RE: 911:: sex offender registry

[Guest guest]

have a question for someone.. WHAT is the purpose of having the sex offender

registry on NCIC? im not about to tell an officer after he runs a dl that

he is a sex offender.... but ya know, if this sex offender is hanging

around a school, that officer should know. had one tonite, and i had him

call in.. what is your procedure??

in the misc field, there is just to much information that is sick.. its word

for word of how they became a sex offender.. WAY TO MUCH INFO..

JUST curious on how its is in other places.

thanks

keep them safe

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

it is a safety thing to make sure they are not hanging around places they

should not be

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/23/02 11:27:49 PM Central Daylight Time,

mancop69@... writes:

> it is a safety thing to make sure they are not hanging around places they

> should not be

>

I realize that!! however, we do not know the location of the officers all

the time when they run dl's. Im not going to broadcast it if they are on the

registry, therefore if the officer is by the school, or some place sex

offenders shouldn't be hanging around, they won't know the susp is on the

registry. the only reason i can think of is, if they are brought to jail

on a similar charge, they will then know. .. on second thoughts i haven't a

clue really..

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/23/02 11:46:31 PM Central Daylight Time,

wilson_k1@... writes:

> but people in scannerland

> would probably freak.

>

>

THEY WOULD FREAK!! i would just like to know why they decided to put it on

NCIC. it comes over when they are entering them, but ive just noticed

recently it comes up when u run dls and they are on the registry..

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/23/02 11:46:31 PM Central Daylight Time,

wilson_k1@... writes:

> I don't think we have

> a code for it.

thats an idea tho, using a code.. i think i'll make that suggestion

thanks

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/24/02 12:01:39 AM Central Daylight Time,

NC911@... writes:

> We use a signal code for sexual offenders, concealed weapons permit, and

> domestic violence orders.

I don't hestitate in telling officers about the domestic violence orders,

cause have the time the other half is with them.. off to jail they go.

people just don't realize that once they call 9-1-1 on a domestic, its out of

there hands for awhile, can't back out at the time, and a no-contact order is

issued immediately.. we bring alot of people in on violations of domestic

orders.

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/24/02 12:04:22 AM Central Daylight Time,

tmoder@... writes:

> Why wouldn't you tell the officer?

>

scannerland!!!!!!! the sheriffs office would be filled with people asking

about what they heard the night before on the scanner. just don't feel

comfortable broadcasting a sex offender, even tho they are scum.. yes it is

public record, but if somebody wants to know if a certain person is on the

registry, they can find out on their own.. its a simple procedure..

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/24/02 12:11:30 AM Central Daylight Time,

E911bell@... writes:

> Why wouldn't you tell the officer?

>

I think i'll just have the officer call in until i find out the procedure,

wouldn't you all?

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/24/02 12:33:55 AM Central Daylight Time,

jovina@... writes:

> There's no rational reason not to give the information if you

> have it. We don't set policy according to scanner land. When

> I give back a return it's usually something like this,

>

> " 27 on is current & valid, no 29, registered sex offender "

>

> It' short and to the point. The officer can then do whatever

> needs to be done, including taking no action or asking

> additional questions if needed.

>

> Children's safety should come before offending anyone in

> scanner land.

>

> Just my .02 worth

>

> JoVina

> Diboll, TX

>

>

>

>

you are so right.... thanks

jamie in iowa

[Guest guest]

We use a signal code for sexual offenders, concealed weapons permit, and

domestic violence orders. Each have their own code of Sig 19, Sig 20, Sig

21 respectively. We don't use them very often, and you can tell when they

have to go back and look up the code.

Larew

Re: 911:: sex offender registry

It would be interesting to find out how different

agencies disseminate this info. I don't think we have

a code for it. I guess you could use plain

language--it's public info--but people in scannerland

would probably freak.

=====

Kim

I make a difference

Tulsa, OK

__

[Guest guest]

We tell the officer over the radio.......we're not worried about offending a

sex offender.

I think it should be known. If someone with a scanner hears then more power

to them. Here in Texas it also shows up on their d.l. that they're a

registered offender.

We have a website they can go to as well. I myself have walked door to door

telling parents when a registered sex offender moved into our neighborhood.

I was given the information by a parole officer who knew I had a small child.

I went around and told all the parents I know where he lived, what he had

been charged & convicted of and his physical and veh description. I went by

his house myself to get the veh info.

