PA’s high court rules retroactive SORNA violates constitution

Viewing 40 reply threads
  • Author
    • #12682 Reply
      Sandy Rozek
      Sandy Rozek

      By NARSOL’s editorial board….. Breaking and exciting news comes today from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. This is, as far as we know, the first pub
      [See the full post at: PA’s high court rules retroactive SORNA violates constitution]

    • #13979 Reply
      Brenda Jones

      I was thrilled to see this win! It has been so long in coming — we first heard about a challenge as far back as 2014, so it has taken a long time to make its way to a decision. Glad it was worth the wait.

      I’ll be very curious to see if PA does any better at following the court’s orders than my own state of Maryland did. Here, after a similar decision, the state didn’t even want to take the plaintiff off! When they were forced to do that, then they tried to come back and argue that they still needed to list him because the feds said his offense must be on THEIR registry.

      Wrong, wrong wrong! There IS NO federal registry: it is only a grouping of all the different state ones. We successfully fought that and got an even stronger ruling that said the feds had NO separate registry and our state laws trumped the federal law. And not only Mister Doe should come off, but “all others so situated.” That took an additional 18 months or so. And even now, several years later, the state is STILL dragging its feet on some people who should have been removed or rolled back to their original registration terms.

      So here’s hoping that PA moves more quickly – I am hopeful because this ruling appears to be much stronger and clearer.

      • #19865 Reply

        Even if not everyone is removed like we’re helping that door’s still open and you can guarantee that many more people are going to file lawsuits against the Pennsylvania State Police and this law. It may take a lot of time but you can guarantee that the law is slowly being dismantled when after win.

      • #26254 Reply

        @Terry Brunson
        Hey I was just wandering where you stand with your Mandamus,
        Muniz lawyers will hopefully be responding to SCOTUS on the 16th as I’m sure you already know. I haven’t seen any posts from you or any of the norms.

    • #14698 Reply
      John Covert

      I’d love to see something similar in Virginia. I was put on the registry for 10 years in 2009, then the state in its “wisdom” raised that to a minimum of 15 while I was serving my time. The change was ostensibly made to bring Virginia into compliance with the Adam Walsh Act, though this is just about the only part of Virginia’s program that is.

    • #15010 Reply
      It doesn’t work!!

      Do the multiple convicted felony dwi criminals get relief from their registry too? What about the felony violent robbery convicts, do they get relief from their registry? My father wasn’t on a domestic violence registry for what he did to my mother, or to his wife prior to her.

      • #18082 Reply

        WTF are you talking about, read some books Bobby Ray!!!!!!!!!!!!! hahahahahahahahahaha

    • #15685 Reply
      Steward Steckley

      The interesting thing about this case also leads to how/who will register and for how long. No one really knows at this point.

      One thing that needs to be understood is that the old Megan’s Law in PA (Megan’s Law II) was ruled unconstitutional as well, so Megan’s Law II kicked in. However, with SORNA, the statutes that governed Megan’s Law II, that is 42 Pa. C.S. 9799.1-9799.9 all expired on December 11, 2012. With them being totally expired they don’t exist, therefore, unlike Megan’s Law III, which wrote over 9799.1 through 9799.9 of title 42 there really is no law to “revert” back to. Just an annalysis I came up with. I’m not a lawyer, but, if there’s no law on the books to revert back to, then there is no Megan’s Law at all in PA. Just an interesting theory I’d like to present. Comments?

      • #18080 Reply

        Very interesting. I’m curious, run this past an attorney?? Most of em’ are f’n trash that could care less, but you’re on to some good shit! Picking the proper angle now is crucial for me. Can you school me a bit more in regards to ML 1,2, and 3? Are you saying there was no ML at all in Pa. between 12-11-12 and 12-20-12????????????????? If so, can you confirm 100%??

      • #19863 Reply

        That makes complete sense. I was thinking the same thing. The spokesman for the Pennsylvania State Police said that everyone convicted before December 20th 2012 might have to be removed. So that would make sense on what you said. But even if they didn’t remove it that door is still open for someone else to walk through.

      • #28595 Reply
        terry brunson

        There is a savings clause rule in Pennsylvania that the legislatures can muster to get it in constitutional acceptance. There has to be not new stuff that was not in the old Megan’s law.

        But all the parts of the old megan’s law was shot down by the PASC. The savings clause rule is not a good course to take. They need to let go SORNA go forward on what good parts they have – but it does not apply to pre-SORNA people – about 10,000 of them.

    • #16247 Reply
      PA SO Editorial
    • #16599 Reply

      It is my prayer that anyone who is delayed in being removed from the registry whose conviction date mandates their removal have some legal recourse to sue the jurisdictions not adhering to the Court’s decision.

      Federal funding has certainly motivated states to punish folks against their own and the United States’ Constitutions. It seems to me, having large chunks of money lost to civil law-suits by those punished beyond a court’s order when they should not be would equally compel states to comply in a timely manner.

    • #17207 Reply

      I’m curious as to how or if this will have ant impact on Michigan’s 6th circuit court ruling? Any ideas?

    • #17392 Reply

      Who was the Attorney? Missouri is out of control ! looking like Florida.

    • #18765 Reply

      Can someone answer the following: If an original conviction date in 1992, followed by a violation of probation for misdemeanor DUI in 1997 on the original crime in 1992, does PA consider the single act crime in 1992 or go by the VOP which resulted in remaining under jurisdiction of DOC until 2001?

      I sexually battered my wife in 1991. Adjudicated in 1992. Forced to register for life as Tier III down here in floriduh. Any information greatly appreciated. floriduh list my date of offense as 1997 on the registry. I didn’t rape anything but too many beers then drive a car for 1997 VOP. Just wondering how PA would view. Thanks.

    • #19006 Reply
      Dave C

      I am sex offender in PA. I was arrested in February of 2005. I was originally given 10 years which was moved to 25 years. I have completed 10 years and I am due relief from the Muniz decision. Is there any action planned in court to expedite the PSP to actually remove offenders from the registry? Is there any action planned to repeal SORNA since it was deemed punitive?

      • #19087 Reply

        To the guy in pa, I’m here also, and I sure hope so. I talked to my public defender about this, and my pending case. And funny he said you know more about this stuff then I do go figure, sounds like appeal’s will have to be filed. And I recommend anyone with public representation. Keep on them cause there in no hurry to help out, due to there heavy caseloads. And yes as far as I’m concerned, all that are due relief. Should get together and file a class action lawsuit, the law has no problem with a speedy arrest when we allegedly screw up. But when something goes our way, it gets kicked aside, wrong wrong wrong.

        • #19817 Reply

          Does anyone know if a class action lawsuit is being started? I just found out I was supposed to be taken off in 2014. I moved to another state after the 2014 ruling and was made to register for two years longer because Pa didn’t notify the state I was in. Where’s the compensation for those of us affected by this. I was sentenced to two years probation for an M2 and instead lost my job, life, friends, etc. when I was told I had to register. now if I pay child support how do you get a job to actually live on. Anyone with news on a civil suit please post. I do see Pa arguing sovereign immunity on the whole thing and we get kicked to the curb

    • #19133 Reply

      Spoke with ML section PSP today, they have no new info., said they are waiting to hear what the AGs office decides to do. I have two ten yr registrations from 2003 they combined them to make a life reg. Didn’t tell me that when I took a plea. I asked the PSP officer today on the phone if the A.S, decision got rid of the two or more thing to make life reg she said yes my tier 3 is from 2012 when they increased the time for Indecent assault 7, So the Muniz case should revert me back to a 10yr reg and they cant combine anymore to make life so my time should be up. Haven’t heard if DA Freed appeal has gone anywhere yet someone said the 19th of aug is the deadline others say 90days for them to appeal to SCOUS

    • #19184 Reply

      Above Supreme Court ruling came out two days ago. Apparently Spann’s pending case in Supreme Court was remanded back to Commonwealth court in order to give him relief based on Muniz… Muniz is the law of the land,according to one of the Muniz dissenters (Mundy).

      So why – given that our own Supreme Court is granting relief based on Muniz,
      Why are others still waiting for relief?!!

      So why

      • #19370 Reply

        Looks like old Leroy is still up on PSP’s website Theses frs are out of control. No respect for the supreme court. PSP thinks they run the state.

    • #19873 Reply
      Dave C

      I am a sex offender in PA. I recently posted that I am due relief from the Muniz Supreme Court decision. I was told tonight that I have 90 days to file a post-conviction release (PCR) or vacate the right to challenge removal from megans law website.

      Has any attorney heard of this?

      if its true, shouldn’t they have to inform everyone?

      HELP !!!

      • #19943 Reply

        To Dave c its like that song, nothing from nothing leaves nothing. I don’t know much about the law but I’ll throw in my opinion, I don’t see why we would have to file a pcr. This ruling has nothing to do with our original plea agreement, unless I’m just guessing if anyone. Is deemed an SVP and absolutely has to register for life, under those circumstances. We should not have to file a pcr, our 10/15/25/ or lifetime registery requirements, should be vacated without any court proceedings. Why the county’s and pa, would wanna waste more time and money, on this decision is beyond me. Best guess to this is, like everything else there just dragging it out.

      • #28596 Reply
        terry brunson

        That is true do a PCR you need to do a mandamus it has no 90 day waiver of rights if you don’t act. a Writ of mandamus can demand relief at any time. . but a PCR has a time bar rule which waves right to appeal (90 days) BUT A WRIT OF MANDAMUS HAS NO TIME BAR RULES

    • #20082 Reply

      I’m in PA, and I was convicted of 3 counts of misdemeanor indecent assault in November of 2011. I received probation and was not required to register with ML. Not only was I required to register on 12/21/12, but they registered me as a tier 3 because I had multiple charges, despite them all being on the same docket.

      I am praying that this ruling will finally provide some justice for me, and return me to my original deal where I was not required to register. I have lost 3 jobs and been kicked out of an apartment since my registration. I have two kids and have struggled to support them or myself since this injustice was carried out.

      I am angry. Not only does the PSP need to act swiftly to remove those who have been illegally forced to register for the last 5 years, but there needs to be some form of compensation. The emotional, and financial toll this has taken on my life has been crippling.

      • #20253 Reply
        Dave C


        I feel your pain. I have lost two jobs as well. Its scary that the PSP and AG can ignore a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision and delay removing registrants who are clearly due relief. The registry has hurt more children that it has ever protected. Stay Strong, Adam. Hopefully, the end is near for these draconian websites which are simply punishment and they protect no one.

      • #20317 Reply

        Did you not get relief in February 2017? I was slightly in the same situation as you. I had 2 charges adjudicated at the same time. PSP raised me to a tier 3 due to that, In February of this year (2017) I received a letter from PSP telling mr that I was reclassified as a tier 2, which it would have been under SONRA. However my case is from 2004 so I actually fall under the latest ruling. I think you may also be due relief under the “same act” provision that got me off of tier 3.

        Also if you took a plea and it did not include ML at the time, then I also believe you can get removed on those grounds alone, as plea agreements are contracts and not subject to the whims of the PSP

        • #20331 Reply

          I did get some relief, but it only dropped me to a tier 2. Which I don’t understand at all. I am meeting with a lawyer on Wednesday to discuss my options. I am hoping to petition a judge asap, and I feel fairly confident that I will be removed on multiple different grounds. It seems almost automatic, but the last 6 years have left me wary of optimism.

          • #20754 Reply

            If you would, How did your meeting with the lawyer go?
            Any news good or bad?

    • #21747 Reply
      Dave C

      It has been two months since the Muniz decision. Has anyone heard any updates on when and/or whether the PSP or AG are going to remove the registrants who are due relief?

      I worked as a software engineer and know its a simple query to find all registrants who are due relief. So, I don’t understand why the delay?

      I was contacted by an attorney who wanted 5,000 to 10,000 dollars for a PCR to facilitate removal from the registry. Sounds like the blood sucking attorneys are now looking for a cash grab.

      Its sad that the PSP do not have to follow the laws of the PA Supreme Court and the attorneys are now just looking for money.

      I don’t think the founding fathers had this in mind when creating our justice system.

    • #21839 Reply

      @Dave C
      Sorry buddy, but as I posted in another article, there is no much better place for updated information in one place that I have found other than NARSOL. You will find info at a local level, but you will need to visit or search every locality in every Town/City in a State to get updates on what is going on in those places. This issue is a sickness (the mental kind) of misinformation that is deeply rooted into every cranny of just about every community in the U.S. (even the Amish after what happened in Lancaster, PA years ago, but the difference being they actually/genuinely forgave) and abroad.

      What I would like to know, in all honesty of course, is where are the ethical people, Constitution believing/quoting folks, the individuals of faith, understanding, compassion & forgiveness and last but not least the legal scholars at?

      I am still waiting to be contacted by any groups or attorneys to offer their “help” to seek relieve from this violation of Human Rights (mine and others) and to get the ball rolling to sue the living ghost out of this States & Federal Government. (not going to happen, of course, except by those with the right people & money in the right places, which it is how the justice system often works, sadly and yes, I do not have confidence in how our U.S. justice system operates)

      I have yet to see any post from any entity, (i.e. ACLU, NARSOL, Human Rights Watch, Politicians [yeah…like that would ever happen!] or Lawyers) actually providing direct useful details or recommendations as to whom to seek for legal recourse affordable to all (read my thinking…No money needed to do what is right & lawful!) and without fear of ridicule or retaliation by authorities. As far as I have observed/experienced with attorneys, we are profit and business is good.

      • #21933 Reply
        terry brunson

        @Dave C
        Sir I sense your frustration – You seem to not realize that the justice system’s wheels roll slower than a snail stuck on rat paper. However; inch by inch the PSP and AG of this state will meet Muniz at the bar . . . . .

        Muniz’s decision has the PSP and AG in a desperate fix to try to appeal to the SCOUS by Petition for Writ of Certiorari. This give a 90 day stay to the PSP and AG to do nothing until the SCOUS accepts or denies to hear the issue of the Appeal.

        After 90 days – the SCOUS will issue a desire to hear the appeal issue. If they accept to hear it- then the stay stays in effect until the SCOUS decides the issue.

        The SCOUS has denied to hear State Expost Facto cases becuase the highest Court in the State has spoken on State Constitutional issue of Expost Facto.

        States AG that have been denied on this same issue all have been denied by the SCOUS to hear State issues of State Constitutional appeals by AG’s
        Here are the States that were denied Petition for Writ of Certiorari to SCOUS:
        and soon you can add PENNSYLVANIA AFTER 19 OCTOBER, 2017 that is the Petition for Writ of Certiorari dead line.

        Normal appeal right are 30 day, but the Petition for Writ of Certiorari is 90 days to the SCOUS.

        The AG and PSP will act on Muniz after the 90 days. . . . . . . . .

        The SCOUS will deny the Petition for Writ of Certiorari from Pennsylvania for this signal reason.

        The Federal Law of SORNA VIOLATES A STATE CONSTITUTIONAL rule of Art 1 Section 17 of the PA. State Constitution – which says:
        “No ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of
        contracts, or making irrevocable any grant of special privileges
        or immunities, shall be passed.”

        The SCOUS will not over step a decision of a state Supreme Court by Petition for Writ of Certiorari who ruled on the basses of it’s own Constitution.

        Be patient.

        There are to writs that can make the PSP and the AG of PA respect your rights:
        1. A Nunc Pro Tunc – Gives you now for then rights of your original plea 10 year registration not (SORNA tier 1 2 3)

        2. A Writ of Mandamus – Make a State official in charge of a State Department act in accordance with the highest Law of Due process which you are entitled to relief on after 10 years of the date of the contracted plea deal.

        3. You can file an appeal by Rule 60b to a Federal court to make suit against PSP and AG to take away Immunity.

        4. You can file a 1983 in Federal court to suit for civil right violation under MUNIZ decision

        Hope you understand all this legal begal stuff I wrote

        • #21938 Reply
          Dave C

          Thanks for the help Terry

          It shouldn’t be this hard.

          I will never understand why they fight so hard to keep people on the registry.

          • #21960 Reply
            terry brunson

            @Dave C

            You ask “Why do they fight to keep people on the registry.”
            Are you willing to accept the truth of abuse of power?
            When you where a kid, did you ever see a Ghost?
            I would think you would say, “NO.”

            The people who are at the PSP and the AG offices are afraid of Ghost and they are donw on what they should be up on – Their oath to protect and serve all people’s rights. . . . . .

            PSP and AG minister are like bullies. . . . .

            They are bothering you because you are the little guy. . . . .

            But you have big brothers – and your big brothers will deal with the bullies in due time. . . . . Wait until 19 October 2017 and you will see the light that Muniz and Jackson v. commomwealth of July 7, 2016 all the big brother protections will come to your aid. . . . Please trust that the little guy is not left out. You may feel that way because you cannot see all that is going on – but know this: people are thinking about your rights.

            I am one of them. . . . and I am one of many that you cannot count. . Hold on don’t give up – – – – – help is on the way . . . . .

            after 19 October 2017 many SO’s will be taken off the registry. And others will revert back to a ten year out date where SORNA put life time. Truth that it will happen. . .
            Look at Alaska – Maryland – Ohio – Michigan they went to the same route – PENNSYLVANIA will soon br next to understand that PSP and AG have no more bully power to hold the little guy down.

            You will be able to soon get on with your life – IN PEACE, with the pass behind you. . . . . . . . .

