Bill SB510 has the same issue as I notified
you all of below for the House version.
going to post about HB48 patroned by Delegate-Elect Simon. Former Delegate
Jim Scott proposed the exact same bill in 2013 HB1410, it failed.
Possession of firearms following certain criminal convictions; penalty.
A. Any person who knowingly and
intentionally possesses or transports any firearm, or who knowingly and
intentionally possesses, transports, or carries about his person any weapon
described in subsection A of § 18.2-308,
within a five-year period following his conviction for (i) stalking in
violation of § 18.2-60.3,
(ii) sexual battery in violation of § 18.2-67.4,
(iii) assault and battery of a family or household member in violation of § 18.2-57.2
that results in serious bodily injury, or (iv) any offense substantially
similar to clause (i), (ii), or (iii) in the laws of any other state or of the
United States is guilty of a Class 6 felony.
B. The provisions of subsection C
of § 18.2-308.2
regarding petitioning a circuit court for a permit to possess, transport, or
carry a firearm shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to a person subject to the
prohibitions of this section.
understand that the intent of Delegate Elect Simon’s 2014 HB48 as it was with
Delegate Scott’s version is to align with Federal law, but as with all States
their laws and penalties can’t always coincide with Federal mandates.
I had 4
concerns with the 2013 version and I have the same four concerns with this 2014
1-Sexual Battery is a misdemeanor in Virginia and this bill proposes a felony
punishment. We can’t create restrictions against certain citizens who have a
misdemeanor conviction that threaten a new felony!
supposed to be a “re-draft” of the 2013 version that would have made it a new
misdemeanor crime instead of a felony for those were previously convicted of
Sexual Battery (for this very reason) but the redraft was never posted nor
voted on by the Sub-committee.
moves forward during the 2014 session the same amendment would be needed.
2-There is no start date of July 1, 2014 for this bill if it becomes law.
This bill would be retroactive for citizens who were convicted 4 years, 11
months ago or less instead of being applied to those convicted after this
coming July. If they are currently gun owners and hunters they will be
unknowingly committing a felony because we know the Commonwealth will not
notify them ahead of time of the change in law.
By not having a start date this bill is a violation of ex
Bill SB454 has the same issue as I notified
you all of below for the House version.
bill that posted today in LIS for the upcoming Virginia General
Assembly session requires immediate attention.
HB235 proposed by Delegate Rob Bell does NOT have a start date of July 1, 2014; this means as
currently written this proposed mandate to register as a Violent Sex Offender
for life would be retroactive not just beginning for those convicted on or
after July 1, 2014. So anyone convicted in 2010, 2005, 2000, 1997 or maybe even
earlier would be denied due
process if this bill remains as-is and becomes law.
Registered Sex Offenders (RSO’s) would now be required to abide by the ever
changing and expanding restrictions and regulations imposed upon Virginia’s
RSO’s and any slip up no matter how minor or unintended carries a Felony charge. A new felony charge is NOT just an
administrative change, it is 100% punitive.
How many of
these “New” RSO’s who have not committed a new crime in years or even decades
would now receive a certified letter to register every 90 days, would now need
a VSP Compliance Officer to visit their residence twice a year and confirm
their employment every time it changes, to take their photo every two years
plus all the address, phone number, vehicle and email additions and
subtractions over then next 20, 30, 40 or 50 years will there be? A fiscal
impact statement with an actual count of how many Virginians with an old
conviction and who have re-entered society successfully years ago, is necessary
to know how much more money and more resources will now be wasted on these
people who paid their court order debt to society years ago and were NOT
required to register or to be monitored for a lifetime.
Virginians if this bill passes would not be permitted to drop off or pick up
their own children or grandchildren from daycare or school? How many would now
loose a job or a career they’ve held for years because their current employer
won’t want to be listed on the Virginia Sex Offender Registry. Without a job
these Virginians will not be able to provide for themselves or their family.
Virginians who would become an RSO will be evicted from their rental property
or not be allowed to renew their lease because no landlord wants to deal with
the other tenants complaining about an RSO living next door or upstairs? Without a home for
themselves or their families many spouses and significant others of these "New"
RSO’s will crack under the stress and leave. The support system and family
dynamic for most of these Virginians will disappear as soon as this bill
of the Commonwealth who have not committed a new crime in years, who have the
second lowest recidivism rate of all crimes, who are living their lives,
supporting and raising their families will be arbitrarily penalized by this
bill. The collateral consequences of registration trickle down to their spouses, their parents,
their significant others, their roommates, their children, their employers and
Contrary to popular belief, offender registries are not a
recent phenomenon. Offender registries are government-controlled systems
that track the movements and other activities of certain persons with
criminal convictions. While today they are most commonly used for sex
offenders, registries have been adopted
since the 1930s to regulate persons convicted of a wide variety of
offenses including embezzlement, arson, and drug crimes. Early registries
were widely criticized as ineffective and overly punitive, and many were
eliminated through litigation or legislative repeals. Others simply fell
into disuse over the course of the 20th century. Now, there is a growing
body of research that demonstrates that
modern sex offender registries are similarly ineffective at reducing crime.