I feel very strongly about the fact that they don't deserve any courtesy in

the area of protecting their feelings. Our kids come first!

s

Abilene PD/FD

Abilene TX

[Guest guest]

- same reason domestic violence information is in NCIC even if warrants

are not extraditable.. Officer safety and citizen safety! Who cares if

they're near a school.. not all sex crimes occur at schools, not all sex

crimes involve children, not all sexual offenders are " dirty old men " and not

all sex crimes occur where the offender lives!. Do you advise officers if

the person they run is listed as a probation/parole client? What about

restraining orders? Concealed weapons permits? Maybe Iowa doesn't enter

this information, Colorado does and any additional information that comes up

on a query, we air to the officers. Don't read the whole entry (I agree some

of the MO's in the sex offender entries can be very disturbing) but I'd

rather my officer know the person he/she is in contact with has an entry of

interest. It just might explain why the person is acting a bit nervous. And

it might prevent/solve a crime. That's why the info is in NCIC ( and because

of the Brady Bill too, most likely).

On an administrative side, I sure wish state/federal legislatures would take

into consideration the amount of work sex offender registries places on local

law enforcement. Because the county work release program is located in my

city, we have a lot of sex offenders coming in to register. We finally had

to make our own policy that we only do it on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Some

register yearly, some twice a year, some 4 times a year. Now Colorado has

the agency enter a second record if the person is enrolled/work/volunteer at

a " secondary education " program such as truck driving school, beauty school,

community college, etc.

As for public access, our law says the public must show " a need to know " for

the information, then they turn around and say a person can request at any

police department, any other departments list!

Alaska has all their sex offenders on a web page and it's being challenged in

court. In Colorado, only the violent sexual predators can be listed on the

state web page as well as those who fail to register.

ahhhh.. it's just one of those things we all have to deal with but back to

the original questions - it's there for officers information and we tell our

officers even if it's a routine traffic stop.

(and if you don't want to get the information, don't do a want check, just do

a DQ for dl status)

kathy

In a message dated 9/23/02 11:04:11 PM Mountain Daylight Time,

E911bell@... writes:

<< THEY WOULD FREAK!! i would just like to know why they decided to put it

on

NCIC. it comes over when they are entering them, but ive just noticed

recently it comes up when u run dls and they are on the registry.. >>

[Guest guest]

I guess I would have to join that soap box - Officer safety is PARAMOUNT

to anything else

[Guest guest]

Re: 911:: sex offender registry

> In a message dated 9/24/02 12:33:55 AM Central Daylight Time,

> jovina@... writes:

>

> > There's no rational reason not to give the information if you

> > have it. We don't set policy according to scanner land. When

> > I give back a return it's usually something like this,

> >

> > " 27 on is current & valid, no 29, registered sex offender "

> >

> > It' short and to the point. The officer can then do whatever

> > needs to be done, including taking no action or asking

> > additional questions if needed.

> >

> > Children's safety should come before offending anyone in

> > scanner land.

OTOH, we're assuming that the information in fact pertains to the individual the

officer is checking. Particularly in a smaller community (as opposed to a big

city), there could well be a " rational reason " for not broadcasting such

information in the manner suggested. There may be someone in Yourtown with

the same name - and close enough identifiers that it " hits " - as that which the

officer is running. A dispatcher broadcasting that " Joe Doomaflobby is a

registered sex offender " could create HUGE, and very long-lasting problems for

the local guy if it's heard by even a handful of citizens. ( " they'll tell two

friends, and they'll tell two friends...) And, especially if it's NOT your

local Mr. Doomaflobby, I could easily see it coming back to bite the department

and the city treasury really hard.

I have virtually no faith in relying on " codes " to keep something secret.

They're well known, often published, and anybody listening to a scanner for a

couple days can figure most codes out just from the context. In this case,

however, some seldom-used code might squeak through unrecognized. That's

assuming the officer has a " need to know, " and the concept of THAT threshold is

becoming more and more commonplace with all the databases at dispatchers'

disposal these days.

Shaky ground, if you ask me.

Harry

The old has-been

[Guest guest]

It seems to me to be a bit contradictory (or at least inconsistent) to say in

one paragraph " There is no need to protect information that is public record and

available to anyone with a computer and Internet connection; " but in the next

to say " if someone has a need to listen to Public Safety Transmission they

should be in a position that allows them to have a radio that is properly

programmed. "

Police radio transmissions, even if they're encrypted or MDT messages, have long

been held to be public information too.