          • #22547 Reply

            Terry Thanks for the posts

            a few questions for you

            1. oct 19th is deadline for freed to appeal How long will it take to hear if SCOTUS accepts or denies hearing it?

            2. You mentioned Muniz retroactive only will apply to those that had a contract plea with 10yr reg in contract. Doesn’t this apply to anyone pre SORNA? I plead to two 10yr reg offenses in 2003 Megans law 2. They combined them and told me two or more 10yr = life reg. A.S. v commonwealth PASC said you have to offend be sent then reopened to receive a life reg from two or more 10yr offenses. So that puts me back at 10yr reg However one of my offenses was changed to life by SORNA 2012 IA7 was 10 changed to life. Shouldn’t they have to take me off ? my 10yrs is up.


          • #22693 Reply
            terry brunson

            Terry Thanks for the posts I have two questions for you

            1. Oct 19th is deadline for freed to appeal How long will it take to hear if SCOTUS accepts or denies hearing it?

            Answer: @ Terry
            19 Oct 2017 is the deadline for the AG of Cumberland County to file the Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Ex Post Fact challenge of the MUNIZ decision on Ex Post Facto claims of SORNA by PA Supreme Court.

            Step one is for Freed to file a stay in the Pa. Supreme court to ask for time to write his argument – He gets a 30 stay.
            The stay gives the PSP time do nothing time. The PSP is now reviewing their records of all pre-SORNA OS’s to get the number of offenders it will effect.

            Then have the number at 4,500 SO’s that will be removed as of 19 Oct 2017.

            Now here is the monkey wrench – SORNA gives offenders 48 hour to report changes, but the PSP is projecting a 12 to 18 month time frame to remove people off the registry. That is a 52 fake out. The MUNIZ decision should be immediate as of 19 Oct 2017

            Now the PSP get a little more time because they don’t have to act until after the SCOTUS takes the MUNIZ case on its docket. That will take about 45 days to get a hearing for oral arguments for both sides if the MUNIZ case is accepted. I make the prediction that it will deny a hearing. And MUNIZ will be remanded for implementation in pa. right away.

            Then the PSP can be suited by SO’s all over tghe state of Pennsylvania if they are kept on the restry 48 hours after the SCOTUS denies the AG Freed’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Ex Post Fact challenge review on Ex Post Facto claims of SORNA in Pa..

            To answer your question direct – 48 hours after the SCOTUS denies the Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Ex Post Fact challenge on Ex Post Facto claims from freed. When that is? The docket sheet of the SCOTUS has the timing on that. 19 Oct 2017 is the deadline date (90 days) add 45 days for docket wait. So by November 7, 2017 you will know the out come.

            Then next

            2. You mentioned Muniz retroactive only will apply to those that had a contract plea with 10yr reg in contract. Doesn’t this apply to anyone pre SORNA? I plead to two 10yr reg offenses in 2003 Megans law 2. They combined them and told me two or more 10yr = life reg.
            A.S. v commonwealth PASC said you have to offend be sent then reopened to receive a life reg from two or more 10yr offenses.
            So that puts me back at 10yr reg
            However one of my offenses was changed to life by SORNA 2012 IA7 was 10 changed to life. Shouldn’t they have to take me off ? my 10yrs is up.

            A.S. v commonwealth PASC was a NON – Precedent case that you cannot claim right to as precedent law as like Muniz, but there is a Precedent case you can claim rights to with your issue – write it down

            PA Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Lutz-Morrison revisited the issue, on (August-15-2016) came to a logical decision:

            “It is enough to note we hold that Section 9799.14, considered in the context of the statutory language as a whole, is susceptible to two reasonable constructions, and the statute, which sets forth a graduated (three-tier) scheme of registration, encompasses a recidivist philosophy.
            As such, the statute requires an act, a conviction, and a subsequent act to trigger lifetime registration for multiple offenses otherwise subject to a fifteen- or twenty-five-year period of registration.”

            It’s important to note that the same general ruling was made with respect to the “two or more convictions” language included in Megan’s Law II (pre-SORNA). See A.S. v. Pa. State Police, 24 MAP 2014, J-36-2016 (Pa. filed Aug. 15, 2016):

            “In accordance with the Gehris Opinion in Support of Reversal (OISR), as supplemented by our analysis below, we hold the provision, considered in the context of the statutory language as a whole, is amenable to two reasonable constructions; and we further hold the statute, which sets forth a graduated scheme of registration, encompasses a recidivist philosophy.

            2 We therefore conclude the statute requires an act, a conviction, and a subsequent act to trigger lifetime registration for multiple offenses otherwise triggering a ten-year period of registration.”

            “Fourth and finally, and returning to the subject of predicate ambiguity, we note there is some validity in the point made in the dissent below that it would be absurd and unreasonable if a single act, giving rise to a single prosecution yielding two convictions for overlapping predicate offenses, subjected an offender to lifetime registration.

            In conclusion, we hold the statute requires an act, a conviction, and a subsequent act to trigger lifetime registration for multiple offenses otherwise triggering a ten-year period of registration.

            Accordingly, the award of mandamus relief is hereby affirmed.”

            Thanks for asking me – I feel humbled to give the best reply that I can to you hope you understand the legal begal stuff I say. I understand it, but am I explaining it right.. . . . for you to understand it also.

            Terry Thanks for the posts

            a few questions for you

            1. oct 19th is deadline for freed to appeal How long will it take to hear if SCOTUS accepts or denies hearing it?

            2. You mentioned Muniz retroactive only will apply to those that had a contract plea with 10yr reg in contract. Doesn’t this apply to anyone pre SORNA? I plead to two 10yr reg offenses in 2003 Megans law 2. They combined them and told me two or more 10yr = life reg. A.S. v commonwealth PASC said you have to offend be sent then reopened to receive a life reg from two or more 10yr offenses. So that puts me back at 10yr reg However one of my offenses was changed to life by SORNA 2012 IA7 was 10 changed to life. Shouldn’t they have to take me off ? my 10yrs is up.


        • #22083 Reply

          hi do you know if da freed has filed the petition yet, and not that im concerned to much about it. im more concerned about just being removed from m,l but can we seek civil damages? thanks for any input.

          • #22097 Reply
            terry brunson

            AG Freed has not filed the petition as of yet. . . . . . . . .

            He has 90 days to file from the decision date of . . . . . . . 19 July 2017

            That put his filing dead-line date at 19 October 2017 . . . . . . . . . . .

            If and when he files to the SCOTUS the money and time will not be worth it. . . . . . . Man hours and millions of dollar on a loss cause. . . . . . . .

            The track record shows that the SCOTUS has denied Ohio – Alaska – Maryland – Michigan – on this same issue Ex Post Facto claim on their state constitutions. The Federal government do not control SO registrations, state law enforces it. . .

            If a state Supreme Court shoots down the law. The SCOTUS will deny the appeal because the highest court in the state has ruled. . . . . .

            A Petition for Writ of Certiorari is only a review of the state supreme courts’ decision.

            Because the U. S. Supreme Court has no jurisdiction on state constitutional claims. . . . . . Pennsylvania will fail to be heard by the high court. . . . . . .

            The only course of action to take is : Go back to the house and senate to revise the unconstitutional portion and make it right. . . or let the State supreme court rule stand as decided in MUNIZ………… Decision of 19 July 2017

            After 19 October 2017 PSP and AG must start releasing SO that were under contract of pleas for 10 years, and all people whose offense occurred before SORNA date of December 2012 will not be forced to be under tier 1 2 3 rules relating to 15 years, 25 years, or life time registration periods. . . THAT IS A FACT JACK

          • #22101 Reply
            Robin Vander Wall
            Robin Vander Wall

            Because the U. S. Supreme Court has no jurisdiction on state constitutional claims

            This is not true. The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives the high Court jurisdiction over a state supreme court’s disposition of state constitutional claims and it will exercise this supremacy in instances where a federal question is clearly perceived.

          • #22109 Reply
            terry brunson

            Thank for adding the Supremacy Clause of Art IV of the U. S. Constitution – which states:

            “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

            This is the question that all law students argue at great lengths.

            The Pennsylvania Constitution and any state constitution has sometime more due process rights than the Federal Constitution on a matter of rights.

            The Ex Post Facto section of a state Constitution is in place for a purpose – though at times it puts laws in a old law and a new law status. . . .

            In point I would say that all state laws and even its Constitution applies laws in courts of lower jurisdiction in a ministerial capacity. If a lower court in supreme authority decides against the Federal Constitution – The Highest court in the land has right to assume jurisdiction under Article IV. So True but it is weighted heavily to the fact that accepting to hear a Ex Post Facto issue will apply over the 50 states on the issue.

            That is why the petition for a writ of certiorari for review is necessary. THE JURISDICTION IS NOT AUTOMATIC ON FACIA PREMIUS .

            The high court has to decide to accept the jurisdiction of a review in 90 day.. . . . . . . . . . . . as its own rules state i.e. in whole below:

            “The U.S. Supreme Court’s 90-day period for filing a petition for certiorari is jurisdictional, mandatory, and very strictly enforced; there are no exceptions. If the petition is not timely filed according to the U.S. Supreme
            Court’s rules (e.g., mailed on Day 91), for any reason whatsoever, it will be rejected:
            “The Clerk will not file any petition for a writ of certiorari that is jurisdictionally out of
            time.” (S.Ct. R. 13(2) [also incorporated here in 28 U.S.C. § 2101(d)].)

            It is therefore exceptionally important for counsel to know exactly when the 90- day jurisdictional period has begun, and when it will end.”

            The High court will weigh also a acceptance or denial for hearing a review of a state high court ruling due to the broad with of their decision over all 50 states.

            If 4 of the filthy states don’t like a Federal law and its individual high courts shoot it down in their territory jurisdiction – they are one of many and not the whole. (Hope you get this)

            So the SCOTUS weights – and it Weights for the states to wrack up one by one on the issue until a 2/3 state re volute
            is seen by the highest court in the land on a single issue. Then the High court of the land feels comfortable to adopt jurisdiction by the next certiorari for review it receives from a state for review.

            As of now here is the state court on Ex Post Facto – Ohio – Indiana – Maryland – Alaska – Michigan – Soon PENNSYLVANIA

            I will say this slow for all to get it – Jurisdiction on a state review is not automatic the supremacy clause is the door way to give the U.S high Court jurisdiction, but the key is will they accept it now. . . . . . . . . . a denial to hear an issue is the high court’s right because to the High Court a decision affecting a few must be weighed over the whole –
            6 minus 50 = 44 SORNA is good in 44 states as relation to Ex Post Facto

            If the High court take that now- the 6 high court over the 6 can affect the other 44 not in the battle – DO YOU SEE HOW IT WORKS?

          • #22115 Reply
            terry brunson

            It is Article (6) not (4) my over sight I will put it in whole: read below –
            Thank for adding the Supremacy Clause of Art VI of the U. S. Constitution – which states:

            “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

            The Unities States Constitution is the Supreme Law in the Law – and all State Constitutions and State Laws Contrary to the U. S. Constitution shall be deemed unconstitutional – and all Judges are bound by the U.S. Constitution.

            Now please note that there is an Ex Posrt Facto rule in the Federal U.S. Constitution –
            Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws).

            The MUNIZ decision used Federal stands on Ex Post Facto Test and they passed. Just as The 9 Justices of the SCOTUS will use on the issue.

            Jurisdiction of lower courts decision are attached to the SCOTUS by request of a review – When accepted jurisdiction attaches before 90 day window closes. A state supreme appeal decision has a 90 day window of U.S. Supreme Court Jurisdiction – – – – on the 91st day that window shuts. . . . . . and the low state supreme court decision stands as Law in that jurisdiction only. . . . . I pray that my intent is gotten across

          • #22275 Reply

            Wow that was just mind blowing, I understood it and will read it again.
            Naturally there is doubt in the back of my mind and I have very high hopes you are 100% correct because it sure sound like you know exactly what your talking about I mean it all makes sense in my mind. Being an SO for so long there is naturally and unintentional doubt do to the many years of seeing so many fight, some win some loose. But either way thank you so much, you made my day I have been waiting impatiently for some sort of news in PA and god willing the rest of the world wins this battle also because this is an international fight.
            Thank you Terry Brunson.

          • #22314 Reply
            terry brunson

            Brain – it is show time form justice on the Ex Post Facto issue. If The SCOTUS accepts PA appeal on Muniz decision and rule in favor – it could slip the case and only accept the Federal review on Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws) which reads in whole right from the U.S. Constitution:
            Article 1 – The Legislative Branch
            Section 10 – Powers Prohibited of States

            No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

            No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

            No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

            This section of the Constitution is the one that is going to break the backs of the MUNIZ case at the SCOTUS on contract rights. The SORNA contract is Ex Post Facto in that it retroactively forces new contract terms one sided without due process rights. People that have a Ten Year contract on Magen’s Law are being forced to enter terms out side the original contract. This is the States rights portion that AG Freed will have to show how the High Court in PA has ruled on 6-1 out of 7 Judges on the Court.

            Six-to-One is a grand slam loud hit that took PA by surprise. All Freed has in his gun to take to the SCOTUS to talk about are personal dead false facts about Sex Offender RECIDIVISM to protect the public from those that re – offend. That boat won’t float it sunk at the High Court in PA in Harrisburg 19 July 2017 under MUNIZ decision.

            U. S. Constitution rights are more weighty than interest reports of dead facts that are not true.

            We are a nation of laws, and the highest law in the land is the U.S. Constitutions. The High Court of PA has used SCOTUS standards to get to MUNIZ decision.

            I am not a crystal ball gazer – tea leaf reader- bone picker- or psychic: BUT HEAR IS MY PREDICTION….

            Reading the actions of the PA high court of a 6-1 decision on MUNIZ going into a SCOTUS on a Petition for Writ of Certiorari outcome for AG Freed will be – DENIED . . . . . . . . . MICHIGAN IS IN FRONT OF YOU WAITING TO BE HEARD ON THE SAME EX POST FACTO ISSUE. And my added prediction is Michigan will not be put off by the SCOTUS because there are 44 others in the stands watching and for the SCOTUS to act now at a state count on the Exo Post Facto issue is not worth the attention now for the high Court to take on the issue on the state side of the U.S. Constitution section of Article 1 Section 10 under contract rights of a plea entered and a plea completed (Ten Year on the registry) the State Voted to accept SORNA by a money deal of getting a Federal cash deal to standardize a national Registry. . . .

            Dis you know that some states never entered into SORNA? Texas never complied- Their nob-compliance was due to fear of appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on Article 1 Section Ten States don’t have a right to change a plea deal under one Law and then accept a Federal Law that violates the rights of a person under EX POST FACTO . Texas was smart not to start.

            Everything is Big in Texas- But not their balls to fight a no win battle on a U.S. Constitutional claim of EX POST FACTO rights! ! Smile and be happy- V day is almost here for all SO’s suffering under the in humane ploys of bureaucrats, and high mined so called experts – An EX is a has been – AND a spect is a drip under pressure. Ex -spects are now going to be has beens soon – Note Indiana Supreme Court is lining up to knock down SORNA they are up next. . . . . . . . . . But those in PA – You Are in A Good Position to See the PSP and the PA AG office plea with the PA house and senate to re-enact a Law fast that will not let the PSP or AG have to be forced to let over 4,500 SO’s off the registry so easy. . . . . . Once 19 October 2017 comes – You will see in PA the rush for the PSP and AG to plead not to be force to let people off the registry. . . The PA house and Senate have more weighty matters to rush than to bother SO’s.

            MUNIZ decision will then give all in PA to file appeals and civil rights suits and the money will start to flow to pay SO’s reparations bu jury’s across the state – that will break the state bank.

            Harrisburg will put pressure on PSP and AG to STOP the madness and let the court’s ruling be the Law of the land. . . . . . . in PA MUNIZ V COMMONWEALTH will prevail 6-1 decision is no slipt it is a home run that will go over the wall at Washington’s High Court walls under states rights of ARTICLE 1 SECTION 10 of the U. S. CONSTITUTION – Glad to report this depiction.

          • #22315 Reply
            terry brunson

            OH I forgot to tell all ya – – -in a TeXas draw – – – – – – – – North Carolina passed a SO law to keep OS of Face Book – Suit went the normal appeal route to the U.S. Supreme Court – they had to heard that case because it was a normal appeal. and not a petition for certiorari where the Court could deny a hearing –

            It was a sad disappointment for North Carolina

            Packingham v. N.C. It was a win 9-0

            9 justices struck the Law Down and there are only 9 Judges on the high Court

            PA – I am sorry to say AG Freed is not representing the PA people – He got some kind of personal thing to prove that he is bigger than the High Courts that protect rights – You All will see 19 October 2017 the clock is counting down

          • #22526 Reply

            @terry brunson
            …with all due respect, what exactly do you mean by *quote*
            “U.S. Constitution Article 1 section 10 under state’s not being able to break contracts – which a plea to register for Ten years was a contract.

            SORNA violates that – – – – – The Muniz decision will not get rid of SORNA in PA. It will only effect those who entered into a plea with a court to register ten years.” *end quote*

            Is the Governor, AG and/or PA State Police going to comeback with games like suddenly stating that my conviction does not apply to the relief of the PA State SORNA retroactive requirements because, having been in a Military Installation and/or out of State (i.e. Camp Lejeune, N.C.)? Am I going to be forced/obligated metaphorically to pay an attorney to bully me to pay lots of $$$ to satisfy their need for a bigger lifestyle? Seriously, when can I go on with my life and be left alone!!!

