigating are status offenses – parole, probation, or registry violations. New sex crimes (or crimes of any kind, for that matter) committed by those currently registered are few and far between. And even when they do occur, the registry had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the accused’s identification and/or arrest.
May 26, 2020 at 5:09 am #72887
Kunarac, Kovac and Vokovic, (Appeals Chamber), June 12, 2002, para. 94: “‘[P]atterns of crimes – that is the non-accidental repetition of similar criminal conduct on a regular basis – are a common expression of [a] systematic occurrence.’”
Naletilic and Martinovic, (Trial Chamber), March 31, 2003, para. 236: “The element ‘systematic’ requires an organised nature of the acts and the improbability of their random occurrence.”
Blaskic, (Trial Chamber), March 3, 2000, para. 203: “The systematic character refers to four elements which . . . may be expressed as follows:  the existence of a political objective, a plan pursuant to which the attack is perpetrated or an ideology, in the broad sense of the word, that is, to destroy, persecute or weaken a community;  the perpetration of a criminal act on a very large scale against a group of civilians or the repeated and continuous commission of inhumane acts linked to one another;  the preparation and use of significant public or private resources, whether military or other;  the implication of high-level political and/or military authorities in the definition and establishment of the methodical plan.”
Kvocka et al., (Trial Chamber), November 2, 2001, para. 190: “In order to constitute persecution, harassment, humiliation, and psychological abuse must occupy the same level of seriousness as other listed or recognized crimes against humanity, or together with other crimes cognizable under Article 5, they must form part of a course of conduct which satisfies the criteria for persecution.” “[H]umiliating treatment that forms part of a discriminatory attack against a civilian population may, in combination with other crimes or, in extreme cases alone, similarly constitute persecution.”