Sex offender registries are costly, vastly overbroad, and error-ridden.
Even worse, the overwhelming stigma of public notification provisions may
actually increase recidivism among offenders.2 Despite their repeated
history of failure, enthusiasm for publicly available, internet-based
registries for every offense imaginable has only grown in recent years. There
have been proposals across the country to register those found guilty of
animal abuse, arson, drug offenses, domestic violence, and even failure to
pay child support. Existing registries are
expanding and becoming increasingly punitive. Without a concerted effort
to stop the tide of offender registration, we are at risk of repeating
past mistakes on a much larger and more treacherous scale.
Offender registries are backwards, punitive measures that
do not make communities safer. Unfortunately, those in favor of more
nuanced, data-driven methods of reducing violence and sexual abuse face
substantial barriers in overcoming precedent from years when registries
were far narrower in scope than they are today. Advocates must work to
distinguish current registries from their predecessors, educate
legislators and the public on the ineffectiveness and perverse
consequences of offender registries, and continue to conduct research
to determine what actually works to prevent harm. While it is an uphill
battle, we may take comfort that the facts are on our side.
a few bills posted in LIS (for the upcoming 2014 Virginia
General Assembly session) that I will be following
but one in particular is standing above all others (see below).
waiting to hear from the patron (left a message) on exactly what the intent of
this bill is and who Robby is.
pretty darn sure once I hear the full explanation I will be opposing this bill
but until then I will wait to get all the facts.
reader is a constituent
of Delegate Ramadan and you are wondering why this bill has
been submitted and what it’s real intention is, please reach out to his district office in the next 2 weeks
before all the representative convene in Richmond.
explanation you are given about HB195 is undesirable or absolutely
ridiculous (as I am currently concluding), tell the Delegate you oppose it.
will be more to come on this bill and most likely many action alerts with
bullet points on why HB195should NOT become law in Virginia.
HB195:Supplement to the Sex Offender and Crimes
Against Minors Registry
the Superintendent of State Police to establish and maintain a supplement to
the Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry that would include the
names of persons who have committed offenses that would require registration if
the offense occurred today, but who are not otherwise required to register. Any
attorney for the Commonwealth or law-enforcement officer may submit a request
to the Department of State Police to include a person on the supplement to the
Registry. Upon receipt of a request, the Department of State Police must
confirm whether the person should be included on the supplement to the
emailed with Asst. Professor Mancini 2 weeks ago advising her of my advocacy here
in Virginia and
my anticipation to receive her book.
last 5 years I have read more than 30 of the books listed here
on Sex Offenders, Registries, Restrictions, Collateral Consequences, Policies,
On-line Crimes and Civil Commitment of SVP’s. Not including the additional books
I’ve read on America’s
Justice System, Prosecutorial Misconduct, the Medias Role in Hype, Myth and
Hysteria in Moral Panics plus False Accusations or Memories.
ago on the afternoon of Christmas Eve, Mancini’s book arrived and I put aside Prosecution
Complex: America's Race to Convict and Its Impact on the Innocent and
immediately began reading, I finished it early this morning.
going to highlight some areas of the book in this post and I hope after reading
it, you will add this book to your reading list for 2014.
I -The Nature and Extent of Sex Offending and Prominent Theoretical
Chapter 1 - Sex Crimes and Offenders
Chapter 2 - Measuring Sex Crime
·Official Data Collection
·Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)
·National Incident- Based Reporting System
·Unofficial Data Collection
·National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)
·National Women’s Study (NWS) and National
Women’s Study- Replication (NWS- R)
·National Violence against Women Survey
Women Sexual Victimization (NCWSV) Study
·National Intimate Partner and Sexual
Violence Survey (NISVS)
·National Survey of Children’s Exposure to
Chapter 3 - Sex Crime Patterns and Trends
·Data Examining General Sexual Offending
·Other National Surveys of Adult Women
·Child Sexual Abuse Statistics
·National Child Abuse and Neglect Data
Chapter 4 - Prominent Theoretical
·Social Learning Theories
II - Societal Responses to Sexual Offending
Chapter 5 - Societal Myths (and Facts)
about Sex Offenders
Chapter 6 - Public Attitudes toward Sex
Chapter 7 - Historical Emergence of Sex
Offender Laws in the U.S.
