Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry; registration requirements. (HB1928)

Introduced By

Sen. Lynwood Lewis (D-Accomac)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Sex offender registration requirements. Provides that any person who is required to register on the Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry be required to submit his Internet Protocol address as well as the currently required email address, instant message or chat name, etc. The bill also requires that the person reregister and submit to be photographed within three days of any significant change in his appearance. Amends § 9.1-903, § 9.1-904, of the Code of Virginia. Read the Bill »

Outcome

Bill Has Failed

History

DateAction
01/13/2009Committee
01/13/2009Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/14/09 090405596
01/13/2009Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety
01/15/2009Impact statement from VCSC (HB1928)
01/23/2009Impact statement from DPB (HB1928)
01/27/2009Assigned MPPS sub: #2
01/29/2009Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s)
01/30/2009Reported from Militia, Police and Public Safety with amendments (22-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/02/2009Read first time
02/03/2009Read second time
02/03/2009Committee amendments agreed to
02/03/2009Engrossed by House as amended HB1928E
02/03/2009Printed as engrossed 090405596-E
02/04/2009Impact statement from VCSC (HB1928E)
02/04/2009Read third time and passed House BLOCK VOTE (98-Y 0-N)
02/04/2009VOTE: BLOCK VOTE PASSAGE (98-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/05/2009Constitutional reading dispensed
02/05/2009Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
02/06/2009Impact statement from DPB (HB1928E)
02/11/2009Assigned Courts sub: Criminal
02/23/2009Passed by in Courts of Justice with letter (11-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/24/2009Subject matter referred to the Crime Commission pursuant to Senate Rule 30 (L)
02/24/2009Subject matter referred to the Crime Commission pursuant to Senate Rule 20 (L)

Comments

L.L. writes:

Problem #1 - Many people have dynamic IP addresses.

Problem #2 - What constitutes a "significant change" in appearance? If I'm a sex offender, and I lose 50 pounds, at what point does that become "significant" - after 10, 20, or all 50? If I don't shave, at what point does the stubble become a beard and require in-person reregistration? I get a haircut, and they cut more than I expected. I have to dash down to the State Police to reregister lest I get a speeding ticket and don't look enough like my picture? Of course, the hair will grow back, and I'll have to reregister in person again.

The language (and intent) of this is absurd.

Bill Twine writes:

Aren't the state police already burdened enough? When the Attorney General got sex offender legislation passed a few years ago he greatly expanded the duties of the state police, but the General Assembly did not adequately fund the expansion (typical). As a result, less state police officers are on the road becuause of the requiremnets of registering and re-registering and contacting sex offenders. Generally there is only one state police offer assigned to each district to handle the sex offender management. When he is not availble to handle a registeration or re-registration then they need to pull someone off the stret to handle it.

Stephen writes:

Doesnt this guy ever read the newspapers, it's been found that sex offenders aren't a major problem on the internet. I look forward to reporting to the state police everytime i turn on my internet, it will drive them nuts.

Waldo Jaquith writes:

The only way that this business of registering IP addresses is plausible is if registered sex offenders are required to install software on their computer that monitors their IP address and reports to a central service when it changes. That software would have to work on Macs, Linux, and Windows. It would also require that the infrastructure exist on the server end to record those IP addresses and record them in a database.

The notion of having sex offenders just write IP addresses down on a piece of paper every so often would make the whole thing useless.

Tom Mabe writes:

Sex offenders are already required to register email addresses and IM / Chat names within 30 minutes of setting them up!!! 99% of internet providers work of DHCP and IP addresses are assigned dynamically. Building on Stephen's comment this is ridiculous. Are offenders supposed to re-register ever time they dial up or connect to the internet (multiple times a day)? The State Police could not possibly handle the workload. This is more of the same... totally unenforceable feel-good legislation pushed by politicians riding on the hype that sex offenders are an epidemic. It's an easy platform for a politician because nobody will dare stand up and say "wait this is absurd" (think fable of the "emperors new clothes"). The Department of Justice did a study years ago which was well publicized in the Economist. The study demonstrated that recidivism of sex offenders is actually LOWER than almost any other crime. Unfortunately due to a few very high profile, horrific cases of sex predators, the public perception is the opposite. The irresponsible media has helped hype the issue as well. Some people may be offended by the analogy (apology in advance) but sex offenders in America are similar in status to Jews and Homosexuals in German circa 1936. Its starting to get crazy. I sincerely hope concentration camps aren't coming next.

Mary writes:

You are all right, I wish you were our lawmakers instead of the sub-committee for Militia, Police and Public Safety .
We did not stop this bill, but on Thursday the legislators witnessed organizers from 2 separate groups step forward and say this type of feel good legislation has to stop and their is evidence to prove it.
Thank you LL, you've been in this for a while and we have just begun but we are here for the long haul.
Seeking Justice and Safety for All Virginans.

Stephen writes:

To all that read this just use a proxy server, and use the browser Ixquick if your paranoid. Be sure to report everytime you get a haircut, this will drive the cops nuts, and bog down the system with paperwork.

Tom Mabe writes:

Stephen - great idea. Also let's have all offenders go down and register multiple times a day every time their IP changes. This also will bog down the system.

Mary - I have looked at your RSOL website. Great work! Your "Our Story" page is almost identical to the story of someone I know. Almost identical... Unfounded accusation out of the blue, immediate arrest with NO evidence. Direct indictment so the accused has NO opportunity to even find out any details of the actual accusation, and in a "closed-book" county a Brady Motion to obtain evidence only resulted the accused being given his own voluntary statement (not even written down). Four attorneys told my friend that trial was a roll of the dice even with NO physical evidence. The female police investigator in the county has a reputation in the local legal community for saying "whatever it takes" (truth or lie) to get a conviction. Facing a potential 25 year sentence my friend also plead "no contest". The registry and it's constantly changing rules seem a blatant violation of ex-post facto laws (like your analogy of stealing candy and then later finding it is illegal to go in a store). The laws are getting absolutely crazy.

L.L. writes:

This bill has been sent to the Crime Commission for "study".