            I did not entered into any contract with anybody that I am aware of. I was made to register! I was released from duty after serving my sentence on the Military Brigg in Camp Lejeune, N.C. and told to report to Law Enforcement (the Sheriff’s office) whom then told me to go to the State Police. Then the individual that “assisted me”, a young trooper, actually told me he was not sure if my conviction/charges on the U.S. Military Installation warranted/required my registration, made me wait 1 hour & 23 minutes (felt an eternity) to then tell me that he was going to go ahead and “process me” after talking to people (whatever that meant).

            Then I was not told much else nor given any papers. Later I received in the mail my requirements stating 10 years (which about 3 years later I was arrested for “supposedly” not complying which, cost me about $2500 and a very good paying job I had worked hard to obtain & maintain, to prove that they (the Commonwealth of PA) were wrong. I was fortunate enough due to the fact that I actually keep all my visits to the PA State Police on record in a binder, but they tried very hard to nail me after 3 years of constantly visiting them to change information or yearly updates). That was in 2007 and I have not been able to bounce back financially or emotionally since. I have been further made into a mess plus all the shaming and bullying on loved ones, but I have chosen to still be here mainly for my children (and now grandchild). I try to be positive, but do tell my children the truth of my sorrow. At least, they have truly demonstrated understanding & support. I am grateful to them for such!

          • #22685 Reply
            terry brunson

            I am writing back to tell you that the U.S. Constitution has a prohibition against Ex post Facto allowing States to retroactively apply a law to people under a previous contracts, such as a plea deal. If you entered a plea allowance
            for ten year registration and now the PSP want to classify you under something different under SORNA has been over turned by the Pa. Supreme Court on 19 July 2017.

            In your case you have no plea contract so you would win under the 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as Cruel and Usual Punishment. You completed your time and just started registration – You fall under equal protection by due process rights of the 14 and and 5th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

            You will get a letter soon from the PSP telling you what to do next. They have until 19 Oct. 2017 to figure out what to tell you. Whatever they say it will have to add the SORNA has been struck down.

            It will take about 12 to 18 months for them to correct the records of 4,500 SO’s in Pa.

            If you cannot wait the 12 to 18 months for them to correct their own records because they will do it by last name in alphabetical order. If your last name begins with A great your file will be corrected before some one who’s last name begins with Z .

            Like you said – about getting a lawyer – you can go to court and claim violation of rights under the U.S. Constitution by filing for injunction relief by Writ of Mandamus or Nunc Pro Tunc . You could file in the closest Commonwealth court nearest to you. it will cost the filing fee and court coast if you Pro Se it or do it yourself.

            Not knowing the law is the draw back in your case. But you don’t need to know more than MUNIZ decision pf July 19, 2017

            After 19 October 2017 I am going to put on this site a Writ of Mandamus copy on step by step how to file it yourself to keep you from waiting 12 to 18 month for the PSP to correct their own records.

            Every day that they delay and have you reporting under SORNA is a violation of your right to liberty and happiness under the PA. Constitution Art. 1 Section 1 You will prevail in your case. You will be taken off – the SORNA.

            The Pa. Judicial Committee is now trying to adjust things to try to undermine the Muniz decision by law change in favor to keep the website on the internet. The PSP web site will be ordered to come down 19 Oct 2017.

            The AG of Cumberland County Pa. where MUNIZ started (Mr. Freed) has taken action to stay Muniz until the SCOTUS review the Pa. Supreme Court decision on MUNIZ. My prediction is that the U.S. Supreme Count will deny Freed’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari on the grounds that it is not time set to hear the issue on the Federal rights on the issue of Ex Post Factto claims on SORNA because the states are the enforcers of SORNA and they have attached rights by each States Constitutions.

            When State one by one make Petition for Writ of Certiorari – one the count get to a point where 2/3 of the State have made Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Ex Post Fact challenge on Ex Post Facto claims.

            As of now the U.S. Supreme Court has denied these states on this issue – 1 – Ohio 2 – Alaska 3 – Maryland
            4 – Indiana 5 – Michigan 6 – Pennsylvania (will next be denied

            Alaska – Maryland – Ohio – Michigan they went to the same route – PENNSYLVANIA will soon be denied on review of Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Ex Post Fact challenge on Ex Post Facto claims.

            for two reasons –
            1. The States’ high court has spoken in its jurisdiction under state rights of Article 1 Section 17 of the
            Pennsylvania Constitution

            2. The Federal claim under states rights of Article 1 Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution

            States have the right to strike down law matters of unconstitutional claims by the highest Court in the States’ on their Constitutions. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court spoke strong 6 to 1 which is a loud shut that SORNA is not right for Sex Offenders in Pa. The SORNA rules are too restrictive and punitive toward SO’s.

            You all will thank me in a few more day to see that I am saying what is right. . .

            SORNA will die in Pa. and the Harrisburg Law makers will get together to come up with a Megan’s Law V which will be similar to the Megan’s Law 2 which was 10 year or life for S.V.P. by court review for life time.

            The two or more conviction rule has fallen. Two counts on the same day plea equals one conviction – which is Ten years only. Not lifetime any more in Pa.

            Pa. 18 3126(a)(7) will fall from life time for people that were put under it as of 20 Dec 2012. Up until that date
            Pa. 18 3126(a)(7) was only ten year registration – That is what MUNIZ decision is all about and he won a win on that point that broke the backs of the PSP and Freed AG of Cumberland County. They are now appealing to buy some Court Stay time until the SCOTUS to figure out an contingency action to not let 4,500 people off the registry. The U.S. Supreme Court will deny Freed’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari on Ex Post Fact challenge on Ex Post Facto under MUNIZ’s claim.

            And Pa. will have to make new rules for pre-SORNA people or remove them off the registry all together never to bother them again about SO registration.

          • #22703 Reply

            @terry brunson
            Thank you!… And I look forward to the copy of Writ of Mandamus after October 19, 2017.

          • #22420 Reply

            @Terry Brunson. So after October 19 the PSP and the AG will try and instate an old law or new law to keep SO’s on the registry? That is rediculose and will cost money I suppose before and after we sue them, that’s the same exact thing they imposed in 2012 when they adopted SORNA in PA, isn’t that still a violation of the constitution to impose another law to keep Registered Citizens on the registry, due that they cancelle SORNA and the ten years rule will be upheld?

          • #22462 Reply
            terry brunson

            Brian – You may not be understanding the Ex Post Facto issue clearly
            The Muniz decision will force the PSP and AG to revert people back to the laws on Sex Offenses pre- SORNA date of 2012 when Pa. came into compliance.

            Before Dec. 2012 there were only 10 year or life requirements to register in pa. Governor Corbert (I may not have his name right) signed a law to accept SORNA well at that time it opened up a three tier system of 1 – 15 year restration 2- 25 year registration and 3- Lifetime registration.

            The problem is that there were people at the end of a 10 year plea contract with the sate. When SORNA passed – a 10 year registration went to 15 or 25 or for many LIFETIME.

            That volated the Ex Post Facto rule of law in the State Constitution. Article 1 section 7
            and the U.S. Constitution Article 1 section 10 under state’s not being able to break contracts – which a plea to register for Ten years was a contract.

            SORNA violates that – – – – – The Muniz decision will not get rid of SORNA in PA. It will only effect those who entered into a plea with a court to register ten years.

            For some that ten year time is up but those people are still on the registry, to add badness to worse some who had ten years when to lifetime. CAN YOU SAY, “That is not right.”

            So one person name MUNIZ appealed and fought under the pa. Constitution Art 1 sec. 7 it went to the highest Court in Pa. and 6-1 the jusges on that court said that MUNIZ was right. . . . . . . .

            Now the AG of Cumberland County wants a SCOTUS review on the issues.

            By rule – Freed has 90 days to appeal to the SCOTUS – He has done so – and the SCOTUS can accep to hear the pa. high court decision to see if it stands right. If they accept it – Not only will MUNIZ wim but you will win to. . . . . and so will all other SO in other states across the U.S.A. becuase when the SCOTUS speak – It speaks to seal law for the Nation………..

            That is the issue at stake. . . You got this?

            Brian don’t feel lost of hope it is a good thing that Freed appealed for review.

            It will get the issue before the right people at the right time to review the right issue that every body knows is wrong.

            If the SCOTUS don’t see it. . . . . . . . It will be a lost. on the issue forever . . . . . . . or the battle continues on. . . . . .
            The good news is – the High Court as given signs in other cases to how they feel about the Ex Post Facto issue. And it is good that they will uphold Muniz of Pa, and that will forece the PSP and AG to do the right thing or keep being sued for a lot of lot of money to be given out on this issue by the courts and juries everywhere.

          • #22463 Reply
            terry brunson

            Brian one more thing – SORNA is not the problem = the problem is the application of the SORNA rules on people that already had a contract for ten years.

            SORNA will stay the Law even in PA, but it cannot be applied in a Ex Post Facto way in retroactive ways.

            There would be – old law of those before SORNA
            There will be a new law for those after SORNA

          • #22516 Reply

            Ok I see, so yes I was at the end of 10 years to be in November 2013 then SORNA kicked in and I went to 25 years, I thought that was a very nice Xmas present for all of us SO’s in PA that year and I’m sure they thought that once it was signed into law, but anyway I was mistaken, I thought SORNA was going to be cancelled. So if the SCOUS decides to see it Freeds way then I and many others have grounds for a big lawsuit? i have read about class action lawsuits but wouldn’t just retaining my own lawyer get it done a lot faster then class action style? I know class action would help more people though. So was Packingham v. N.C
            Ruling made by SCOUS or the state itself? I know there are lots of issues going on and lots of lawsuits, it’s hard to keep track of it all.

          • #22100 Reply
            terry brunson

            One note I forgot to tell : Civil damages
            There is built into state enforcement of SORNA immunity.
            To get by immunity you have to show damage by the official capacity of the PSP. . . that will be hard to do. . .

            However; you can file 1983 civil rights violation against a state ministery in their individual capacity for not complying with what you are entitled in regards to your relief rights. A jury can award punitive damages based on facts proven

          • #22150 Reply

            thank you

    • #22125 Reply

      @ terry brunson
      “But you have big brothers – and your big brothers will deal with the bullies in due time. . . . . Wait until 19 October 2017 and you will see the light that Muniz and Jackson v. commomwealth of July 7, 2016 all the big brother protections will come to your aid. . . . Please trust that the little guy is not left out. You may feel that way because you cannot see all that is going on – but know this: people are thinking about your rights.

      I am one of them. . . . and I am one of many that you cannot count. . Hold on don’t give up – – – – – help is on the way . . . . .”

      Dear Sir, Ma’am or other (I do not need to know gender) I am in tears, lots of them, but not so much for the time frame of hope you pointed out as for the Human element of your words used in your post on September 22, 2017 at 8:22 am. Humanity and being humane are words that have lost meaning to many, but clearly not to all. I have shed many tears over the long years (almost 15 years) on this registry that can be & has been called many things notwithstanding, my lifetime of tears prior. I will undoubtedly and privately shed more tears (anger, joy, etc. I am not even sure) the day this nightmare comes to an end, more so than when I received my Eagle, Globe and Anchor (U.S. Marines) or even when I saw my child for the first time. I continue to desire to do something positive for others and me out of this experience for sure, as I have tried for almost 15 years, but failed. I can still reach for the Stars right!?

      I… Thank… you! …and the many like you!

    • #22183 Reply

      @terry brunson
      This is from the comment section on the NARSOL article: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court
      July 21, 2017 by Sandy
      Cary shared some info with a link that moderators permitted the posting to the safe official site (when I used the link at least) of the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association (PDAA). While I encourage & ask that everyone reads the comments and article, here below is my reply to Cary:

      Thank you for that information!
      So we now officially know that Dave Freed, the Cumberland County District Attorney and Communications Chair for the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association that he is *quote* “pleased to report that just last week the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stayed the Muniz decision pending my filing of a Writ of Certiorari petition with the United States Supreme Court.” *end quote*

      After reading the official article on the link your provided, it is very clear to me that this law enforcement public servant is on a personal vendetta against folks on a registry and will not rest until he can make himself more powerful and a household name by quoting manipulated (picked & chosen) & unrealistic statistics of recidivism and sharing his personal views and not the professional views of the State Constitution & laws he swore (supposedly) to uphold (& protect). I have copy & paste some excerpts from Dave Freed’s report Before the House Judiciary Committee on 9/12/2017

      “One such study followed 9,691 male sex offenders released from prisons in 15 states in 1994 and found that nearly 4 out of every 10 returned to prison within 3 years.(1) Another study that spanned a twenty-five year period after release found that rapists and child molesters remained at risk to reoffend at least 15-20 years after discharge, and that the sexual recidivism arrest rate for rapists was 39% and the sexual recidivism arrest rate for child molesters was an even higher 52%.(2)”

      “Equally significant is that any statistical attempts to measure the risk of new offenses greatly understate the true nature of the problem because the vast majority of sex crimes are never reported.”

      “With regard to the Muniz case, I disagree with the ruling. In my view, SORNA’s requirements are neither punitive nor onerous. While SORNA places significant burdens on those required to register, the scope of these requirements do not, in my view, rise to the level of punishment. It is for that reason that I have filed a petition for Writ of Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court.”

      “The Muniz case has the potential to affect every single sex offender convicted before December 20, 2012. It will then be up to the Pennsylvania State Police to determine whether they should remain on the registry and to litigate any attempts to remove those sex offenders from the registry.”

      “With all that said, there is room for a legislative fix. The PDAA has already been working with Committee staff, and we recommend reenacting a version of Megan’s Law that was in place before SORNA took effect in 2012. This version should apply to those offenders to whom SORNA applied retroactively, meaning that their registration crimes were committed before December 20, 2012. Under this proposal, some offenders would ultimately come off the registry. But the numbers would pale in comparison to the possible 10,000 who could ultimately be removed from the registry should no legislative action be taken.”

      Now we wait, again, on the SCOTUS and what other “adjustments” to SORNA legislators come up with in PA. *exhales heavily*

      • #23280 Reply
        terry brunson

        Any Legislative Fix will – cause a new Megan’s Law to be passed. Megan’s Law III expired when SORNA took effect. To create a new law would start a new fight on retroactive application of LAW under the PA. Contitution Article 1 Section 17. . . . That is what MUNIZ was all about . . . Here we go around and around

    • #22423 Reply

      According to a NARSOL article here:

      AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

      …and posts in the comments from:
      “Thank you for the article link!” -my response-

      “The 9/28/2017 date may be when we should know if SCOTUS will hear the case. May it be so, if it is for the best outcome!” -my response-

      Now, I will get ahead of myself a bit… When the decision is made to remove human folks from this unconstitutional-oppressive… (OK, let me stay professional. If we are here, we know!) SORNA, then what happens with our lives? (and I am not referring to monetary compensation though, if any one wants to share further as some have, it would surely be appreciated!) Are we really going to be free or just freer *look it up* for others in the future (which I am OK with)? Just more free than current?

      I am referring to further obligations imposed by States, U.S. Federal Government and/or other Countries when it comes to where we live, where we work, where we travel and/or where we raise a family. Will we have to live forever in the same State given relief (i.e. PA, etc.)[I am an American citizen PA resident since early 90’s, convicted in a Military Court (just because of that my situation turned more complex than most others…I get it) in Camp Lejeune, N.C. (11 month sentence-misdemeanor- out in 9 good behavior) back to PA with no restrictions other than being placed on PA registry (for 10 years now tier 1) which I do not recall ever being discussed by my free legal Military Counsel until days before release when they were demanding to have my blood drawn as part of my release (or I would not have taken the plea deal offered even as I was threatened with further *made up* charges), never any other convictions. Born in Puerto Rico where a registry is mandated in exchange to receive Federal funds for Law Enforcement] Will I have to register if I go there? I have been considering moving to some Central American Countries (since I do speak Spanish) when $ permit and my children are on a solid path to success where they will need me very little to nothing at all (though to me our children will always needs us and we will need them, if there is genuine love), but I want to start another life without being a social stigma to myself or loved ones or have fingers pointed at me by people that have done…that are no Saints, but have never gotten caught by “the law” on things.

      I have been reading that many European Countries will not welcome people in our situation or past plus, I am not financially well (anyone is pretty much welcome anywhere if you have money *ahem…Dennis Rodman & North Korea…ahem* nor am I Caucasian, no offense intended to anyone, but just a sincere observation) so, much of Europe and Australia is pretty much out of my future plans. Maybe Japan (but not with the tension that is going on right now in that region of the World).

      Essentially, can we live in other States of the U.S. with more peace and income opportunities? Can we move to another Country where we may find peace & civility even if it means renouncing citizenship? Will we legally be able to change our names if we want to do so? (I have read in articles on the subject over the years that we are a major exception to a resounding, NO) Will we be completely removed from the Federal Government Database NSOPW which right now states: *quote* “Due to Hurricane Maria, Puerto Rico’s offender information is unavailable through NSOPW. At this time, we are unable to provide an estimate for when their information will be available again.” *end quote* and thru the SMART website *quote* “Welcome to the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) site. The SMART Office was authorized in the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, which was signed into law on July 27, 2006.” *end quote* Are our drivers’ licenses and/or travel Visas going to be tagged or marked with some sort of designation to further punish/shame us? Will paying lawyers/legal counsels be the only way to truly have the legal back-up and motions placed/taken to be removed from everything to include records sealing/clearing/pardoning/expungement?

