SC: Victory in the South Carolina Senate!
Fellow Warriors for Justice,
It is with great pleasure that I send this report tonight. Late this afternoon, the Senate passed our registry reform bill by a vote of 42 to 0! While the bill certainly isn’t perfect, it is a great step forward, and for the first time, will offer registrants a possible path off the registry. I was astounded at how smoothly it went, particularly after enduring almost two hours of debate on a bill prohibiting transgender students from participation in athletic leagues for their adopted gender. Kudos to Sen. Brad Hutto from Orangeburg for his excellent presentation of the bill, as well as his efforts to bring it to fruition.
In the end, the two original bills that had been introduced got dropped, but the contents were incorporated by amendment into another bill that had already passed the House and made it to the Senate. Now the bill must go back to the House for acceptance of the amendment. With only four days left for processing bills in the legislative session, that should now happen the beginning of next week, unless they add it to the House calendar during their floor session tomorrow.
Barring any significant amendment in the House, which probably can’t happen at this point, here is what the bill contains. First, it codifies the definitions of the registry tiers, assigning each registrable offense to a tier. In formulating these assignments, several offenses are moving down one tier from the current assignments that are being used by SLED. It is likely that several thousand people will move to a lower tier once these are implemented. Now, no one under 12 years old can be placed on the registry and any 13 or 14 year-old will be put on only if the Family Court judge handling their case determines that they pose a significant risk. I haven’t seen the text of the amendment yet, but I believe that we finally achieved the long sought-after judicial discretion on registration of any juvenile processed by the Family Court.
Now, the part that many of you have been waiting for – everyone has the possibility of being removed from the registry after a tier-dependent time period if they meet the following conditions: offense-free for the duration of the time, completed any sentence and supervision successfully, completed any required treatment program successfully. For Tier 1 registrants, the time period is 15 years, for Tier II, 20 years, and for Tier III, 30 years. For Tier I and Tier II, SLED will trigger the removal process automatically, but they will notify any victims and the Solicitor of the convicting county, who can oppose the de-registration with cause. That will cause the matter to become a court petition, and both sides will be able to present any evidence for or against removal. The judge will determine, by the preponderance of the evidence, whether the person is of a high enough risk to warrant continued registration. All Tier III registrants will have to go through the court process.
So, the bill to watch is H 4075. I expect the House to add it to their calendar early in tomorrow’s session, which starts at 10 a.m. In addition to tomorrow’s session, I expect them to meet Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday next week. That’s the end, without some special modifications of the rules. If you want to watch the House in action, you can find their video broadcasts at https://scstatehouse.gov. Click on the “House” link in the Chamber Video box at the upper left part of the page. And by all means, call and/or email your own representatives ASAP, to ask for their support for H 4075! Let’s hope and pray that the path through the House is as smooth as it was in the Senate today.
Thank you for your interest and support.
Don Thurber
NARSOL State Advocate
SCRSOL Legislative Director
Here is my opinion:
Half measures are anathema to our cause!
The more people we remove from the registry, the more toothless we become to effect change; for our numbers are eroded. Our support becomes eroded.
The registry must cease to exist in its entirety – not partially, but totally cease to exist! It is a government blacklist. It is unconstitutional on all fronts!
It bears repeating: Half measures are anathema to our cause!!
@JJJ I disagree. Any decision that moves in the direction of a less restrictive registry is positive. Two turns of the thumb screws is preferable to three. The fact that the legislature had to spend time discussing registry issues means that they became educated to some degree. Sex offense issues are a third rail for politicians who frequently take more draconian and politically safe positions.
The SC law is not going to create some mass exodus from the registry. If it did, I would cheer loudly. But it won’t. A handful of people removed from the registry won’t dampen the million existing voices, and politicians will constantly fill the pipe from the other end.
JJJJ
But if you were one of those eligible to be removed in this program mentioned, I bet a bag of crusty pennies you would not reject the offer. A win is a win no matter what.
There was an experiment done once at a college. The professor said that He would give everyone in the class $20 or they could wait till the end of the semester and get a mystery envelope. He stated they could be taking a risk as the envelope could contain Nothing, it could contain a gift card or a “Gotcha”.
All but one of the students took the $20. At the end of the semester, the one lone student asked about the envelopes. They were handed one and as they opened it, they were shocked to see a $5,000 scholarship towards future classes, expenses or anything related to that colleges expenses incurred by the student.
My point is, you are right in a sense if you want to “Hold out” for a better deal, but it also may bite you in the tush. Also in your scenario, if registries are ended, it is free. If you appeal to get off, it could ruin you and your family financially. Some might be automatic as the article states but some would still need to fight.