III - Sex Crime Policy and Reform
Chapter 8 - Logic and Efficacy of Sex
Chapter 9 - Methods to Assess Sex
Offender Recidivism and Treatment Needs
Sex Offender Screening Tool-Revised (MnSOST-R)/
Sex Offender Screening Tool-3 (MnSOST-3)
·Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment
·Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual
Offense Recidivism (ERASOR)
·Sex Offender Risk Assessment Controversies
Chapter 10 - National Variation in Sex
Chapter 11 - Legal Challenges to Sex
Chapter 12 - The Future of Sex Crime
On Tables 10.1 and 10.2 there are errors, I have
advised Professor Mancini.
While reading this book I noted that numerous
phrases and summaries made by the author are in fact the same stances and
statements I have been making to Virginia
lawmakers and Commissions for years. But here is a researcher, an educator,
someone with a Ph.D backing up the claims that many Virginia Legislators have
scoffed at, discredited and ignored because I was the deliverer of the
I was extremely please this book is not a duplicate
of so many already written books on this topic. It does include the history of
public registries including Megan’s Law, the Wetterling Act, Adam Walsh Act,
etc but as with any book on this topic some background is needed for those who
are reading their first book on these issues.
This is the first book to cover a 34 (1976-2010)
year span of sex crimes in the U.S.
shows not only are sex crimes down but they dropped before the creation of the
public Sex Offender registries and all the restrictions and regulations were
implemented. So the perception by Victims groups that sex crimes have increased
over the last 20 years that there is an epidemic is false. Then there are
groups who’ve claimed that the creation of the registries and laws is what has
reduced recidivists and first-time offenders, they too are false based on the
34 year time-frame the drop had already occurred.
As most of us know Victim’s groups beat the drum of
unreported and under-reported crimes, that only a very small portion of sex
crimes are ever reported, investigated and result in a conviction. Well again
Professor Mancini covers all the “unofficial” reporting methods created in the 1990’s
by Crime, Violence, Victim’s, Sexual Violence and Women’s Groups to capture
what they call the “dark figure of crime”.
It turns out that the trend /percentage of “unreported”
assaults are very much in-line with the “reported” crimes for both adults and
for children. And again there is not an epidemic of sex crimes reported or
Another issue I have not read in other publications
is the Rape Shield Laws; this is an issue I mention regularly when meeting with
Victims groups when pushing for the Rape Shield Laws
claimed the changes to evidence and testimony removed “non-relevant facts” from
the proceedings, protected the identity of the victim and allowed for the
reporting of a crime without any time constraints or limitations.
Missing from the Rape Shield portion of this book is
the shift of the burden of proof being put on the defendant and no longer on the
prosecution, that an accusation is entered into evidence (even though it is NOT
evidence), that no corroboration (witnesses, physical evidence, specific dates,
times, places,) is required to be given by the victim or produced by the
prosecution, that a polygraph is no longer required to be taken by the victim
because they should be believed no matter what and the insistence of a
polygraph means the State doubts their claim (but yet the State still pushes
the defendant to submit to a polygraph)and the overall standards of guilt were
lowered resulting in an environment ofguilty until your defense attorney proves your innocence (more than 93% of charges are settled with a plea deal) creating many
more felons and lifelong Sex Offenders in the Commonwealth.
Over the years numerous reporters have made
misleading statements to their readers that the Virginia Age of Consent is 15
years old. But yet numerous 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 year olds have been
prosecuted for sex crimes and labeled a Sex Offender for life with consenting
partners ranging from 14 to 17 years old.
If the Virginia Age of Consent (which is the age in
which all sex is consensual with anyone above that age) was actually 15 years
old then these acts would not be crimes. So where is the disconnect?
Virginia General Assembly begins on January 8, 2014 in Richmond so the winner
of this election will miss the first 2-2.5 weeks of session and will have to
hit the ground running. It also means that they will be allowed to submit bills
after the cut-off date as they are a late comer to session so their particular
political party could use them to propose any last minute agendas.
live in the 33rd District?
aren’t sure look up your District /CurrentState Delegate and
Senatorby your address and if it shows Mark Herring then
candidates for the January 21, 2014 Special Election are:
anticipation of the 2014 Virginia General Assembly Session I wanted to take
everyone back in time with a little School House Rock. This is about Federal
Legislation and Federal Representatives (Congress) but it’s the same process as
what happens at a State level.
would wait until January before I begin posts about specific Bills for the
upcoming 2014 Virginia General Assembly session but for 2 days this bill has
been nagging at me.
The Bill I’m
discussing today is HB136. Now this is the type of bill I
would normally not give a second thought to but if you read the below you’ll
see the red area that caught my attention.
