Monday, March 6, 2017

Verizon is Eliminating Their Email Service and “Migrating” Those Accounts to AOL, for Virginia’s RSO’s That Don’t Know or Act Fast Enough This Could Amount to a Felony

In less than 10 hours a VA RSO who checks this site regularly and who email’s me learned their Verizon email will be transferring to AOL. They advised me that they have NOT heard one word about this switch from Verizon. Now they are keeping an eye on their account and looking for email’s about the switch so they can try to comply with VA law.

Their email address may not change or stop working at first but at some point down the line AOL is going to want their name in the email addresses of their users to say AOL, not Verizon.

Original Post:
Just 30 minutes ago I walked into my living room and heard the end of a Richmond NBC12 news story that not only caught my attention but immediately made me consider the possible arbitrary felonies that may follow soon in Virginia via the Virginia State Police (VSP). 

The news story (which is NOT posted on NBC12 as of right now) is that Verizon is discontinuing its email service and those accounts will be “migrated” to AOL accounts. It seems this has been news for a week now, but tonight’s story was the very first I had heard of it. 

After a Google search I found an article with some details here

So what’s the issue? 

Per § 9.1-903. Virginia’s 22,000+ Registered Sex Offenders (RSO) have ONLY 30 minutes to register in-person (there is no phone or electronic system) ANY change (additions or deletions) with their email. And as a side note the Virginia State Police Barracks are not open evenings, weekends or holidays. 

So per tonight’s news I’ve learned Verizon is going to delete existing email addresses and it sounds as though new AOL addresses may be created all behind the scenes without any involvement of the person who owned the Verizon account.  

Now I check email daily but there are MANY people who do not. They might check it weekly or it could be monthly. But for RSO’s in Virginia if an email address has been deleted by Verizon and created by AOL without any action (at a VSP location) by the person who is attached to the account they could be facing a new felony. First an investigation, then charges and an arrest, then bail (if they can come up with it), possible loss of employment, hiring an attorney, and then a court date. All because Verizon is eliminating email service and they’ve handed it over to AOL. 

A Throwaway Line in a Magazine from 1986 is the Basis for the last 22 years of Sex Offender Legislation, Restrictions and Requirements in America

03/18/17- Some very good editorials written after the below NY Times article:
·         Radley Balko: The big lie about sex offender, March 9, 2017
·         Questionable Statistic Pervades High Court Sex Offender Cases, March 8, 2017
·         The Supreme Court’s Sex-Offender Jurisprudence Is Based on a Lie, March 7, 2017
        The Supreme Court believes most sex offenders will keep committing sex crimes. The data suggests otherwise.
·         How the Supreme Court Spread a False Statistic About Sex Offenders, March 6, 2017

The below was emailed to every Virginia Legislator this morning. - Mary

Dear Virginia Delegates and Senators, 

Last week the U.S. Supreme Court heard the oral arguments for Packingham v. North Carolina. 

I have been sharing and posting many opinion pieces and articles on the case but this NY Times piece today is so very important that I’ve decided to share it with all of you. 


Dubious Data Belies Supreme Court’s Stance on Repeat Sex Offenders, March 6, 2017
By Adam Liptak

Last week at the Supreme Court, a lawyer made what seemed like an unremarkable point about registered sex offenders. 

“This court has recognized that they have a high rate of recidivism and are very likely to do this again,” said the lawyer, Robert C. Montgomery, who was defending a North Carolina statute that bars sex offenders from using Facebook, Twitter and other social media services. 

The Supreme Court has indeed said the risk that sex offenders will commit new crimes is “frightening and high.” That phrase, in a 2003 decision upholding Alaska’s sex offender registration law, has been exceptionally influential. It has appeared in more than 100 lower-court opinions, and it has helped justify laws that effectively banish registered sex offenders from many aspects of everyday life. 

But there is vanishingly little evidence for the Supreme Court’s assertion that convicted sex offenders commit new offenses at very high rates. The story behind the notion, it turns out, starts with a throwaway line in a glossy magazine. 

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s majority opinion in the 2003 case, Smith v. Doe, cited one of his own earlier opinions for support, and that opinion did include a startling statistic. “The rate of recidivism of untreated offenders has been estimated to be as high as 80 percent,” Justice Kennedy wrote in the earlier case, McKune v. Lile. 

He cited what seemed to be a good source for the statistic: “A Practitioner’s Guide to Treating the Incarcerated Male Sex Offender,” published in 1988 by the Justice Department. 

The guide, a compendium of papers from outside experts, is 231 pages long, and it contains lots of statistics on sex offender recidivism rates. Many of them were in the single digits, some a little higher. Only one source claimed an 80 percent rate, and the guide itself said that number might be exaggerated.

The source of the 80 percent figure was a 1986 article in Psychology Today, a magazine written for a general audience. The article was about a counseling program run by the authors, and they made a statement that could be good for business. “Most untreated sex offenders released from prison go on to commit more offenses — indeed, as many as 80 percent do,” the article said, without evidence or elaboration. 

That’s it. The basis for much of American jurisprudence and legislation about sex offenders was rooted in an offhand and unsupported statement in a mass-market magazine, not a peer-reviewed journal. 

“Unfortunately,” Melissa Hamilton wrote in a new article in The Boston College Law Review, “the Supreme Court’s scientifically dubious guidance on the actual risk of recidivism that sex offenders pose has been unquestionably repeated by almost all other lower courts that have upheld the public safety need for targeted sex offender restrictions.”