      I am asking these questions for me and those that choose not to ask them, but want to also know!
      I’ve been afraid for many long years, and still am. But may my questions help us all trying to do right!
      *respectful rant finished, thank you for reading and/or answering!* 🙂

      • #22487 Reply

        After further research, checking, reading and…re-checking, I came across these SORNA related articles that I hope helps all interested. Some articles will answer questions and some will raise more. There will be links so, it will be up to the moderators to permit their posting. Thanks to the mods in advance!
        International Tracking of Sex Offenders

        The SMART Office provides guidance on the implementation of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) and has been continually involved in the efforts to improve tracking of registered sex offenders traveling internationally since its inception. Through collaborative actions with other federal agencies, the development of policy and guidelines and the publication of relevant resources, the SMART Office plays a vital role in the U.S. government’s overarching efforts to notify foreign countries when registered sex offenders are traveling abroad.
        International Tracking of Sex Offenders Working Group

        SORNA and the SORNA Final Guidelines tasked the U.S. Department of Justice with creating a tracking system for sex offenders who enter and depart the United States. To that end, the SMART Office organized the International Tracking of Sex Offenders Working Group in 2008. This working group, comprising more than 20 component agencies and offices within the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, State and Defense, proposed a system using existing resources, outlined in the International Tracking of Sex Offenders Working Group White Paper. The working group, chaired by SMART, has met regularly over the past 10 years, most recently in May 2017.
        SORNA & Advance Notice of International Travel

        In 2011, the Department of Justice released the SORNA Supplemental Guidelines that require registered sex offenders to inform their residence jurisdiction of any intended travel outside of the United States at least 21 days prior to their departure, and the registration jurisdiction to collect information about the offender’s intended international travel. The jurisdiction is required to send that information to the U.S. Marshals Service’s National Sex Offender Targeting Center, who, in turn, reviews and forwards it to INTERPOL-Washington for foreign country notification.
        International Megan’s Law

        In 2016, Congress passed International Megan’s Law, which codified the 21-day advance travel notification requirement, and built on the work of the U.S. Marshals Service’s National Sex Offender Targeting Center. It also specifically authorized the work of the Department of Homeland Security’s Angel Watch Center, which uses passenger manifest data and criminal history record information to detect persons convicted of sex offenses against minors who are traveling to countries where the sexual exploitation of children is most likely to occur.

        The SMART Office published a two-page summary of International Megan’s Law shortly after its passage.
        Additional Resources

        In 2013, the Government Accountability Office issued a comprehensive report detailing the efforts to track registered sex offenders traveling internationally, including the work of the SMART Office and the International Tracking of Sex Offenders Working Group.

        The SMART Office published a Global Overview of Sex Offender Registration and Notification Systems, most recently updated in 2016.

        You will need to have a PDF file reader installed on your computing device for this one below:
        Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) State and Territory Implementation
        Progress Check

        These following are NARSOL articles and please read the comments as possible:

        Anthony Weiner sentenced to 21 months in sexting case

        Does anyone really understand recidivism?

        Sex offenders blame secluded island’s water for deaths

        International Meagan’s Law damages a person’s reputation

      • #23339 Reply
        terry brunson

        Michigan took the path to appeal their Ex Post Facto application of SORMA by petition of Writ of Certiorari in (Snyder v Doe) 6th Cir. On October 2, 2017 their review on Snyder v Doe was denied and returned to lower court for final declaration through out the state . . . . as the Land of that land. . . . . . . . . . WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO MICHIGAN WILL BE THE PLIGHT OF FREED’S PENNSYLVANIA PETITION OF WRIT FOR CETIORARI TOO WILL BE DENIED. . . . . i WILL PUT A DATE ON IT –

        Early 2018 about May 2018 – The Freed Cetiorari will be denied for SCOTUS review and the PSP and AG’s of Pennsylvania will have BUT only one hope – To look to the Pennsylvania State House and Senate and the Governor’s office in Harrisburg for guidance on the issue to find a fix to the Megan’s Law issue. . . . . . . . . . for those pre-SORNA of 20 December 2012.

        A fix will cause another fight on on the same Ex Post Facto claims – for SORNA of 20 December 2012 expired the Magan’s Law III law – to re do it and try to apply it as a fix will cause another fight on Ex post Facto rule from the Pennsylvania Constitution Article 1 Section 17 and that is what MUNIZ decision is all about. . . . . . .

        You just cannot make a new Megan’s Law and try to through it on people who are pre- SORNA. That would be Ex Post Facto too. . . And like the baby song says – HERE WE GO ROUND AND AROUND – THE MULBERRY TREE back to the courts for correction and the MUNIZ decision will hit the PSP and the AG’s of this State in the Face again. . . . . .

        The Best fix is to remove the names of all pre-SORNA people — Let them go free to live their lives.. Stop this pre-judgmental talk about most sex offenders are dangerious. . . . . . . and needed to be watched. . . STOP IT STOP IT.

        The truth is that most under the pre-SORNA where put in an unfair position to comply of face punishment fot non-compliance. . . . . . . MUNIZ decision corrects that. . . . That is the fix MUNIZ application which is the Pennsylvania Constitution Article 1 Section 1 and 17

        SORNA is not dead in PA just application of it on people PRE-DATED 20 December 2012- – – – – Let these people in this group go on with their lives. . . . . . . . . . .

        If any of them re-offend – – – SORNA will be their lot- – and MUNIZ will not help them . . . . . . . . . .

        The PSP and AG cannot accept that as right. . . . They want to keep everyone on the registry under SORNA from not to now on. . . . . . . under tier 3 lifetime. . . . . . . . So sad that people in the PSP and AG take their protection of the public beyond the LAWs that are being presented to them to let the Law stand as the Law. . MUNIZ is the Law now. let it do what it was pointed to do… Correct punitive wrong and give SO’s a chance to show that they are not the monsters PSP and AG’s have to protect the public from – – – – – – This may be my last post Hope it reached all that it was intended for – – – – – – – – – I am sure SO registration is taking a turn towards the best – Pre-SORNA people of Michigan – Ohio – Alaska – Indiana – Kentucky – Maryland – &- Pennsylvania will step up to show that the Majority will stand true to the call to show that they are no danger to the public.

        One person started this in New Jersey – One Sex offender’s action has infected and affected the lives of so many. . . . Not it is time for the so many to infect and effect change to show that it is wrong to punish the so many for the action and failure of one that started the Megan’s Law wheels to turn. . . . . . The vehicle of Megan’s Law had flat tires now- – – – putting air in them is not going to work.. Too many holes in the tire that won’t hole air. . . . .

    • #22695 Reply
      terry brunson

      There’s no guarantee that the U.S. Supreme Court will give a hearing to Freed on review of MUNIZ case. The appeal potential out come is know by well studied Constitutional lawyers. . . . . . . . .

      The MUNIZ case was a slam dunk 6-1 decision against SORNA Ex Post Facto violation. Freed wants review on what should the State law enforcers do to protect the public – this is his review question which has nothing to do with the law argument.

      Freed is looking for guidance from the Supreme Court to help form a new avenue to violate SO’s rights further.

      He don’t want to give up the fight – clearly MUNIZ decision will prevail in PA. the PSP and AG should get set to adjust to remove names form their registry and become more enforcing of SORNA that they have left. SORNA is not leaving the State of PA – those convicted of a sex crime after 20 December 2012 are still under SORNA rules.

      MUNIZ does not have total claims to over tun SORNA just that it cannot by applied retroactive to those before 20 December 2012. They have to be removed from the registry as MUNIZ decision claims rights to. THANK YOU ALL FOR READING THIS – – – – – – –

      The MUNIZ case was decided under both the federal and state Constitution for the express purpose of resolving the issue and precluding a SCOTUS appeal – The retroactivity of SORNA was rightly declared a violation of ex post facto and that decision is not subject to federal review under Pa. Article 1 Section 17 is the precedent Law.

      • #22704 Reply

        @terry brunson
        Thank you for keeping us all updated! 🙂

      • #22733 Reply

        I was looking on SCOTUS BLOG and I didn’t see anything about freed, your 100% correct about Freed though and wanting to fight after all the articles I have read from him.
        I can’t wait till this comes to an end and we’re released from these chains.
        Thank you for the information to.

      • #22869 Reply

        Do you have any idea when PA will be up to bat?

        • #23279 Reply
          terry brunson

          I think Freed did file His Petition of Writ of Certiorari – The SCOTUS is on vacation now – It may take about 6 to 10 months for Freed’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to be denied. There will then be a remand to the PASC and a motion to reconsider MUZIZ on the Federal issues that the SCOTUS would have heard. . . . . . Then the MUNIZ decision will be in full effect in PA for all pre- SORNA

          • #23286 Reply

            SCOTUS has been back from break since Sept. 25th.

          • #23368 Reply

            Is there any way to see Freeds appeal on the SCOTUS blog?

          • #23452 Reply
            terry brunson

            Brian – Hello
            The SCOTUS was on a vacation – they are back in section since 25 Sept 2017

            They have not seen Freed writ yet to them – the first step is to get a stay of the MUNIZ decision to give Pa. chance or time to debate legislative fix to revert people back to old Megan’s law rules – – – – – – WHICH WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE—— because Megan’s Law 3 expired at SORNA’s effective date of 20 December 2012

            There is now no way any prosecutor in Pa. can take violators of Old Megan’s Laws before a Judge- What Law will prosecutors in Pa. claim SO’s violated? (SORNA) ? Muniz wiped that out. . . . . Megan’s Law 3 SORNA wiped that out (expired it) Megan’s Law 2? Megan’s Law 3 wiped that out. I know PA will make a new Megan’s Law reflecting Laws similar to Old Megan’s Law’s?

            OH = wouldn’t that be Ex Post Facto? LIKE muniz? TO COME UP WITH THE NEW mEGAN’S lAW IN 2017 TO APPLY TO THOSE PRE SORNA? They Muniz decison will still know that down too.

            Brian can you see the fix PA is in?


            And let post SORNA stay alive for people with a offense date after 20 Dec 2012

            That would clear 80% of Pa. SO’s registry – Freed don’t like that . . . neither do PSP or all AG’s of PA. . . .

            Brian am I making myself clear? Are you understanding why Freed is fighting so hard?

            Asking to go to the SCOTUS is only a time delay- – – – – – – – – 0f 10 months to a year from not only to be denied. . . .
            Brain there were states in front of PA on this issue – Ohio – denied Indiana – denied Maryland – denied Alaska – denied Michigan (just denied 2 Oct 2017) next up Pennsylvania – and they too will be denied about May 2018..

            You will thank me when you see that I am telling you the future on Pre-SORNA issues all because of MUNIZ

            Let me tell you why the SCOTUS wil deny PA. . . . . . if they tale PA MUNIZ- their decision will effect the other 49 states when only 7 state are in issue with SORNA.. . . . .. Why upset a good illegal things in other states because of the few complaining . . . . . . When others start to complain about SORNA in their state – and the number gets to 2/3’s then it is time for the SCOTUS to say something to effect the whole nation on SORNA

            You got this yet?
            In May 2018 you will get a letter from PSP telling you that you are no longer under any sex offender law’s in PA..

            If you move out of PA. you will be back under SORNA and will have 48 Hours under SORNA to register in the new place to fight like MUNIZ – But MUNIZ is only good for us in Pa. If you move MUNIZ will not help you at all. Out side od PA. You got this? YET?

          • #23473 Reply
            Just the Logic

            I think you are capable of making your point without insulting the other person’s intelligence. Most of us here are just learning. We are all on the same team, so let’s practice basic respect and decency towards our fellow commenters, instead of creating a hostile environment.

          • #23488 Reply
            terry brunson

            Yes you are right I get overly excited and forget I am typing and people can’t see me. . . . . . I would ask all to forgive my flair of talking down – – – that is not my aim. . . . . . I just want all to get that pre-SORNA people are in a good position to be erased off the Pa. registry – by MUNIZ decision in spite of what the SCOTUS decides – unless the SCOTUS takes on the MUNIZ case to over turn it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and don’t see what the United States Constitution Article 1 Section 10 means for states not being allowed to Ex Post Facto laws……….

            As for Pre Megan’s Laws enacted pre SORNA – Once a Megan’s Law was Expired. . . . To future date it as a fix would only be able to be applied to people from the enacted date forward – and not us backwards – that would put us right back at MUNIZ’s argument NO new MEGAN’S LAW fix can fix this – They would be right back at Ex Post Facto challenge to that new fix to fix their fix that they are in – I just want all to understand this with a passion.

            The only thing – in all this is the delay of just using the stay rights – and the wait for the writs to move through the High court docket chains – and the remand process.

            All that slows just down. . . for SO’s rights to be in limbo until all the smoke clear – I write as I do to try to give hope to people that have been waiting too long. . . . . . . . .

            Say if PSP made a law for SO’s to follow. . . . the Law will go into effect in 48 hours- and all SO’s will have to comply or go to jail …….. but when the Law is a win for us. . . . we have to wait weeks – months and maybe years. . . .

            Please don’t miss read me talking down to people – I feel that I am education and enlightening people. . . But I also must say to all please don’t take me wrong – I AM ON YOUR SIDE – i DESPERATELY want all to understand me- so I over do it. . . . . . I beg your forgiveness and ask that you over look my zeal to tell what I know so far. I love all of you and I pray that I could correct anything that I have said in a wrong way. . . . Thank you for pointing out that we all are on the same team. . . . . . . . I desire to do my part on the team to make the way clear for all of us to get through this together . . . .and celebrate each victory with pride to move on with out lives to success and happiness. . . . We all have carried this burden too long. . .

            In waiting Terry Brunson

      • #23091 Reply

        the us supreme court turned down mich, so my hopefully good guess is they will do the same with pa,

        • #23275 Reply
          terry brunson

          r Pennsylvania Petition of Writ of Certiorari from AG Freed of Cumberland County will be turned down just like Michigan- Indiana – Ohio – Alaska – Maryland – was. Do you know that less than 1% make it to the SCOTUS for review decision?

          Kentucky mad it on their FACEBOOK case – but that was a normal appeal and not a Certiorari REVIEW.

          The PASC did give Freed a stay – but it was only to give Harrisburg time to make some kind of fix to Megan’s Law. . .

          But the only problem is Megan’s Law was to expire 20 December 2012 when SORNA took effect. If Harrisburg makes a new Megan’s Law – it too cannot be applied retroactively under the Pennsylvania Constitution Article 1 Section 17 which is what MUNIZ decision was all about (Ex Post Facto)

          There will be no Megan’s Law to revert back to. . . . . . . for those offenses committed before the date that they make a new Megan’s Law. . . . . . . . . . . . PA. is in a fix on this one. . . . . . . . . . .

      • #23633 Reply
        terry brunson

        The MUNIZ decision count was 5 – for it and 1 against it I thought it was 6- to – 1 decision one judge did not vote but said this :

        “Although I disagree with Muniz’s conclusions, they are now the law of this Commonwealth. As such, they must be applied in a meaningful way. No sensible reading of Muniz would permit the Commonwealth Court’s contrary judgment to stand. I therefore join the Court’s order in this case, because it correctly applies Muniz and reverses the Commonwealth Court’s order in this regard.”

    • #22781 Reply

      I have a question. DA FREED wants to inact a portion of the old Megan’s law to registrants whom had the 10year rule or registered citizens whom were supposed to come off before SORNA was inacted, he’s saying 10,000 registrants could come off the list, what happened to 4500 registrants, I swear they spew lies like an infected cut. I’m glad there is new are new and more accurate statistics on recidivism, they can try pulling the rabbit out of the hat but the courts clearly see it is only lies.k

    • #23500 Reply
      terry brunson

      State Must Reenact Megan’s Law to Preserve Sex Offender Registration – Sep 12, 2017

      Without legislative fix approximately 10,000 sex offenders could avoid prosecution for failing to register and may be removed from PSP’s SO’s registry list.

      Members of PA. House Judiciary Committee on September 12, 2017 heard from Cumberland County District Attorney Freed , who said without a sufficient statute in place to put any registration requirements on sexual offenders, district attorneys would not be able to prosecute individuals who fail to register or verify their registry.

      He added unless the Commonwealth reenacts a version of Megan’s Law in response to a state Supreme Court ruling earlier this year, (Commonwealth v Muniz 19 July 2017 which when enforced by the PASC – approximately 10,000 sex offenders in PA. would escape prosecution for failing to register or verify their obligations related to Pennsylvania’s Megan’s Law registry and could be removed from the list.

      Freed told the PA. House Judiciary Committee that it is a very real possibility that those who had to register as sex offenders before December 20, 2012 may not be able to be prosecuted for failing to meet their registration or verification obligations and may actually be removed from the Megan’s Law website.”

      Freed’s office litigated Commonwealth vs. Muniz, in which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that provisions of the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) that applied retroactively were unconstitutional.

      Freed has said he will file a petition for Writ Certiorari with the U. S. Supreme Court.
      Just last week the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stayed the Muniz decision pending his filing with the U.S. Supreme Court.