That is the worst thing I’ve read in a while. So because it doesn’t just instantly free everyone is bad? This is a great win because the more people who get released from the registry and never ever reoffend strengthen our argument that the registry is unnecessary as it does not do what people think. I may die on the list, but if anyone is able to be free from it and live a great life I’m ok with that. I’ll hate it until I’m off it or until my last breath. But we should want for other people the same as ourselves. Because a win for any of us, is a win for all of us.
It is good to see South Carolina is moving in the right direction. I’m in Florida so does this do anything for us here? I understand it can set a precedence for other states but will Florida really care to follow suit? They have no tier system at all and it seems they want to keep everyone on the registry for life even the people visiting from out of state. I’d love a 15, 20, 30 year system to be removed from the registry. It’s been 16 years since I’ve finished any sort of supervision so even if I fell under tier II I would only have another 4 years to go which is nothing.
No effect in Florida. And you will still be on the registry after you’re dead.
How are the times tolled? Is it 15, 20 or 30 years after conviction or after sanctions end? Does this law only apply to people convicted by a SC court like some other states or any court like the Georgia laws?
There is a provision that preserves registration requirements from the convicting state if someone was convicted out of state. I’ve seen these in other states to try and deter “state shopping” as they put it by registrants looking for relief in other jurisdictions. Sorry.
James
LOL , thanks for the laugh, I almost spit out my coffee. “State shopping”. That’s funny but a reality for some I guess.
Unfortunately, the yearning for freedom is often seen by others as exploiting loopholes, subverting the law, etc. If only they experienced the daily living under the weight of these laws (with always the threat of imprisonment hanging over their heads), they would be singing a different tune.
Bottom line is that no state wants an influx in registrants, which is why so few are willing to relax their laws. I’m glad some level-headed judges are saying otherwise.
What if the conviction was Federal?
Federal registration requirements would apply, but your state’s laws may also come into play I suppose. See the full text to make sure, though. If in doubt, wait until it becomes law and ask a lawyer for advice.
Many FAC members are not subject to the registration requirements of the convicting state at all, just Florida’s.
I would love to see what the science and their calculus is for the years they give for each tier. They seem arbitrary and akin to more then just getting blood from a turnip, but inflicting the most pain they can and still meet the intent of allowing a path off for all.
Tell me a murderer will always do 30 years, then SC has a bit more standing but they won’t because they don’t. A misdemeanor is worth 15 years? Again, they met the intent, but not without making it exceptionally painful for all on the registry. Statistically, at 17 years a person is no longer a threat. The added 13 years to make 30 overall for tier 3 is just because they can as elected officials.
Did anyone asked about this calculus in the process? What is the science behind it? Now, it is time to get them to understand the science and place appropriate criteria/requirements within each tier for removal with appropriate times, not just follow other states who have done similar years in their tier removal schemes. A great small victory… now make it a better victory for all impacted. Back to the drawing board!
I would guess the time frames they came up with are arbitrary and will likely change again once too many people become eligible for removal.
SC tiers are offense-based, not scientific. Only a few states attempt to apply science to their tier assignments. The majority of states, plus feds, take a ‘sounds good to me’ approach to tier definitions.
The registry itself has been repeatedly and scientifically proven ineffective at preventing sex crime. No supposed “tiering science” will make it so.
Narsol had a representative at the judicial committee meetings and presented the statistical data which supported our position for shorter registration requirements. It apparently did not have much effect, however. The end result is, IMO, the least amount of political compromise they could afford to avoid this being litigated to death.
If you heard the words of the SC AG (Alan Wilson) when speaking on this, he obviously doesn’t want registrants to have any relief and is gearing up to fight every petition. Talk about a caveman mentality and clearly scared he would be voted down in the next election should he show any support. Clearly, he should be voted down, but he should also be more concerned about James 2:13.
Thank You for this update. Will this have any effect on any other States? Good for SC. Hope they publish how much money the state will save by this new ruling.
Congratulations South Carolina registrants. Like the article states it’s not perfect, but a huge step forward. Hopefully Florida will one day have a way off.
Until it stops being profitable for the State to have as many names on its list as possible, after many legal battles, and only well after it’s no longer politically acceptable will Florida even consider a move like this.
Profit (for a few) is the bottom line here… In the guise of public safety mind you.
Bingo.
perfectly said.
Here is the full text:
https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess124_2021-2022/bills/4075.htm
I agree registries need to be abolished. Yet, in Michigan the 1000 ft school safety zone removal allowed me to not only visit me grandchildren’s home but also their school. I spent $$$ I couldn’t afford at their book fair. It gave me a break from registry hell. When one is drowning, a floatation device isn’t as good as a rescue boat, but it hives one a chance.