The Adam Walsh Act Parasite has Infected Michigan Lawmakers...

11-5-2010 Michigan:

The AWA parasite has crept into Michigan, likely carried by the SMART Guidelines (they really do exist, although named by someone who obviously wanted to play a joke on registrants) for the Adam Walsh Act; the parasite has infected the minds of lawmakers and turned on the insanity switch.

Two bills have been introduced outlining the changes Michigan lawmakers WILL MAKE and they will be effective 4-1-2011. No this is not a April Fools joke, unless lawmakers chose that date to say, "here we stick it to registrants again," and they WILL get away with it, again.

The bills are: S-1560 (The meat of the changes are in this one) and S-1559 (this has to do with the Petitions some folks [only certain folks were eligible] used to be able to use to get off the registry).

Why do I use the word INSANE? Well, because it is well known, that the AWA is to be interpreted as the floor and not the ceiling, meaning States must do the minimum AWA requires, but are also allowed to go beyond AWA requirements. Michigan is somewhere in outer space with their new requirements.

Before reviewing the bills, mainly S-1560 the meat, here are some terms that are critically important:

When considering the following, think about what one does in a normal day, then think about being a registrant and having to worry about how officials will construe, or misconstrue, some of the following:

"immediately" which is defined as within 3 business days, but, business days are not defined nor are they listed anywhere. Defining "business days" is important because, if left undefined, and in the hands of a rouge official, it could mean what they want, just to get a registrant back in jail.

"to be used" this is the insidious one, used in many ways. ex: A registrant wants to offer their opinion on a news story or blog, most folks know that, when one signs up as some sites require, before being allowed to comment, registrants will have to give their REAL e-mail address. Then when they actually enter their comment, they are allowed to chose a any Internet ID or Anonymous is used as default. So, what does a registrant chose? If anonymous, then everywhere on the Internet that "anonymous" is used, it is a registered sex offender speaking. Does this example show Lawmakers know nothing about the Internet or how it works? Or, are they using the idiosyncrasies of the Internet to entrap registrants. The latter is more likely, and especially true in the hands of a rouge official, there are many. "to be used" is used in several places, and each leaves one with thinking about entrapment.

Another example of "to be used," is with respect to residences. Here I think (am assuming, grrr) that they are speaking about homeless folks, it says, "information under this subsection shall identify the location or area used -or- to be used by the individual in lieu of a residence." Here I will take a pot-shot, Thomas Pauli homeless and rejected from shelters in the dead of winter (temperatures below zero), he looked for anywhere to get out of the cold, he found a junkyard. Could he have predicted beforehand (i.e. to be used) that he would take up residence there? He froze to death there, and this bill does NOTHING to handle such circumstances. NOTHING! Is insanity an incorrect word for me to use about this bill?

Note: The Michigan Supreme court anounced on 11-4-2010 that they will hear the case about Michigan's homeless folks, up from a lower court.

Another example of "to be used," and this one is a Prosecutor's dream provision:

(E) THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF ANY PLACE OF TEMPORARY LODGING USED OR TO BE USED BY THE INDIVIDUAL DURING ANY PERIOD IN WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL IS AWAY, OR IS EXPECTED TO BE AWAY, FROM HIS OR HER RESIDENCE. INFORMATION UNDER THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL INCLUDE THE DATES THE LODGING IS USED OR TO BE USED.

Is there any doubt that is a entrapment provision? And this information must be provided when the registrant FIRST registers (that is how the bill is worded).

"routinely used" Again "routinely used" is not defined, and leaving such open allows it to be construed several ways. Routinely used is also used with respect to Internet restrictions. By the way, how does one register "part of a telephone number" read it closely? Maybe a 7 or 10 digit phone number, but what if one must first dial a "1" is that part of the phone number? The bill refuses to be precise allowing for misconstructions.

(H) ALL TELEPHONE NUMBERS REGISTERED IN WHOLE OR IN PART TO THE INDIVIDUAL OR ROUTINELY USED BY THE INDIVIDUAL.

"alleged social security number" Now, this is again, undefined. How does one use an "alleged SS number," I cannot think of a circumstance. If they meant a fictitious one, or one that is not assigned by Social Security Administration then there is a way to describe such, but left undefined who knows how that will be interpreted, especially for women who get married or have changed theirs because of domestic violence circumstances.

I could write a book on where this bill is open for misconstruction, but I am ending with this one:

(11) THE REGISTRATION PERIODS UNDER THIS SECTION EXCLUDE ANY PERIOD OF INCARCERATION FOR COMMITTING A CRIME AND ANY PERIOD OF CIVIL COMMITMENT.

Everyone has complained about AWA being applied retroactively, but here is Michigan's latest trick: The "Registration Term" does not BEGIN until the sentence (including any parole or probation period) has been completed. Clearly they got the idea from how civil commitment works, following a sentence. And why is Michigan even mentioning "civil commitment" when they do not have such in their laws, YET?

Finally, not one word on how to handle folks who are disabled and cannot follow registry requirements. Folks do get old and become infirm, and some do wind up only having a short time to live; the registry requirements are not relaxed even then. Plain insane!

For now, have a great day and a better tomorrow.
eAdvocate

PS: I may do a Part-2 on this bill as I see more egregious things in it.