      The real heart of the issue is when SORNA went into effect it replaced Pennsylvania’s previously enacted Megan’s Law provisions that do not now exist as of this day.

      By adopting SORNA, on 20 December 2012 the state of Pennsylvania expired all previous Megan Law rules which opens the door for 10,000 SO’s to be removed all together off the of the PSP web – site and registry record.

      Freed is recommending the reenactment of a version of Megan’s Law that was in place before the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) replaced it 2012. This new version of Megan’s Law would apply to those offenders to whom SORNA applied retroactively, meaning that their registration crimes were committed before December 20, 2012.

      Under this proposal some offenders would ultimately come off the registry, but the numbers would pale in comparison to the possible 10,000 who could ultimately be removed from the registry should no legislative action be taken immediately.

      Now – this is the recommendation to make a New Megan’s Law to cover some pre-SORNA SO’s – only problem is THAT TOO WOULD BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY – And we are right back at what the MUNIZ decision is all about…….
      To make a new Megan’s Law just for Pre-SORNA people would make a bigger mess. . . . . .
      Every Pre- SORNA SO will say wait a minute ya. . . . . . Didn’t we just get from under SORNA of 20 December 2012? Now we will fight to get from under any new Magan’s Law fix of 2017 that would not apply to us neither. . .

      It too would violate due process procedural and substance – Ex Post Facto – Equal protections rights of all getting relief from MUNIZ decision- and the web site would violate reputation laws of PA Constitution Article 1 Section 1 and 11 and section 17 and section 9 . . . MAKING A NEW MEGAN’s LAW TO FIT SOME PRE-SORNA PEOPLE UNDER – JUST WOULD NOT WORK AT ALL – It too would be unfair some pre SORNA get relief others get a New Megan’s Law to be under. . . . . . How does that sound? Dumb of what? ……….. Terry Brunson

      • #23574 Reply

        @ Terry
        Yea sounds like the same thing as SORNA to me. I am not thinking SCOTUS OR PA SUPREME COURT WOULD allow that to happen swing as to that they shot down the Freeds appeal. At least I hope not.

        • #23623 Reply
          terry brunson

          Brian I want to make a public apology to you – you may not have felt disrespected- by my excited tone to get you to understand this MUNIZ – decision and how it helps you. But I felt I was out of line talking down to you. . . . It was not my intention to insult your intelligence – You are my brother in this fight and I just wanted to get every bit of information to you – Please Please accept my over step in calling your name out in this public forum. I am on your side. . . . . I have been brought to understand that we all are in a learning process here. . . I am so proud of you and others that are taking a personal look at reality on how to lift these chains of oppression PS and unfair SORNA rules has put om you.

          You may not have felt that I was talking down to you – but as I re-read my post to you in particular . . . . . I felt I was wrong in the way I typed my words to you.

          YOU DO understand the issues clear – I was only trying to over simplify the issues to connect the dots to push emphasis to understanding. That may have seem arrogant to talk with confidence and boldness as I did to you.

          I don’t know you – personally; but you are a real person in this fight and my team mate – that I have much respect for in the utmost to the highest –

          Brain much love to you and yours on this path to VICTORY. terry brunson

          • #23643 Reply

            @Terry Brunson
            No you are fine Terry I don’t take any offense to anything you had or have to say, everything you said that I didn’t understand was explained in terms that helped me to understand very clearly, I personally needed to hear every bit of what you had to say because there was a lot of information I needed better clarification on and no I’m not offended at all.

          • #23658 Reply

            …after reading all posts (as I try to always do before posting)…
            @Just the Logic
            Thank you for standing up to what you felt was/could have been insulting to someone else. I am glad that was not the case for we are in this together (can not say that enough!) and constantly learning.

            @terry brunson @Brian
            …just wanted to congratulate you both! It takes a mature person to offer an apology when they find themselves wrong and an equally mature person to accept it.

            I am glad we have respect for each other (all things considered). Whether we like it or not, if we are here (by choice or otherwise), we are family!


        • #23773 Reply

          If the registry only had public information such as your name, picture, and what you were convicted of, I think they would be apply to apply that retroactively because all the information is already public…. There would defiantly be a fight, I just don’t know if we would win in.

    • #23668 Reply

      …I have not posted in a few days, but have chosen not to post as I/we wait for October 19 or 17 or whatever it keeps changing to for the SCOTUS to accept or deny AG Freed appeal/Writ of Certiorari. Now I keep hearing/reading that there is a “stay” issued (by the PA Supreme Court, if I understood correctly) so, now there is more time to wait (6 weeks from what I hear) while these supposed servants, but definitely violators of the Constitution and Oath of Office (therefore, criminals of the highest order) are afforded time for some “legislative fix” that may affect many if not all of the supposed 4,500 to 10,000 RSO’s that should have been given relief upon the conclusion of our own State Supreme Court and that of 5 other States when “they” had no problems making everything retroactive and immediate and there is no major march known or planned on Capitol Hill on this issue or legal proceeding (lawsuits) against the State of PA and every official violating the law and our rights? (Rhetorical question! I get it, it would “slow” down the process of this victory under Muñiz “further”) And we are supposed to wait!!!…more???

      …plus there have been people calling the PSP (the PA body of law enforcement competent for some things and not others) and have gotten nothing, but run around and empty answers to what they know is not only morally, ethically right, but also lawfully right. Add to that all this hearsay about PSP taking 12-18 months to look into removing any RSO’s (if any at all) and that we not even get letters on this issue until “sometime 2018” with specific months being spoken of by Officials and RSO’s all over the place!!! …As in nobody knows or seems to care!!! …and then some wonder why many lose sight of greener pastures or “hope” in this Country/World’s system of treating Humans (at least the peaceful ones) and have no desire to connect further with life. To those that feel that way, I do not condone and will not applaud harm to anyone, ever, period! But I understand you! For almost 15 years, I understand you!

      And this is only a fight at State level for our right to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” as residents of PA. If we leave PA to do that elsewhere we are subject to another State’s SORNA laws because apparently (and clearly to me) nothing is uniform and/or consistent. How is that OK? …and add to that the “International Megan’s Law” not many seem to talk about or be even aware of brewing in “Countries near you” and being worked on as part of the Master Plan of control over our lives, what we do, where we do it, who we do it with and ultimately, over people’s lives with criminal record or not! Wake up!!! (to those that are not yet, awaken). RSO’s are subject to notifications & requirements to that as well! …somehow!!! How many of you know what the requirements are currently with overseas travel? Passports? Do you care?

      Again, as I keep asking for…where are the Pro Bono “free” lawyers, the Law Scholars, Professors of Constitution and Human Rights Advocates at en masse on these issues??? (NARSOL excluded)

      I am sorry to say, but it can not just be NARSOL!

      • #23686 Reply

        I am having a problem locating any information anywhere, exactly what web pages or news posts is all this stuff at ? I look on the SCOTUS BLOG and nothing makes any sense I guess I don’t know what direction to go in, I always seam to have that problem.

        • #23712 Reply
          terry brunson

          Brain I put a copy of a Madamus Writ and a certificate of service and a Nunc Pro Tunc motion Nunc Pro Tunc means give me now for then my rights. When the PASC rule on Muniz it was then the law of the Land – But law people namely PSP and AG’s want to delay the victory with added filings that takes time and delays justice – – –

          Muniz is going to be hard to overcome for PA. the PASC deal all a check up from the neck up on State Constitution rights that we that are pre SORNA must name and claim. . . .

          You can wait the victory will comw- But a Writ of Mandamus pro -se meaning filing your self .

          The Writ must be in the Closest Commonwealth appeal court to you. . . . . . . .

          The one I am filing with is in Harrisburg – I posted a dYI mandamus on this page and the monitors did not let it through to all…. That was the pro Bono free writ of Mandamus. . . . . . . . My email is for anyone that desires the writ of Mandamus. . . . to file.

          It is $65.50 for court cost or a Informa Paupus affidavit of indentgecy meaning you have no money to pay the court. . Mandamus is the way around the wait. It is going to take 10 to 18 months to move the PSP to start removing names.

          A writ of Mandamus will take as fast as you get get it before a commonwealth judge – Muniz came through that court. they know the real deal on all the time delay tactics going on to find a legal begal to give a legislative fix- that will not help them – that too would be Ex Post Facto if they pass a new Megan’s Law in 2017 and your offense date was before that – There is no way to apply that New Megan’s law to you. . . . . That is what MUNIZ is all about. . . . .
          I can email the writ to anyone that desires it with all the info where to file and how many copies to send to the court.

          Commonwealth court rule 761(a)(1) gives the commonwealth court jurisdiction over registration matters because there is not procedure in the PSP to follow to appeal to. The Commonwealth court Civil Division is the answer if you want relief of Megan’s Law time waiting game. . . it will save you the run around. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . terry brunson

          • #23733 Reply
            Robin Vander Wall
            Robin Vander Wall

            Terry, you’ve probably noticed that a couple of your posts were either rejected or deleted. If they are excessively long, they will be rejected. But, more importantly, you are getting awfully darn close to the practice of law here. And NARSOL is a bit uncomfortable providing a forum for you to get yourself into a jam. So, please make sure that you are careful not to “counsel” people what to do (in such precise, legal terms) in a public forum. That could come back at you if someone up there in your neck of the woods wants to be an ass. My advice would be to summarize your ideas in broad strokes and ask for people to contact you in private if they would like more detailed information. Just friendly advice.

          • #23753 Reply

            Please help understand where the fire is? I am a RSO who was put on before 12/20/2012 so the Commonwealth vs Muniz and the Commonwealth vs Neiman decision apply to me personally, yet I fail to see where the fire is. Why can’t we wait 6-12 months? Most of us, not all, only report every 12 months anyway.
            You have to understand these cases are not just about us (those who were put on BEFORE 12/20/2017) These cases set the stage for the ultimate fight: The very existence of the registry.

            I truly believe within the next 3-5 years there will not be a Megans Law registry, or if there is it won’t be public.
            That is the key sticking point in my mind. If the registry was for Law enforcement only, I couldn’t see how we could challenge the registry. This is why in NY the registry is NOT public. Only Law enforcement can access it. You have every right to go down to the police station and asks, but who is going to do that? No one unless you pissed someone off…..

          • #23778 Reply
            terry brunson

            @chuck –
            There is no fire – I am only showing options that read in the tone of thoses asking questions like how long do I have to wait for justice to come to my door – I hear a need and I just offer a fill – but I do add that waiting this out is the least expensive way- the door on Pa. public SO’s registry is about to cave in and fall off the hinge.

            Some may not know that they can get ahead of the rush – a docket wait of 6 to 12 months – on the high courts to get the reviews in front of them – – – –

            Then – the PSP wants 8- to 18 months to review their records to identify all pre- SORNA people. . . . . . And there is the slowing the feet on that. . . . . . on 12 September 2017 PSP layed out their time frame to remove pre-SORNA people. PSP spoke in man hours time and so forth. . . . . . JW Whenthworth has a phrase- “IT’S MY MONEY AND I WANT IT NOW!”

            There is a Writ called a NUNC PRO TUNC that one can file pro se them selves in a Commonwealth Court – it would be a Writ of Mandamus for injunction relief it is free to call the Pa. Commonwealth court clerk MICHAEL F. KRIMMEL, CHIEF CLERK @ 717-255-1650 and ask the hard question of filing in that court Pro-se. . .

            They cannot practice law and tell you all the steps but they will help a person get to the right Judge on this issue.

            There is now a greater unfolding of rights that OS’s are coming to understand. . . . . . I do 100% agree with you chuck that the wheels of Justice to roll slow and time wait is part of the process – BUT SOME ARE ASKING THE HOW LONG- i THINK IT JUST MAY BE A RHETORICAL QUESTION. . . of being human on wanting to know when – How long – they are going to get to the victory – but there is also a option to jump to the know and clear up the question to how long. . . Knowledge dispels fear – Knowing builds assurance and gives hope in knowing they can get to the victory line faster – in spite of delay.

      • #23699 Reply
        terry brunson

        I am filing a Writ of Mandamus in the Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg 9 a.m. 11 Oct 2017. against the PSP . I will tell you the outcome. Muniz is the Law in Pa. if you don’t want to wait for the PSP to do the right thing- do as I file pro se Mandamus Writ under State’s rights of the PA Constitution and comity MUNIZ . You have to file the Mandamus in Harrisburg Pa. The filling fee is 65.50 or you can proceed In Forma Paupus if you don’t have the $65.50 to pay the commonwealth court.

        • #23717 Reply
          terry brunson

          When I say you have to file in Harrisburg – you can by mail or e filing too.
          Chief Clerk office of
          Michael F. Krimmel
          601 Commonwealth Ave.
          Suite 2100
          P.O. Box 69185
          Harrisburg, Pa. 17106

          It is a Write of Mandamus for injunction relief form Megam’s law retroactive harms
          Commonwealth Court rule 761(a)(1) jurisdiction of RSO”s appeal.
          you file they will help you through the maze

        • #23746 Reply

          Wasting your time brother. The Pa Supreme Court issued a stay that doesn’t expire until October 17th.

          Be patient guys. I am in the same boat but I don’t understand why you guys act like you must be off within the next 39 seconds or you will die.
          A lower court cannot order PSP to do something that is NOT the law of the land YET. Not while there is a stay in force at least

          • #23766 Reply
            terry brunson

            Chuck – – – – you R right about the 17 Oct 2017 stay date- See my post of September 30 2017) That is why I waited until now to file mandamus Pro-se- I am in Philadelphia if I mail the writ on the 11th Wed. It will get to the Harrisburg post office in three day – will be there Friday – Court Clerk said by phone that they will not file dated it until 16th and it will take time for the docket to develop. The 90 day stay will have been lifted – for the this so called legislative fix – that will be newer than SORNA’s date of 20 December 2012 –

            Any so called legislative fix will still be ex Post Facto – retroactive . . . . . . . . and cannot apply to offenses pre- whatever date they roll out this new version of Megan’s law V.

            State Constitution right are at times gives greater protection of rights. The lone PASC JUSTICE MUNDY GAVE THIS CONCURRING STATEMENT:

            “Although I disagree with Muniz’s conclusions, they are now the law of this Commonwealth. As such, they must be applied in a meaningful way. No sensible reading of Muniz would permit the Commonwealth Court’s contrary judgment to stand. I therefore join the Court’s order in this case, because it correctly applies Muniz and reverses the Commonwealth Court’s order in this regard.”

            I knew there was a 90 day stay – to give the Pa. legislatures time to put together a some kind of fix. . . . . but the rule for a stay is normally 30 days. . . . . . . . Freed has also Petitioned the SCOTUS for Writ Certiorari that is also a 90 wait to file it within the 90 days. on the 91st day jurisdiction remands back to the PASC. . . . . . Then the PSP will be give direction to remove names from the registry.

            Freed’s appeal for review may be a hold up on finality of Muniz – but there is an open door only on the question of U.S. Constitution federal matters that the SCOTUS may never accept- less than 1% of Petitions of Writs of Certiorari are accepted for review. . . . That is a shoot in the dark to just add time on the wait.

            I know that it will take time, but the way the PASC performed this Muniz decision was masterful. . . . . They established finality on State Constution rights up front where there would no need to be a remand back to them on State Constitution questions of law. They cover all State right questions. The SCOTUS cannot move that – Just on that alone seals Muniz-

            I bank on the SCOTUS to deny Freed’s Petition for Writ Certiorari like it did to Ohio – Alaska – Maryland – Indiana – Michigan – and Next Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . Sorry if I speak so boldly with assurance of that – it is not arrogance it is all through hours in the prison Law Libray and filling writs for fellow prisoners in TEXAS –

            Pa. gives greater rights – I was shocked when Muniz decision was 5 to 1 that was strange to me. Most Judges don’t see the punitive side of SORNA and the Ex Post Facto issues of old Law New Law concept. They like one size fits all. WoW it was an eye opener to behold that. . . . . . . But this is how I know that the SCOTUS will not let SORNA reach it’s chambers. . .

            Just reason to ask yourself – Why did Texas never accepted to comply with SORNA – The people of Texas knew something. They that old law new law concepts right. They know what Ex post Facto rules look like. Other state Law makers are slow to understand the real Constitutional concerns with SORNA – – – But they will catch up soon and a new light on Justice is shining forth today. . . . . You will see in your day a death of SO’s Registration soon all over. . . . . . The SCOTUS is waiting for just the right time to correct this mess. . . . . now only 6 state are awaking – more will follow as each state Supreme court sees writs and arguments on true justice . . . . . . The North Caroline Face Book case was another hope that the SCOTUS is waiting in the wins to accept the right state to speak for the whole nation. . . . . . . Megan’s Law is mostly controlled and regulated by the States – the AWA tried for a Nationa data base but failed SORNA was as close as they could get to a national registry. . . . And still there is no standardize scale yet. . . . . The SO’s registry helps one one stay safe it is a waste of time and effort of busy work to disrupt people’s lives with more and more restrictions based on ghost facts and prejudices.

        • #23771 Reply

          From what I have read, there is seven elements one has to put forth in their edit. There are described in the following:
          The plaintiff shall set forth in the complaint:

          (1) the name and description of the plaintiff and defendant;

          (2) the facts upon which plaintiff relies for the relief sought;

          (3) the act or duty the defendant is required to perform and the refusal to perform it;

          (4) the interest of the plaintiff in the result;

          (5) the damages, if any;

          (6) the want of any other adequate remedy at law;

          (7) a prayer for the entry of a judgment against the defendant commanding that the defendant perform the act or duty required to be performed and for damages, if any, and costs.

