- This topic has 6 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 3 months, 1 week ago by Jeremy from Indiana.
September 5, 2019 at 11:30 am #59588
By Amanda Ottaway . . . A Long Island sex offender who faced home visits from a private nonprofit contracted by his county did not endure an unconstit
[See the full post at: Second Circuit: Private company home visits constitutional for registrants]
September 6, 2019 at 8:52 pm #59630
This is the kind of decision that makes me depressed about the judicial system and biased judges who are just normal people that find ways to support their preexisting point of view (which is a widely-recognized human phenomenon in psychology circles). Research study after study after study after study have all concluded that registries are at best useless. Common sense dictates that THERE CAN’T POSSIBLY BE A “SPECIAL NEED” to help in “reducing sex offender recidivism.” There should never be another one of these cases ever decided in any way favoring enforcement of these laws. Ever. Not because they negatively affect me but because the basic premise of them has been proven irrefutably to be completely invalid.
September 7, 2019 at 8:17 am #59656
Tony From Long Island
A few things . . . In New York, a level one designation is not moderate risk – it is LOW risk. . . . second, as a Level one offender, this guy would not have his info on the state online registry page – HOWEVER, Parents For Megan’s law (the group at issue in this case) routinely publishes information about level one offenders on their page claiming public information.
Second – the judge here claiming that this program is valid because of ” . . . . .government’s substantial interest in reducing sex offender recidivism by improving the accuracy of the registry . . . . ” is disingenuous. We have spoken ad nasuea on here about the “frightening and high” nonsense repeatedly quoted in court decisions.
Additionally, this “program” is nothing but theft of tax money to pad the pockets of Laura Ahearn. What they do is something that was already done by police. They are a quasi-police force. So the accuracy of the registry was already being done by police when suffolk paid Laura Ahearn to pay retired cops (who already get their sweet pension) to verify residence.
That being said, when they come to my house, they are nothing but professional, polite and discreet. They ask for your ID and sometimes a pay stub (to prove your employment is accurately registered) then leave. Takes one minute. They come at most twice a year. I make sure I tell them that what they do is a bunch of crap and then show them my ID and they leave.
Don’t construe anything I say as defending them, Laura Ahearn is a pure zealot and her organization is stealing money but Ive never had any specific problems with them.
September 17, 2019 at 9:16 am #59927
Tim in WI
Tony in LI,
Here a database, there a database, everywhere a database, and who can say what can be kept or said on any of one about anyone? None!
A well organized group would be free to approach the homes of those people too! A group to watch the watchers made of registered persons. Believe me when I tell you if registrants begin ” showing up” in certain residential areas these cowards would fold like paper tigers. Turn about is fair play.
Just look at the 20K ex post registrants in MI who are still not protesting GIVEN a fed judge has ruled in their favor 3 years ago + a recent mandamus!
September 21, 2019 at 10:16 am #60008
The part that is breaking his constitutional rights is what the judge said: Writing for a three-judge panel, U.S. Circuit Judge Christopher Droney noted in the ruling that in this case, public-safety interests outweigh the offenders’ rights
So no other crime that requires a home check like that could be done by a private company. I believe since it is not law enforcement you dont have to answer the door because private companies cannot enforce the law. Also because the judge says public saftey interest they can break (outweigh) his rights that makes it legal. So when ever a judge decides a defendant dont deserve same rights as any other citizen because a crime he’s convicted of, the judge just states: public saftey interest? Where’s the penal codes for this?
October 9, 2019 at 11:53 am #60528
This is rather dicey on a number of fronts. As a private non profit, they are NOT a government entity. They do not enjoy certain protections that government figures do. They are exposing themselves here. The smart move here is to first, start tracking the activities. Pictures of people and license plates.
2nd, distribute that information to all local registrants.
3rd, there is NO requirement to talk to a private citizen. don’t even open the door.
4th, wait. its just a matter of time before they make a mistake. Then take appropriate legal action. probably a law suit.
I find the part where they post information that the Government doesn’t to be critical. at some time some vigilante is going to use that information. when they get caught that 501c is on the hook for providing the information. That’s when you go after them in court. nice and legal, like it should be.
November 11, 2019 at 7:40 pm #61655
Jeremy from Indiana
Tell them to leave your property! I would not put up with this if this were in my state. I’ve already argued with some of the “officers” when they come to my door. One started asking me about cars in the driveway that belonged to family that weren’t in my registration documents. I just repeatedly told him my status is current. You also do not have to show them ID or answer any questions. Nothing in these laws forces you to help them verify your information. If they are not law enforcement, you can respectfully tell them to leave your property!