Requires any navigator, any
navigator's subgrantee or partner organization, certain of their employees or
volunteers, and any certified application counselor to be licensed by the State
Corporation Commission if the person provides advice, guidance, or other
assistance with regard to health benefit plans under the provisions of the
federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Conditions for licensure of
these exchange assistors include completing a training program, passing an
examination, and submitting a criminal history. Grounds for the Commission to
refuse to issue or renew a license, or to revoke or suspend a license, include
being convicted of a felony involving fraud, misuse of funds, or misuse of
information, being required to register with the Sex
Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry, and knowingly providing
inaccurate information to uninsured persons regarding premium tax credits and
cost-sharing reductions. The bill makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor to provide
information that the person obtained while acting as an exchange assistor to
any political party or political organization for purposes related to voter
registration, to disclose a social security number or any other personal
information of any individual that was obtained while acting as an exchange
assistor, or to encourage or direct an individual to knowingly make any false,
fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations to an exchange or
government agency in connection with an application for health insurance
coverage, enrollment in a health benefit program, or a subsidy provided under
the federal act.
that outlines the Navigators and Exchange Assistors licensing and regulation
for the Virginia Health Insurance Exchange does not prohibit these citizens
from becoming a Navigator or an Assistor.
Convicted of murder
Convicted of selling illegal
Convicted of using illegal
Convicted of selling illegal
Convicted of using illegal
Convicted of robbery
Convicted of larceny
Convicted of selling stolen
Convicted of vehicle theft
ban All Felons from becoming a Navigator or an Assistor.
ban All Virginians convicted of Misdemeanors from becoming a Navigator or
HB136 does propose that any Virginian who registers as a Sex Offender can not
be a Navigator or an Assistors, which includes felonies and misdemeanors. Plus
fraud, misuse of funds, or misuse of information which is vague and could be
left open to interpretation. I'm not saying its right to exclude people
convicted of these three crimes, but at least it’s relevant to being an
insurance navigator where as being an RSO and navigating citizens through the
insurance process are not connected, at all!
Delegate Robert G. Marshall picking on the 20,300+ Registered
Sex Offenders in Virginia?
well maybe there are Federal guidelines already in place and RSO’s have already
been singled out and maybe Delegate Marshall is just following the mandated
guidelines, I searched the web and found no such restriction.
Employment is a requirement of probation, employment is
also necessary to provide housing, clothing and food for yourself and for your
In Virginia wepublicly
shame Employers and Companies who hire the best candidate for
a job who also happens to be a Registered Sex Offender. We post the
Employer/Company name and address on the offenders registry listing so that
customers, clients, contractors and anonymous callers can harass and condemn
the Employer for hiring a Registered Virginian. Because of this most Employers
automatically refuse to hire RSO’s or after a few weeks from hiring decide the
public humiliation and constant harassment isn’t worth it, and they fire the
already legislatively banned from working at schools, daycares, coaching,
driving school buses, tow trucks and charters of minors plus holding an elected
state position. Then there are businesses that do background checks to weed out
the RSO’s but would never admit to it and then there are companies with “No
RSO” policies that do admit to it.
Self-employment is usually the only option for a
Registered Sex Offender as no employer or company wants to be bothered, but three years ago the
Federal Government banned all RSO’s from being allowed to obtain Small Business
Loans, including the misdemeanors. According to the lawmakers and most citizens
if you must register as an RSO then you are all the same.
Barriers like this one in HB136 are not just cruel but
they make a successful re-entry back into society nearly impossible.
There is no justified motive to ban RSO’s from applying to
the Navigator positions; this proposal is based on false perception, prejudice,
hate and vindictiveness.
Prolonging unjust treatment or control over a group is
oppression and that’s what the patron of HB136 is attempting to do oppress a
segment of the Commonwealth just because he doesn’t like them not because these
positions create a danger to society.
Registered Sex Offenders are any easy target; they make a
perfect punching-bag and stepping-stone all in one for career Legislators. I’ve
witnessed this first hand for the last 5 years. A veritable parade of
malicious, callus, intolerant, apathetic, fear-mongering, myth-based proposals
by egomaniacs who crave the feeling of moral superiority at any cost and today
that cost is another job opportunity being taken away from citizens and families
already struggling to survive.
should be called:
The Yet Another Job that Virginia’s Registered Sex
Offenders (RSO’s) are Legislatively Banned from Having for No Particular Reason,
but it Sounds Reasonable and Who in their Right Mind Would Ever Oppose it Bill of
Governor McDonnell’s Administration claimed to support the
successful re-entry of ex-offenders, removing the barriers that exist so they
can become productive members of society. HB136 is not assisting ex-offenders in the Commonwealth it is
tightening the noose that is already around the necks of 20,300 RSO’s because
of all the previous restrictions and regulations put in place by both State and
HB136 needs to be amended so that any Virginian can apply
for a Navigator or Assistors position, equal opportunity for all not just for
lawmakers personally deem worthy.
Email or call your one State Delegate and your one State Senator
asking them to propose an amendment removing the
RSO prohibition from HB136.