          As you can seee in number 3 one would have to show how the PSP has refused to comply with the decision in Commonwealth vs Muniz. How can you show that when the section HAS NOT become law yet. The PSP cannot break the law. Untill Pa has exhausted ALL of their Appeals there is NO requirement to remove anyone from anywhere.

          I would love to here your thoughts

          • #23893 Reply
            terry brunson

            @ chuck
            As you can see in number 3 one would have to show how the PSP has refused to comply with the decision in Commonwealth vs Muniz. How can you show that when the section HAS NOT become law yet. The PSP cannot break the law. Until PA has exhausted ALL of its Appeals,  there is NO requirement to remove anyone from anywhere.

            I would love to hear your thoughts.

          • #24224 Reply
            terry brunson

            @ Chuck
            The legal mindedness of how the PASC handed down Muniz was masterful – There was a 5 to 1 decision with Justice Mundy not voting: The question on the State Constitution had finality in which that needs no remand review on State rights under the Pa. Const.

            An appeal to the SCOTUS by Cert. is not part of the appeal process. . . It is like an interlocutory appeal. However; the question was on the Federal U.S. Constitution. . . . . That is what is being appealed to have a review on. . . The federal issue should not stop state enforcement of MUNIZ –

            “Although I disagree with Muniz’s conclusions, they are now the law of this Commonwealth. As such, they must be applied in a meaningful way. No sensible reading of Muniz would permit the Commonwealth Court’s contrary judgment to stand. I therefore join the Court’s order in this case, because it correctly applies Muniz and reverses the Commonwealth Court’s order in this regard.”

            On 19 July 2017 Muniz on the State issues was final – No matter what the SCOTUS demands on the federal question. Justice Mundy said – “MUNIZ IS THE LAW OF THE LAND IN PA. and must be applied in a meaningful way. . .

            And no commonwealth court should give contrary judgement to it. . The PSP on the state issue is applying SORNA
            in a retroactive way to pre-SORNA people, They are breaking the Law. Oct 19, 2017 is the date to roll out a legislative fix which too will be applied in a retroactive way.. . . going again against the MUNIZ decision of 19 July 2017. . . . And one more note. At SORNA date – all Pa. Megan’s laws were expired – – by SORNA. . . What is there to revert back to? All rules of Megan’s Law I , I I, and I I I and dead. . . . . .

        • #24457 Reply

          thanks for all the input terry, its been very helpful for me. in regards to the 19th, how soon do ya possibly think we should know about the us, supreme court decision once they make the decision, ?

        • #24795 Reply
          Who removes from list

          @terrybrunson – my husband has an attorney and he is filing a writ for mandamus to his lowet court sentence where his conviction for pre sorna originated out of. How are you making out?

    • #23764 Reply

      @terry brunson @Chuck
      Thank you both for trying to keep us all informed! It is challenging to decide what avenues to take on an uncertain road of random paths to outcomes.

      @Robin Keymaster
      I admire your genuine good heart to want to keep people safe of undue harm (specially the legal kind!)
      I know it must be tough for moderators to read , review, research, select and authorize posts on a public forum while still keeping an open platform with the Constitutional rights afforded to each citizen. My hat off to the service all of you perform that often does not get thanked so; Thanks!

      …I hope my reply to your question(s) or the AWA NARSOL article helps.

      Good night to everyone! (having a hard time falling asleep)

      • #23811 Reply

        @ Anonymous
        Thank you for the information that lead me in the correct direction very much appreciate that. Hopefully we will get some good news on the 17th then.

        @ Terry Brunson
        I think I’m going to hold off on filing anything to the psp. Thank you for all of your very helpful information as well.

        Everyone just think positive and the outcome will most likely be a positive outcome that’s my experience anyway.

    • #23816 Reply

      (…about my previous post to you and to anyone) You are welcome! 🙂

      Good afternoon to everyone!
      I read this article and thought others would find it informative. This Professor is “Rational” about the reality confronting RSO’s and the laws that bind everyone involved. Please, look to the right side (currently) of the Website/Blog. Notice the amount of bills introduced that are fear mongering! Great way to score political points with voters huh! Do all these public servants really care for public safety and the lives of all…yes, all? I wonder…(but do know that many would say and always think that all convicted of any crime should not be integrated or permitted with “regular/law abiding” society. Yeap, because they do not make mistakes! (or get caught, or tricked, or set-up, or blackmailed; They are just perfect).
      Thank you NARSOL for the article!

      Professor Catherine Carpenter: The unconstitutionality of sex offense laws

    • #23898 Reply

      In case anyone is wondering what the individual that caused harm to Megan Kanka is up to. This person was the main reason used to green-light/create the registry!

      –I am re-posting this from another NARSOL article’s comment section because, I thought others would find it helpful & informative–

      AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

      Thank you for your sharing of gun crime registry news!

      Here take a look:
      “Adam John Walsh (November 14, 1974 – July 27, 1981) was an American boy who was abducted from a Sears department store at the Hollywood Mall in Hollywood, Florida, on July 27, 1981. His severed head was found two weeks later in a drainage canal alongside Florida’s Turnpike in rural St. Lucie County, Florida. His death earned national publicity. His story was made into the 1983 television film Adam, seen by 38 million people in its original airing.[2] His father, John Walsh, became an advocate for victims of violent crimes and was the host of the television program America’s Most Wanted.[3]

      Convicted serial killer Ottis Toole confessed to Adam’s murder, but was never convicted for this specific crime due to loss of evidence and a recanted confession. Toole died in prison of liver failure on September 15, 1996.[4] Although no new evidence has come forth, on December 16, 2008, police announced that the Walsh case was closed as they were satisfied that Toole was the murderer.”

      For years I have known that the supposed killer was not even a “convicted sex offender”, but that did not stop John Walsh from going on a vendetta against RSO’s, starting TV Shows racking up fortunes while becoming a household name synonymous with “tough on predators”. Sadly but also Ironically…
      “On the afternoon of July 27, 1981, Revé, Adam’s mother, took him shopping with her to the Hollywood (“Sears”) Mall in Hollywood, Florida (26°00′46″N 80°10′30″W). They went together to the Sears store and entered via the north entrance.[5] Revé intended to inquire about a lamp which was on sale, and left Adam at a kiosk with Atari 2600 video games on display where several other boys were taking turns playing games. Revé completed her business in the lamp department at approximately 12:15 pm.[5][6] She said that she returned to find that Adam and the other boys had disappeared. A store manager informed her that a scuffle had broken out over whose turn it was at the kiosk and a security guard demanded that they leave the store. The security guard asked the older ones if their parents were there, and they said that they were not.[7] It was later conjectured by Adam’s parents that he was too shy to speak to the security guard, who presumed that he was in the company of the other boys, and as such the security guard made him leave by the same door that they did (which was the Sears west entrance). His parents believe that after the other boys dispersed, Adam was left alone outside the store, at an exit unfamiliar to him.[7][8] Meanwhile, unable to find Adam in the toy department, Revé had Adam paged over the Sears public address system and continued to look for him throughout the store. She by coincidence ran into Adam’s grandmother Jean inside the store, who helped her search for her son. After more than 90 minutes of fruitless searching and public address pages which failed to turn up Adam, she called the Hollywood Police at 1:55 pm.[5]”
      …where the parents ever charge with negligence on their part? Child endangerment? Where they criticized by the masses as unfit to be parents?

      Also, did you know that John Walsh (Adam’s celebrity dad) was dating Adam’s mother (John’s wife) while she was under age?…
      “In his book Tears of Rage, Walsh openly admits being in a relationship with 16-year-old Revé when Walsh was in his early 20s and aware of the age of consent being 17 in New York.[20] Critics of Adam Walsh Act have pointed out that, had he been convicted, Walsh himself would be subject to sex offender registration under the law which he aggressively promoted.”
      …huh, was he ever arrested for it? No. I even know of and seen a video that was circulating years ago where someone had confronted/interviewed him about him (John Walsh) dating an underage girl (which later became his wife, I am aware of this!) and he responded very cocky about it!
      …here I found said video!

      How about his open views…(never mind what is in his head; I do not even want to know!) about RSO’s…
      “John Walsh generated a great deal of controversy during a summer press tour in 2006 when he stated to the media he jokingly told senators to implant “exploding” chips in the anuses of sex offenders. He stated, “I said implant it in their anus and if they go outside the radius, explode it, that would send a big message.” Walsh stated this was a “joke,” but that “nobody thought it was funny.”[17] Walsh later suggested implanting GPS chips in such criminals.[18]

      John Walsh also faced criticism when he advised women to never hire a male babysitter, which was seen as a blatantly sexist remark. “It’s not a witch hunt,” he said. “It’s all about minimizing risks. What dog is more likely to bite and hurt you? A Doberman, not a poodle. Who’s more likely to molest a child? A male.”[19]”
      …but that is “somehow, thru connection I guess” not considered a threat nor, is it considered intent to harm, conspiracy to harm, intent to conspire to commit harm or mentally unstable! (after all, he did loose a loved one, and much closer to his mind Adam, his son)

      And last, but not least read this:
      Some critics accuse Walsh of creating predator panic by using his publicity.[21] Walsh was heard by Congress on February 2, 1983, where he gave an unsourced claim of 50,000 abducted and 1.5 million missing children annually. He testified that the U.S. is “littered with mutilated, decapitated, raped, strangled children”,[22] when in fact, later Department of Justice study from 1999 found only 115 incidences of stereotypical kidnappings perpetrated by strangers, of which about 50 resulted in death or child not being found.[23] Critics claim that Adam Walsh Child Resource Center, which started without funding in 1981, generated 1.5 million dollars annually following his testimony before the Congress.[22] In fiscal year ending 2015, Walsh’s private charity, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, received income from the following sources:

      Contributions, Gifts & Grants $7,810,614
      Federated Campaigns $157,239
      Fundraising Events $2,257,837
      Government Grants $31,886,730

      for a total of $42,112,420. Compensation of the CEO, John Ryan, was $442,924 or over 1% of expenses. [24]

      …but no charges of deceit, perjury or intent to commit such, charges for creating a public panic or contributing to Inducing panic (when a person causes the evacuation of any public place, or otherwise cause serious public inconvenience or alarm) nor was his private charity investigated (to the best of public knowledge).

      “I saw the typo but it is still the 17th. I added it up right just made a typo writing it out.”
      …we all make mistakes! (Lol in sympathy)

      …you are correct in your assessment! Any other crime, even murder (non-sexually related) is more easily overlooked and/or forgiven than sexually related crimes or “sex offenders” as we are labeled. People have been conditioned to associate sex offenses as automatic child molesters, rapist and sickos without remorse and always waiting and ready to strike. That perception could not be further from the truth, but nobody cares to give a RSO a chance. I do not fret for their ignorance as much as for their choice to stay ignorant.

      Also; You are welcome! I am glad to know that “my time” is appreciated. 🙂

      (I should have gone to school and/or gotten a job to be a researcher! …If only I would have known the internet would exist…I also would have bought Google IPO shares)

      Good night to everyone! I refuse to be on very late tonight.

    • #23925 Reply

      Yeap! All this attention is surely not going to help our case/cause/arguments… Please, be prepared (if you aren’t already) to accept the reality that this registry(ies) ploy to keep people in shackles (physical & mental, maybe even spiritual) by utilizing fear mongering as an excuse or reason will never go away! It is clearly (to me at least) that it is part of the ultimate plan for total control of the populace.
      ***Save it! I know, I already have my tin foil hat on in place***

      …and a lot more news stuff/garbage at a Local, State, Federal level and International too if you care to research it! It is…just…overwhelming! 🙁 Oh well, right!!?

      (please forgive me, just not a positive day for me with all these “sexual scandals’ ” news and more possible War with World tensions so high…we humans just can not seem to get along anywhere)

      Anyhow regardless of my tough day, I wish you all an Outstanding day! 🙂
      …and thank you NARSOL for what you do for me and many by presenting the truth and fighting for the rights (Constitutional and otherwise) of all! 🙂

    • #24454 Reply

      Here, another one out of the many happening somewhere (reported or not) everyday in every State & territories.

      NYPD Cop Exposed Himself To Pre-Teen Girls, Police Say

      …but…but…but… They (law enforcement officers, politicians, judges) wouldn’t do that!
      *looks the other way*

    • #24477 Reply

      I guess no word on SCOTUS?

      • #24486 Reply

        …sadly, Not that I am aware of.

        • #24813 Reply
          terry brunson

          @ Brain

          You can make the process move faster by filing a Writ of mandamus for injunction relief against the PSP and thiss will go much faster.

          It has to be filed in Harrisburg in the Commonwealth Court

          That will take the docket run about 45 days to set a hearing to be heard on the issues.

          All you must do is show that you are a pre-SORNA SO by affidavit, and you desire to comidy rights under Muniz and the Pa. constitution Art 1 Sections 1, 11, 9, and 17 Please don’t mention the U S Constitution Art. 1 Section 10 because that is what Freed is appealing on and you would be denied to be heard because the issue on the federal U S Constitution needs a remand review by the SCOTUS and that what Freed’s Cert appeal is about – Just claim state rights only in the Writ of Mandamus

          • #24822 Reply

            Ok sense the SCOTUS hasn’t made any judgement on Muniz how would a write or right of mandimes work sense there hasn’t been a ruling from SCOTUS yet only Pa? I supose when and God willing when SCOTUS denyes F’s case then I can see a mandimis being filed but in my mind this makes no sense, in my mind you would be waisitng your time attempting to get relief before he fact, buuuut if they do decide in our favor does it just move ones whome filed to the front of the line for relief?

          • #24833 Reply

            My thoughts exactly.
            The whole reason a stay was granted, is because SCOTUS could reverse PA Supreme Court’s ruling. If PSP starts acting on that ruling now and SCOTUS reverses it later, imagine the chaos that would create.
            Also,because there ia a stay, the law is still exactly the same. Nothing has changed. There are no grounds to file a writ to force PSP to comply with a change that hasn’t happened yet.
            An attorney might gladly take the money and file the writ, but it won’t go anywhere, at least not until after SCOTUS denies or decides this case, but by then, it might not even be necessary.

            *** I am not an attorney. Nothing I say should be taken as legal advice. I could very well be wrong in my speculations ***

          • #24865 Reply

            THANK YOU FRED,
            You and I seem to be the only ones here not freaking out!!! Come on guys, we will know in 3-4 months whether or not SCOTUS wants to hear from the US GOV. Considering the Michigan Snyder vs Die case is so similar, I can’t see the need for the US GOV to weigh in again, but we will see!!

            Another 4 months isn’t going to kill you guys. It isn’t like there is a sniper team out there going from address to address shooting people. Don’t forget in Pa, if something harassed you or your family simply because you are on the registry that is a Hate Crime.

          • #24866 Reply
            terry brunson

            Less than 1 % of Petitions for Writ of Cert are accepted at SCOTUS. . . . . .
            On the Muniz issue of restroactive application on pre SORMA – First up was Alaska – was denied Next Ohio was Denied Next Maryland – was denied- next Indiana- was denied. Then Michigan 2 Oct 2017 Hey they too were denied- Not Pa. Muniz is at the plate – – – – – – – It Too Will be denied!!!!!
            I been fighting this issues on expost Facto along time- – – – – I am not a lawyer and I don’t offer legal advice – – – I just been in the fight so long I know just as much. . . . . . Muniz has killed the Megan’s law in Pa. . . . The PASC gave pa 90 days to come up with a legislative fix. . . . . . . guest what yall. . . None came the deadline was 19 October 2017 The Judicial Committee met with the PSP and Freed to ask what to do – – Freed said – a legislative fix is needed.

            They got to gether and came to a dead in the SORNA expired all the old Megan’s Laws in Pa. to revert back to. If they make a new Megan’s Law it will be ex Post Facto if it is applied to pre SORNA people (that is what MUNIZ is all about.)

          • #24918 Reply
            terry brunson

            If the Stay for Muniz is in effect, it is obviously only in effect for the Federal. All these cases have came out after the STAT OF SEPT 5 2017. SOME POWER HOUSE CASES TOO!

            We will see next week how many more cases come through decided using Muniz, during this stay.

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

          • #24863 Reply
            terry brunson

            @ Brian
            I know it don’t make sense because freed appealed and a stay was issued – That stay and Freed’s Cert appeal to the SCOTUS is on a single issue of U.S. Constitution Claim in Muniz on ARTICLE 1 Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution.

            Muniz case needs a remand only on the Federal issue – The State issues are final. The Highest court in pa. has issued their opinion. If a petitioner makes a claim to state rights only the Commonwealth court in Harrisburg will issue a ruling under state rights. The stay on the Muniz case is on the federal issues. State issue is done.

            I got my filed copy Writ of Mandamus back and the commonwealth court clerk sent me a letter saying my mandamus is going on the docket for a hearing . my case number is 463 MD 2017. it can be looked up I don’t mind.

            The court sent me a Court’s Web Portal to file my brief in support of the complain against the PSP for waiting for total completion of Muniz on the federal issue.

            I am sure that Freed’s Cert to the SCOTUS will be denied – less than 1 % make it to the SCOTUS on Cert Appeals. Freed is buying time for the PSP to do nothing. . . .