Trunking is now readily followed by a number of scanners on the market, the

" new " APCO P25 digital format will be receivable within two months.

Harry

http://www.snowcrest.net/marnells/kma367.htm <~~ LAPD Communications History

http://www.snowcrest.net/marnells/digital-scanner.htm <~~ New " digital capable "

trunk-tracking scanners

RE: 911:: sex offender registry

>

> Our Department transmits the information to the officer on request. He

> request we check the subject, if it returns that information we put it

> out. There is no need to protect information that is public record and

> available to anyone with a computer and Internet connection. If the

> subject involved is that concerned about others knowing about his/her

> past then the individual should have thought about that before he became

> a Sex Offender.

>

> In Texas not only is the information maintained on a State Web Site but

> it is published in the Local News papers daily for new Entries. As far

> as I am concerned that makes the information PUBLIC RECORD and as such

> is not protected from disemination.

>

> As for Scanner Land. Well, until the recent release of the trunking

> Scanners those departments with Trunked systems simply needed to pay

> closer attention to the way they handled Radio transmissions. I don't

> agree with scanners, never have. The way I look at it, if someone has a

> need to listen to Public Safety Transmission they should be in a

> position that allows them to have a radio that is properly programmed.

[Guest guest]

________________________________________________

Get your own " 800 " number

Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more

http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag

-

> (and if you don't want to get the information, don't do a

want check, just do

> a DQ for dl status)

>

> kathy

I was with you for the whole page and then this stood out.

Please tell me you were refering to the officers

requests.....I'm a firm believer that anytime you're given or

have access to a nam/dob, you run EVERYTHING. Whenever you get

a lic plate you run reg & 29. Whether the officer asks for it

or not. It's a pet peeve of mine when dispatchers do exactly

what's asked and never go the extra mile. Maybe that's because

I have a father & brother who are both officers but getting all

the information on a subject is a matter of officer safety.

I'm training someone now who has already gotten into the habit

of only doing what's asked and it's frustrating trying to get

her to think ahead and outside the box. The really sad part is

her initial training was done by my supervisor who only does

what's asked.....She told me she doesn't aspire to be a

Dispatch Goddess and all my efforts are wasted. Ok, I'll hush

for now

JoVina

Goddess of Dispatch

currently practicing my craft in Diboll Texas

[Guest guest]

>

>

> I realize that!! however, we do not know the location of the officers all

> the time when they run dl's. Im not going to broadcast it if they are on the

> registry, therefore if the officer is by the school, or some place sex

> offenders shouldn't be hanging around, they won't know the susp is on the

> registry.

well, that is why we always broadcast the information. The officer can't do

his/her job without all relevant information.....

[Guest guest]

>

>

> Alaska has all their sex offenders on a web page and it's being challenged in

> court. In Colorado, only the violent sexual predators can be listed on the

> state web page as well as those who fail to register.

>

what was challenged was putting folks on the registry that had committed their

crimes prior to when the mandatory registration law was passed. that issue was

resolved, the website was down temporarily, and is now back up and running.

problem is, if the person committed their sex crime prior to the mid 1990's,

they

aren't required to register and aren't on the list....but, if their crime was in

1982 and they haven't re offended then should they really need to be on a list

somewhere?

http://www.dps.state.ak.us/nSorcr/asp/

Amber in Alaska

[Guest guest]

your agency should come up with a code to id sex offenders

[Guest guest]

we say negative 10-29 10-27 valid subject is code 77

[Guest guest]

> have a question for someone.. WHAT is the purpose of having the sex

offender

> registry on NCIC?

> jamie in iowa

********************************************************************

Hi , good luck on the new comm center.

2nd I had one of those hits on a guy out of Illinois after his old girl

friend called to complain that he was working in Iowa and living in

Illinois. (potential joke but I won't go there). According to the girl

friend, this guy was working as a truck driver in Illinois and driving in

Iowa (no not going there). He has an ankle bracelet, but no one knows he is

in Iowa. Got the phone number and had a DCI agent call him. According to

the NCIC advisory, I didn't see anything that made it illegal for him to be

here.

Here's the kicker. X girlfriend says that this guy has a new girlfriend

(hmm reason to rat him off?) and has brought her little girl to live with

this pedophile. THAT is the problem here. But I think this is where the

problem lies.

Plus it came in right at shift change...always fun when you are by yourself.