            Chuck is right about the be still and wait – the real battle has been won – But a mandamus only gives a head start. The PSP is not going to just let 10,000 SO go without a fight. . . . . Muniz put SO in a wonderful position to appeal or waint it out. . . I am one that will test the waters of the Mandamus. . . . . . . The stay on Muniz don’t effect the state right change if you do not metion in your Mandamus anything about you U.S. Constitution rights on Ex Post Facto Art. 1 Sec 10 federal rule on state part under federal challenge. . . . I know it seem to not make sense how one can Mandamus when a stay is in place – – – – – – A Mandamus is a relief Writ – Compelling a state agency like the PSP to follow the law. You may ask What Law? Muniz? It is not final yet. But it is on the State Level. If in the Mandamus you state on the state claim – The State Commonwealth court will hear you- – – – and give you a changes to say your peace – – – – – – If the stay on Muniz was so enforce I would not have gotten a docket Number 463 MD 2017. I would have been told to wait until Muniz is finished. . . Not the case. . . . The great thing is that we all will get to the finish line. . . . I just decided to hop on the fire truck to get to the issue quicker. . . . .

          • #24880 Reply

            The docket number was assigned by a clerk, who is responsible for putting your petition on the court’s docket. That clerk is not responsible for determining if you have a case or if any stays will interfere with a judgement. A judge has not seen your petition yet.

            PSP isn’t what you should be worried about complying with a final ruling. PA’s state legislators must rewrite the law so that it complies with the ruling, until then PSP will continue enforcing the law in the books.

            Take the Snyder case for example, if you think all those registrants are now free, you are mistaken. As far as I know, not a single one has been removed yet as they wait for Michigan state legislators and ACLU to work out and agree on what these changes will be and who will be affected by them. Only when the new law is passed will Michigan State Police begin complying and removing affected registrants.

            If you are going to pressure anyone into complying after this case is denied or decided, PA state legislators is good place to start, and people who specialize in this sort of thing are already preparing for that.

          • #24917 Reply
            terry brunson

            The Muniz case was filed October 13, 2017
            A Response is being demanded by 16 November 2017
            under SCOTUS Docket:

            No. 17-575
            Title: Pennsylvania, Petitioner
            Jose M. Muniz
            Docketed: October 17, 2017
            Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District
            Case Numbers: (a7 MAP 2016)
            Decision Date: July 19, 2017

            Oct 13 2017 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 16, 2017)

          • #24919 Reply
            terry brunson

            The SCOTUS will never accept Muniz – Freed’s Cert petition will be denied on docket call Just like Synder of Michigan 2 Oct 2017

            The stay the the PASC issued is only on the Federal question on U.S. Constitution Article 1 Section 10 – But the state rights issue is final final final. The Stay on State rights and the stay on Federal rights are not the same. . . . . .

            If the Stay for Muniz is in effect, it is obviously only in effect for the Federal. All these cases have came out after the STAY OF SEPT 5 2017. SOME POWER HOUSE CASES TOO!

            We will see next week how many more cases come through decided using Muniz, during this stay.

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

   Muniz 2017%22

          • #24950 Reply

            It’s is going to be interesting to see what non punitive scheme the General Assembly comes up with to keep everyone on a registry.

            The registry is on its last gasp and it won’t be long before the whole registry will be found unconstitutional. Just have to bide our time until then.
            I think Pa needs to create a process that allows people to remove their criminal convictions once 10-20 years have passed. Obviously, the more serious the crime, the longer you have to be crime free.
            It is in the interest of the offender AND society to allow the offender to become a productive memeber of society. I know way to many people who can’t make more than 10-12/hr becuase 30 years ago they wrote a bad check.
            In order to fully heal, you need to be able to rebuild.

          • #24954 Reply
            terry brunson

            @ Chuck

            Hey- Did you get to go to SCOTUS docket section to see that Freed Cert was Docketed 13 Oct 2017 and a response requirement of November 16th 2017

            Chuck I was so supersized to see a demand response so quick
            It seem to me that the SCOTUS is not going to give Freed a chance to be heard. . . I see the hand writing on the wall for the PSP and AG of Pa. Pa to STOP the fight against the Law they are to be up holding.

            MUNIZ has taken the wind of of the PSP the AG and not the 90 days the PASC gave for a legislative fix is over and they came up with no fix because, it cannot reach back to cover people that MUNIZ helps. . . . . .

            Any New Megan’s Laws would have to always meet MUNIZ – retroactive application denials.

            The Pa. legislatures are not up for no fix. . . . . . They too business dealing with some new tax code in Pa.

            Chuck you are right about taking time to see the dust clear on the MUNIZ decision. It is settling now. There was a duel stay put on MUNIZ 90 days for State to come up with a legislative fix – (They never met to figure it out) and that Stay was only to be in effect until 19 October 2017 0 No Pa. court was to accept any Muniz decision filings until after that date.

            Then there is a stay that on the federal issue on Freed’s cert – that stay on federal issue will not stop state claims on mandamus from going forward to the commonwealth Courts of Pa. under R. A. P. rule 741(a)(1) jurisdiction on state rights separate from federal rights on interlocutory appeals. A Cert petition to the SCOTUS is such. . .

            I never did understand how state rights give more protection to the people when we have a Supreme Clause in the U.S. Constitution that it is the Law of the Law.

          • #24989 Reply

            The US Constitution says here are the minimum rights given to US Citizens. The Pa Constitution says in addition to what the US Constution gives you, we also grant you these rights. The US Constitution sets the minimum standard. If states want to go beyond it, so be it but they must at least meet the minimum the US Constution sets out. I think it is amazing that the US Constution did not apply to defendants charged by the state until the 14th amendment.
            I believe with every fiber of my being that Pa will not be able to overcome the Snyder vs Doe denial. That was SCOTUS chance to reaffirm 2003 Smith vs Doe and they refused to do so. 3 of the current justices were on the court when Smith vs Doe was decided.
            I believe unless SCOTUS asks for the Solictor General’s opinion, we will have a denial by Spring. Which means, within 12 months from now they will have everyone removed.
            I can’t wait to read Freed’s petition to see how he responded to Snyder vs Doe or if he even tried to. I know if I was on Mr. Muniz’s legal team, that denial would literally be the first thing out of my mouth.

          • #25162 Reply

            I did see that. I am waiting for SCOTUSBlog to pick up the case so I can read the petition and the other filings that will be there by that time. Also, when I called the Megans Law Section they told me it was filed on the 13th. They also said there was never any doubt about filing even after the Snyder case was denied.
            I spoke to my neighbor who is in law enforcement. He told me what we all suspected. Freed and company are just delaying. Everyone knows the writing is on the wall for the registry. However, He told me that the General Assemvly is interested in designing a registry that complies with the law.
            I never understood why the state is so afraid to let sex offenders go once they have completed their time. I finished my parole in 2012 , yet I have neighbors that think I should never be off of parole. It’s kind of funny becuase everytime someone new moves to the block, there is this old lady that believes it’s her duty to inform them that a “sex offender” lives on the block . Most don’t care, but there has been a few that freaked out. One even wanted the police to ORDER me to move even though I was on the block FIRST. She told the cops that I shouldn’t be allowed to live where there is indoor plumbing. I just laugh becuase I do not associate with anyone on my block, primarily due to the registry. I don’t talk to them or make it a point to start a conversation if I see them but I am a THREAT to society. I will say hello in passing but that is all.
            It was funny when my niece and brother moved in for a bit The old lady almost had a heart attack. She ran over to make sure my brother knew. He said, “I know he is my brother” she tried to call CYS to have his kid taken away because the only logical reason why he would allow a child to live with me was becuase my brother and I were committing crimes together…. LOL… Not becuase we are family and he loves me no matter what.

          • #24955 Reply

            I have a question, does the mandamus have to be filed in Harrisburg or can it be sent via certified, FedEx etc, I’m Thinking what can it hurt anyway right?

          • #24966 Reply

            In the past, attorneys involved in similar cases had advised to NOT file additional suits on top of an already pending case. They said it could actually slow the process down.
            Perhaps you should consider reaching out to an attorney who is familiar with this process or involved in this case before pursuing that idea any further.

            Just something to think about.

          • #24981 Reply

            @ Brian
            You can always file legal documents with the Court by mail/FedEX/UPS. As long as you include the proper payment form in the proper amount, they will file it for you.
            Brian, I would suggest you do nothing. Relax. By the time you are buy chocolate for Valentine’s Day, we will know whether or not it has been scheduled for conference. I do not understand why terry and you are in such a hurry. 12 months either way isn’t going to make s big difference.

          • #25043 Reply

            I guess I have dealt with this for so long and now all of these cases are being won and all this stuff is going on makes me anxious to get this out of the way, over and done with.
            I am going to get a professional opinion from an attorney next week. I respect all of the knowledge from the people on NARSOL but no one on this site is an actual lawyer or has passed the BAR not that any of you couldn’t pass the bar I just want an attorneys opinion now. Maybe they will say do exactly what some people here recommend or say don’t do that at all.

          • #24958 Reply
            terry brunson

            There were two stays in the MUNIZ decison . . .
            1. On the state issue and the PASC gave 90 days to the Pa. legislatures to come up with a illustrative fix to set some kind of order to give pre SORNA people relief. That stay was from July 19, 2017 until October 19, 2017 under State rights of Pa. Constitution Article 1 Section 1 , 11, 9, and 17 . . . . . . . and the comidy of MUNIZ by precedence of rights under equal protection of PASC Law decision. . . . . . . The PASC was kind to stay its own decision on Muniz to give the state law makers a chance to get Megan’s Law right with the pre-SORNA people.

            After 19 Oct 2017 – Pre-SORNA people can file a mandamus under state rights ONLY State Pa. Constitution rights only. . . . If you put Federal claim in the Mandamus about the U.S. Constitution. . . . . You are adding two claims of Stae and Federal. . . . . That would be denied … because the federal claim would need a SCOTUS remand on the federal issue……… But if you stay with the Pa. Constitutional claim under MUNIZ your mandamus would continues to go forward under state rights alone………

            On September 17, 2017 Freed files a stay request with the PASC to take MUNIZ decisiom to the SCOTUS under Peption of Writ of Cert. That stay has no effect on the stay of 90 days the PASC gave PA, PSP, and Legislatures to fix Megan’s law.. There is a state claim and a federal claim. The Federal claim needs a remand from the SCOTUS the State Claim needs no SCOTUS remand – – – – – – – I know this sounds crazy – But Judges understatnd it clear and if you file a mandamus under Pa. claim rights only although MUNIZ is not final on the fereral cliam the state claim is allowed to go forward. . . . WOW

            I just got the news that the SCOTUC is giving Freed a really short time to respond as 16 November 2016

            That is called a fast tract and it is a sign that the SCOTUS wants to get MUNIZ out the way fast – and I call that the SCOTUS will deny Freed Cert to fight MUNIZ in Washington D.C. at their court house .

          • #24960 Reply

            Freed already filed his brief, He doesn’t need to respond to anything.

            SCOTUS is giving Muniz’s team until November 16 2017 to respond, as is the standard time frame.

            That is not a sign of anything, but typical SCOTUS procedures. I don’t know where you got your information, but it is incorrect.

          • #24968 Reply

            There are 31 days in July and August so 90 days from July 19th is NOT October 19th but October 17th. It is very important when dealing with legal issues to be as accurate as we can be.

          • #24848 Reply

            @ Terry
            Please take a chill pill. Be patient. The hardest part was to get a favorable opinion. Now that we have one it is just a manner of defending it.

          • #24859 Reply

            @terry brunson
            …Thank you for the update!

            …there you go again! (be supportive and grateful, please!)

            …I understand and share your hesitation to file anything at this time!

            @Fred Keymaster
            …again, thank you for the update! **Disclaimer understood**


          • #24970 Reply

            Everyone had to understand most sex offender convicted before 12/20/2012 is desperate for a way off ASAP. The ONLY way off is to wait for SCOTUS to finish their work. Considering we have been waiting almost 5 years already, I do not see what a few more months would do. Look st it this way, we have the holidays to spend time with friends and family, then NFL playoffs along with the Super Bowl. By that time, we should know if the case is ready for conference. The major wildcard here is whether SCOTUS will ask the Solictor General to weigh in. If they do, that will add more time to wait for the Solictor General to reply.
            However, given the fact this case is similar to Snyder vs Doe and the Solictor General all ready answers I that case, I do not THINK they will ask for his opinion in the case.
            In my opinion, I THINK we have two options. Either we will have a denial by Spring, or we will be waiting the summer for the Solictor General’s response.
            I have a busy Fall and Winter ahead of me with school, and getting my Summaries/ dismissals expunged, so I am excited to see where we will be come the Spring.

      • #24697 Reply
        terry brunson

        @ Brian
        Hey Brian – it is terry- there will be no word until the SCOTUS accept to hear the review of Pa. case Muniz. . The way the court works is this:

        1 Freed makes his appeal for review to the PASC for the record on MUNIZ
        2. A Stay on Muniz case is issued for 90 days.
        3. The clerk of the SCOTUS accepts the PASC record on MUNIZ
        4. A Docket number is set by the clerk of the SCOTUS
        5. The Docket order gets to a list of cases to be accepted by the 9 panel Justices of the SCOTUS
        6. They will accept or deny the case.
        7. If they accept it. a hearing is set. . . . . . then more time goes by wainting fot the date
        8. If they deny the case . . The SCOTUS will remand the case back to the PASC clerk with all the records.
        9. Then the PASC will write an opinion and a declared judgement to to Pa. AG office
        10. The AG office will give instructions to the PSP to follow the oreder of the PASC court on Muniz
        11. The PSP will them start removing names from the Megan’s Law registry

        All of this will take time. . . . . This is what I been telling you is Freed’s objective. To waste time.

        The SCOTUS will deny Freed’s Cert for review about May of 2018
        The Remand to the PASC on Muniz will happen about August 2018
        The PASC is issue opinion and judgment to Pa, AG about Sept 2018
        The AG will then instruct the PSP to remove names off the Megan’s Law registry
        The PSP will drag their feet for about 18 months form the Pa. AG order saying they are trying to comply with the instruction by they only have 8 hours in a day and staff is working as diligent as they can to insure that all pre SORNA people get off the registry as ordered….

        You can wait this out and see that what I am telling you will happen close to this time frame. . . . . The wait see will be just as you see

        • #24744 Reply

          @ Terry
          Thank you for the explanation, I wish they were able to move along a lot faster though.

    • #24769 Reply

      @terry brunson
      “I am filing a Writ of Mandamus in the Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg 9 a.m. 11 Oct 2017. against the PSP . I will tell you the outcome.”
      …so how did it go terry, good or bad? It has been quite a few days since your last post. (I actually thought the PSP might have arrested you in retaliation) Either way; Good to have you back! 🙂

    • #24973 Reply

      Key master
      Thank you, I think I will look into that before I file anything . Some people on here are very knowledgeable about law which I am not as you can probably tell, Not sure if Muniz attorneys will talk to me for free but I know most will do free consultations.

    • #25069 Reply

      …Hello! As you venture into your meeting with a legal professional, it is my wish that you are told the truth and the best available course of action while being properly advised. You are probably paying for this knowledge/guidance (don’t need to know amount) so, if you wish (and only if you wish!) to share with us your experience & understanding (**without giving or offering legal advise yourself with the intent to practice law**) it would be, I would think, appreciated by most if not all on here.
      Thank you in advance Sir!

      Good night to everyone! 🙂

      • #25091 Reply

        @ Anonymous
        I will give an update on what I am recommended to do once I meet with an attorney. .
        As for money I’m pretty sure attorneys do free consolations. So if they say to file a mandomos I will most likely do that myself. I’m sure they are looking for 5000 or more to work for any SO I’m sure, I could be wrong though.

        • #25324 Reply

          Why even talk to someone? Most likely, we only have 12 months left. Just kick back and enjoy the last gasp of the registry for us. I have to report in July, I expect that will be my last time, yet we will see.
          This is what I don’t understand about you guys, especially Terry on here. Why is everyone is such a hurry? Relax, and let the SCOTUS do all the work for you. I am just saying why invite midterm and stress when all you have to do is forget about it, and all the work will be done for you.
          By the time you are buying flowers and chocolate for your wife due to Valentine’s Day, we should have an idea of when we can expect a conference if we hadn’t had one already. Relax and enjoy the scenery!!!

          • #25369 Reply

            @ Chuck I get what your saying, my update is in couple months also, only thing is I don’t want to get stuck waiting on psp to figure out who’s who for the next two years to so who knows. I’m waiting on a call back either way. The lawyers are a little busy with other classes for the next couple months is what they are telling me anyway.
            Did you see the post where the guy won with a similar case to the Muniz? I think it’s a fraud if you ask me, if you look at the type you can see the letters look like they have been removed and Muniz added in, if you look at any other professional documentations you don’t see any lettering that looks like that just sayin.
            I could be wrong which I have been many times in he past.

          • #25386 Reply

            Even if PSP drags their feet all that would mean is they are going to be paying you once a reasonable time has elapsed, becuase once all the appeals have been exhausted and PA has officially informed PSP, they are now violating your rights. LET THEM!!! I am going to get PAID then!!!! I believe 6 -12 months is a reasonable amount of time. After that. Each day I am still on there, I am getting PAID!!

          • #25400 Reply

            @ Chuck
            Yea that’s a good way off looking at it. I thought about it and I just want off the registry, after all is said and done if we get a couple bucks then that’s money in our pockets. So hope sooner then later as my patience is wearing but it is also my bet best virtue. If I were to pursue anyone for retribution it would be the people who pushed to pass these laws and the one she who want to keep stacking them on just to get votes, not the people who are, not standing up for the psp or anything but the ones just doing there job, do I think it’s right? No not at all it’s not at all right in any way, people don’t deserve to live like this unless they keep doing it over and over and just have no intentions to stop. But that’s what society wants us to be and I would say we’re not that. Those people are like Sandusky, people like that, not me and hope not anyone I talk to on here.

          • #25421 Reply

            Colonel Tyree C. Blocke, the commissioner of PSP, was asked about How he felt about Muniz. He said that PSP is a law Enforcement Agency and that is what they will do. If SCOTUS tells them this is the law, then that is what they will enforce., We all have to realize if PSP tried to removed people today from the registry, they would be breaking the law. As much as we would like then to just snap their fingers and it be so, it doesn’t work that way. They planned for over a year before AWA went into effect. Think about it, almost 5,000 case files they have to find, alter, and inform on. We all know the day after SCOTUS is done with this case, and the current ruling stands, each and everyone of the 5,0000 RSO will be calling and breathing down their backs. Myself included.
            This is how I feel. By saying “oh I am going to get a lawyer and fight this” or “I am going to file this or that” you are disrespecting our legal system and confusing others. Let the system work as intended. Then, each and every workday, give PSP hell about getting g you off.
            Be honest with yourself. Is being on another 12 months really going to kill you??? Hurt like hell? SURE. But is it going to kill you?? No, the odds are it won’t. Yes, there are those that seek out people on the registryvti hurt or Maine them, but Rhodes cases are few and far between.
            I have stated in another post, I have at least 18 months from today before being off the registry would really impact my life. Each and every day I deal with people that HATE me and wish I was dead simply because I am on a list. Half don’t even know what I was charged with. All they know is I am on the list. You want to know what really pisses them off. When you don’t let their actions bother you. I had an ex co worker that thought she was God’s Angel spreading the GOOD NEWS when she told everyone, and yes I mean everyone, that I was a sex offender. My boss said, “Yes I know. That was litterly the second thing he told me. The first was his name.” It BURNED her that my boss didn’t care. And I worked with her before I was arrested. People like that you have to just let them be them. I have a list of about 5 or 6 friends that I made because they respect the way I handle being on the registry. It affects me but I don’t let it end my life.

          • #25464 Reply

            Well said, that does make a lot of sense, as I don’t know much about law practice and not understanding what people are seeing in filing a mandamus, like you said the psp would be braking the law if they let people off I just wanted to see what the lawyers think they know what the mandamus would do. Maybe it’s just a scheme to get more money, I don’t see anyone else filing them accept for a couple on NARSOL, I am starting to think well if I do file then psp will put s big radar on my forehead and start looking for anything to come up with to make my life more he’ll then it already is.

      • #25193 Reply
        Robin S.
    • #25392 Reply

      So when you see that someone is awaiting moderation and the name disappears is that something the moderators don’t like or are they people that want to say nasty things to the people posting on NARSOL?

      • #25415 Reply
        Robin Vander Wall
        Robin Vander Wall

        Surprisingly, there are very few negative comments aimed at our advocacy from the general public. Most of the time, what you are seeing are posts from spammers who are promoting some kind of web-based service. We delete those comments. However, on some occasions, replies are rejected for being too lengthy, too caustic, or too explicit in recommending a particular legal course of action (what amounts to the practice of law).

    • #25539 Reply

      While I was looking for information I found this FING BS ya know enough is enough,
      They over ruled residency restrictions a couple years ago in PA why the hell are they at it again?
      by WEB STAFFTuesday, October 24th 2017

      Gavel and Scales

      HARRISBURG, Pa — State Reps. Tina Davis and Pam Snyder introduced a bill that would restrict sex offenders from living near schools.
      The proposed bill would make it so that those registered under Megan’s Law would not be permitted to live within 2,500 feet of any school or child-care facility.

      According to PA State Police reports, there is approximately 21,600 registered sex offenders residing in the commonwealth, ranging in offenses from rape to child pornography possession.
      “Right now, there are no laws preventing offenders from moving in right next door to the school attended by your child, grandchild, niece or nephew,” said Davis, D-Bucks. “Our legislation aims to address this problem and keep kids safe at school and on their way to and from school.”
      “We must do all we can to protect our most vulnerable citizens from those with a proven record of predatory – and in some cases violent – behavior,” said Snyder, D-Greene/Fayette/Washington. “Our legislation simply mandates a buffer zone between an offender and a school or child-care facility to keep children safe. It’s past time Pennsylvania had a law like this on its books.”

      • #25586 Reply

        Don’t worry, Due to Muniz it won’t apply to you or I.,They are just digging their hole deeper and deeper.

        • #25593 Reply

          So in the meantime they can make our lives a living hell till SCOTUS makes their ruling.
          Oh well I hope deniey F sooner than later.

      • #25598 Reply

        They are going to keep trying to implement anything they can. But one thing that you have to realize and I haven’t heard anyone talk about yet is that in the pa constitution they have a part about shaming. That was also mentioned in the decision of the muniz case. So even if they bring back an old version of Megans Law, they still can not make it public for anyone convicted before 2012. You can watch the PSP and Freed talk before the Pa senate on this issue a few weeks ago. Megans law is done and they know it. The reason Freed is putting up such a fight is because he was nominated to become a federal prosecutor, and, think about it, would you want to be the DA that totally destroyed Megans law. Because he’s a politician and thats how he sees things. Megans law is on its way down, no way to stop it. Politicians are stupid, they don’t know when to stop and they have a big ego. The more people they put on Megans law the more appeals they will have. They didn’t plan for that.

        • #25607 Reply

          With the Budget issues, an election year right around the corner, and preparing for the Muniz decision to finalize, they do not have the time nor the will power to enhance Megans Law restrictions. It just good press. When the voters get angry Megans Law was abolished they can say, “I introduced a bill to enhance Megans law, and no one wanted to back me”. It’s called CYA= Cover you ARSE…..
          it is the same reason why they didn’t come up with a “legislative fix” during the 90 day stay. They didn’t have the time nor the will power. They know that anything they do now won’t apply to us becuase we will be off. What they don’t realize is with the Muniz decision, they are open to a “cruel and unusual” challenge. And, making Megans Law more restrictive is just going to add fuel to the fire. It is all show for the voters who don’t understand the law.
          I can’t wait till Muniz is finalized, so a cruel and unusal (8th amendment) challenge can be made. On August 31,2017 one was approved in Colorado but that was an “as appilied” challenge. Which means it only appilies to those who are involved in the court case not the whole state.
          First, the battle was trying to get SORNA recognized as “punishment”. Now, the battle is going to be on 8th amendment grounds. That will kill it once and for all.

          • #25830 Reply

            Chuck, I am really hoping that you’re right, I really hope it’s going to be as easy as sitting back waiting for the law to take its place. I really hope that it’s over but we’ve all been jerked around so much Something tells me that this new decision is just the beginning. But I really hope you’re right because what you are saying does make perfect sense.

        • #25611 Reply

          It is my understanding that they can’t even bring back any Megan’s law due to Muniz. Anything pre 12/20/2012 is done, once SCOTUS is done the pre 12/20/2012 registrants are done, no longer have to register for anything but drivers licens and vehicle registrations.
          I have to agree with the politicians comants, they all have inflated egos for sure and I would say they are mostly all slimy rotten people, I say mostly because it wrong to classify all the same, we’re all classified the same basically if you know what I mean.

    • #26376 Reply

      So with ten days until Muniz lawyers have to respond unless they already have and we don’t know, I wander what’s going to happen, does SCOTUS have a time frame in which they have to respond once Muniz team responds? I have read some things about the Muniz case on another site sort of like this site, are there any other forums out there to see what people are talking about?

      • #26386 Reply
        Robin Vander Wall
        Robin Vander Wall

        There are no time limits on the Supreme Court. The Court’s calendar is managed by the Chief Justice’s chambers with considerable deference given to collegiality among the justices. The Court generally grants around 1% of the petitions submitted each term. In light of the Court’s rejection of the Snyder petition, the chances of it granting certiorari in Muniz is highly improbable, but not impossible. All that can be done is to patiently wait the Court’s decision.

        • #26498 Reply

          Granted there are no time contstrsints, however they do operate the same way for each case. Once a petition is filled, the respondent gets a chance to respond. Once they have responded, the petitioner has a chance to respond. This is what Brian was lookin for I believe. Once everyone has responded, it will be scheduled for conference. They may relist it for conference multiple times, especially if they ask the US Solictor General to weigh in. Since he did I. The Snyder case and this. Ssd is similar, I do not expect him to weigh in, however we will se.
          Like I have said in previous posts, by the time we are buying chocolate for our loved ones, we should st least know what conference date we have.
          All the hard work is done. Like many of stated,less than 1% of petitions are granted. This was a HUGE win for us, and the Commonwealth is gong to need time to cope with the decision.
          I had friends tell me that the General Assembly should make a “New Megans Law”. Once I explained that cannot be done, they stated the Commonwealth should ignore the court decision as state officials cannot be arrested for doing their jobs. I pointed out doing their jobs means following court orders.

      • #26465 Reply

        Once Muniz Legal team responds, then The commonwealth of Pa gets to respond. Once Pa reply brief is received, it will be scheduled for conference.

    • #26503 Reply

      Here is something positive

      Ruling halts proceedings related to defendants facing sexually violent predator designations
      Monday November 6, 2017 12:01 AM
      Written by Stephanie Weaver
      The state Superior Court has handed down a ruling that put an immediate halt to all court proceedings related to defendants facing sexually violent predator designations.

      As the second ruling within several months to call the state’s current sexual offender statute into question, District Attorney John T. Adams said that it’s time to start fresh.
      “What we need now is a rewrite of our statutory scheme dealing with the sexual offenders registry,” he said.

      In an appeal ruling in July, the state Supreme Court found that sexual offender registration requirements are a form of punishment for defendants.
      Prior to that decision, registration was thought of as a civil consequence of committing a sex offense.
      But due to that new definition, the state Superior Court said in its ruling Tuesday that the entire framework for then designating sexual offenders as sexually violent predators is unconstitutional.
      As such, the court placed a moratorium on all sexually violent predator proceedings until state legislators enact a new, constitutional system for sex offender registration.
      The recent ruling granted an appeal to a Butler County man who was questioning his status for a statutory sexual assault conviction.
      The designation increased his registration term from 15 years to life, which he claimed violated his constitutional right to protect his reputation.
      The ruling in July is currently under appeal and Adams, who is also the president of the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association, said that the new ruling will be appealed in the near future.
      However, he said that prosecutors throughout the state are now working to create new legislation that will hopefully resolve the issues raised in the rulings.
      “I do believe that everyone knows that this is an immediate problem,” Adams said, adding that he expects movement on legislation before year’s end.
      But for now, many of the cases are stuck in limbo with no clear path on how to proceed.
      “We are reviewing the rulings and there are more questions than answers,” Adams said.
      For example, he said that his office isn’t sure if the ruling applies to all sexual offender cases or only ones in which a sexually violent predator designation increases the registration term.
      It also was unclear if it would be applied retroactively or if the moratorium would stand once the ruling is under appeal.
      “I’m not sure where it will go,” he said.
      Constitutionally flawed
      The Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act was enacted in 2012, replacing the prior Megan’s Law system. The act has three levels of registration – 15 years, 25 years or life – that are assigned to specific sexual crimes.

      Regardless of the degree of the crime, all individuals convicted of a sexual offense must also be evaluated by the state Sexual Offenders Assessment Board.
      That board, made up of psychiatrists, psychologists and criminal justice professionals, conducts a 15-factor analysis to determine if the individual meets the criteria to be designated a sexually violent predator.
      The board then submits that recommendation to a judge.
      Judges review the recommendation and, when contested, the expert testimony before making the final ruling.
      In last week’s ruling, the higher court said the final step of the sexually violent predator process is the main issue.
      In light of the state Supreme Court ruling that registration requirements are a form of punishment, the court said registering as a sexually violent predator is an additional penalty.
      A title indicates a convict has a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes him or her likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses.
      It carries lifetime registration, lifetime counseling and active community notification requirements, which are similar to someone who is already required to register for life, but widely considered to be harsher.
      The ruling then reasoned that since it is an increased punishment, the facts supporting it must be found, beyond a reasonable doubt, by the defendant’s choice of either a judge or a jury, like a trial.
      Previously, such designations required only “clear and convincing evidence,” a lower burden of proof.
      The higher court said that since the entire framework is now constitutionally flawed, judges may no longer hold designation hearings, declaring that “there is no longer a legitimate path forward” to resolve these cases.
      Problematic from start
      The murkiness of the higher court’s ruling played out in at least two cases that came before Berks judges last week, as prosecutors asked for lengthy continuances to determine how to properly move forward.

      Defense attorney James M. Polyak said he has four clients awaiting predator evaluations, but due to the ruling, he plans to file motions asking the court to rescind the orders permitting the assessment board to conduct those reviews.
      “The propriety of the entire evaluation framework is now questionable,” he said.
      Defense attorney Kevin Feeney said the recent rulings are simply the court acknowledging that the statute has always been a punishment, not merely registration.
      “The conditions and requirements are so detailed and complicated, I do not know how a person could comply,” he said.
      Adams agreed that the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act and its federally mandated provisions was overreaching and problematic from the start.
      But he is hopeful that any new legislation will be able to withstand legal and constitutional challenges.
      “Clearly, I think we are losing sight of the reason for the registry,” he said, “and that is for the protection of the public.”

      • #26525 Reply

        What I cannot understand is that all these District Attorneys know that Muniz disallows retroactive legistration. Are they going to pass something in defiance of Muniz and then arrest everyone who does not comply? “Ah, screw it!! It will be years before they get out”
        Whatever they come up with, is going to have to be non public. However if they do that, that will open them up to a cruel and unusual argument becuase there is no public safety value if they can’t access it.

        • #26540 Reply

          Exactly, but seeing that the judge denied the SVP application then I’m thinking that anything attempted to go retroactive will also be denied before it even starts because I’m thinking that they don’t want to deal with anymore lawsuits seeing as though people are not afraid to sue nowadays because what do they have to loose I mean we’re already on the rege who cares if it makes head lines, look at Muniz he could care less.

          • #26553 Reply

            Whag is going to happen is the General Assembly is going to drag their feet until the SCOTUS denial comes out. Then, it being an election year., they will be tripping over themselves going to the microphone to exclaim how “our justice system has let us down” and we must “correct the error” right away!!

            Got to look tough on crime in a election year. The ONLY reason Freed filed an appeal was for political reasons. He knew he can’t win at the Supreme Court.

    • #28715 Reply

      Here’s something to think about. Life time registration was found unconstitutional for minors but hasn’t been challenged for adults yet under the same argument.

      Also , DA Freed filed his breef for the muniz case before the sexual predator designation case was handed down. So even if they don’t remove everyone before 2012, the door has been opened for more challenges than the state can handle.

    • #28718 Reply

      So now the general assembly has created yet another bill, house bill 1952, I tried to read up on it but it makes no sense to me at all, I have no idea how to look at code or look up or understand code , kind of like the matrix, why the f are they pounding us with these bills left and with now it seams like, did they do all this in Michigan when they were at the end of their fight also?

      • #29592 Reply

        Bill 1952 was removed from the table as of Monday, I dunno what that means but I’m sure it can’t be bad news your thoughts .?

    • #29591 Reply

      I looked on the pa,website as of Monday bill 1952 was removed from the table, what does this mean ?.I also read an article that stated depending on ones offense they pled guilty too, they mite not be due the pre 2012 sorna retroactive muniz ruling. ?

    • #42868 Reply
      terry brunson

      @ Brian

      Hey – you are still on top of things – You find of the Narristown court is good – but that is a lower court. The court with power is the Commonwealth court of Harrisburg.

      Lower Commonwealth Courts only carry original jurisdiction by 42 PA. C.S. Section 761 to prosecute crimes against the commonwealth, but only the Harrisburg division Commonwealth Court carry both original jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction to order the PSP around.

      A Narristown Commonwealth Court has no bite to force the PSP to do anything. That Lawyer is fighting in the right court , but wrong jurisdiction. The PSP can claim the provision of SORNA – ACT 10 42 Pa. C.S. 9799.59(a)(6) and appeal to the Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg to shut out the Narristown Court rulling.

      Then the Superior Appeal Court of Pa. has to get in to be the referee . . . . It is a lawyers way of getting more money out of a client filing in a DA court instead of a PAG court.

      Just wanted to tip you on the Court power level.

      If you ever have to file anything – Please start in the Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg[.] That court can tell the PSP and any other state agency to act right and follow Pa. Law. Lower Commonwealth Court’s handle lower issues that affect the Commonwealth. SORNA Constitutional Challenge is not one of those issues. See 42 Pa. C.S. 761 (a) (1) I am not a lawyer but I been down this road with the Courts in PA.

Viewing 40 reply threads
Reply To: PA’s high court rules retroactive SORNA violates constitution
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="">