Iowa State Patrol Communications, Cedar Rapids

Werling NØXZY

scott@...

http://www.ia.net/~anachamb/pumpkin.html

http://www.jonescountytourism.com

http://www.earthsat.com/wx/dotwx/winter_roads.html

I have a new address for my Olympic photos.

http://www.photoisland.com

Login: ridgeroader password: blah

[Guest guest]

> > but people in scannerland

> > would probably freak.

> >

> >

>

> THEY WOULD FREAK!!

> jamie in iowa

********************************************************************

Good thread here. Scannerland. Ruled by very lonely people with nothing

much to do but listen to cops, EMD, etc etc.

I've had this kind of a discussion before. We have some control over

content but not to whom the message is directed.

The Federal Communications Act of 1934 says (highly paraphrased) anything on

the airwaves is fair game to be heard by anyone.

I always smiled at scramblers etc. The thousands of dollars spent to

install it. Anyone could get a de-scrambler built for under $100.

Digital is another matter, but many early digital capable scanners could

listen easily.

Technology leaves the mid-sized department behind for many years (till the

price comes down).

Iowa State Patrol Communications, Cedar Rapids

Werling NØXZY

scott@...

http://www.ia.net/~anachamb/pumpkin.html

http://www.jonescountytourism.com

http://www.earthsat.com/wx/dotwx/winter_roads.html

I have a new address for my Olympic photos.

http://www.photoisland.com

Login: ridgeroader password: blah

[Guest guest]

> I was with you for the whole page and then this stood out.

> Please tell me you were refering to the officers

> requests.....I'm a firm believer that anytime you're given or

> have access to a nam/dob, you run EVERYTHING. Whenever you get

> a lic plate you run reg & 29. Whether the officer asks for it

> or not.

> JoVina

> Goddess of Dispatch

> currently practicing my craft in Diboll Texas

********************************************************************

JoVina, let me play devils advocate.

Officer calls a plate for registration & wanted. U give it back, And you go

on to say reg owner is suspended for (whatever) and wanted for (misdemeanor

traffic warrant). Now officer says. Car is unoccupied. Waste of time,

waste of resources (paper, electricity, computer time).

I used to do the very thing you support. Way too many times was the

information wasted (see example above) or I had one officer call me on the

phone and ask me why I ran " all that extra crap when I didn't ask for it. "

Hey, just going that extra step to look out for you on the road. He said

" let me worry about the police work, you worry about the paper, pencils and

telephone. "

Plus, by what authority do you run these extra checks? Don't you violate

this person's 4th Amendment civil rights by doing this?

Just because the officer runs some kind of check doesn't authorize a

dispatcher to " invade " their lives.

I don't mean to come off like a wise guy, but have you read " 1984? "

Iowa State Patrol Communications, Cedar Rapids

Werling NØXZY

scott@...

http://www.ia.net/~anachamb/pumpkin.html

http://www.jonescountytourism.com

http://www.earthsat.com/wx/dotwx/winter_roads.html

I have a new address for my Olympic photos.

http://www.photoisland.com

Login: ridgeroader password: blah

[Guest guest]

>That's assuming the officer has a " need to know, " and the

concept of THAT threshold is becoming more and more commonplace

with all the databases at dispatchers'disposal these days.

Shaky ground, if you ask me.

Harry

The old has-beenRegister now!

[Guest guest]

________________________________________________

Get your own " 800 " number

Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more

http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag

-

> JoVina, let me play devils advocate.

You little devil you

Ok, explanation time: when an officer gives me an LP, I enter

it on one formated screen that runs both the registration and

wanted check. That's all I do and I hold the information until

the officer asks for it. If he doesn't it just gets cleared or

shredded.

Same thing with a DL. When he gives me a number, I run it and

it comes back with a DOB, which I then enter to check 29's. I

give him what he asks for and then clear it or shred it. I

would think that anytime an officer makes contact with someone

that they think is important enought to log and give a NAM/DOB

that it would be in everyone's best interest to check wanted

and advise. In TX the sex offender file is cross-referenced

with other files. It is automatically cross-searched in

response to wanted person inquiry using transaction code " QW " .

I don't give them a bunch of stuff they don't need. If the

person/vehicle is 10-29 I let them know and just like with a

hit, it doesn't get confirmed until the officer requests it.

I don't need any extra authority to run these checks it's part

of my job description. There's no violation of rights

according to current interpretation of the 4th Amendment but I

realize that's subject to change. Also, no invasive action on

my part.

By the way, I love it when there's a hot topic we can all

discuss like this....it makes my day a little brighter!

JoVina