As part of the settlement, the county agreed to pay damages of $2,500 each to the plaintiffs ― sex offenders Charles Munsey Jr., Vincent Rinaldi and Charles Violi ― plus pay $150,000 for plaintiffs’ attorney fees.

The lawsuit filed in January 2022 in U.S. District Court was triggered by a 2006 Brevard County ordinance that, with some exceptions, prohibits people on the sex offender registry from being within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, park or playground. Violators are subject to up to 60 days in jail and up to a $500 fine.

Because the Brevard County Government Center in Viera is within 1,000 feet of a school — and the ordinance had no exceptions for attending public meetings — sex offenders were prohibited from attending County Commission meetings.

Legal action filed: 3 Brevard County registered sex offenders file federal lawsuit against county

The lawsuit alleged that, because of this, the county violated the First Amendment and Florida’s Government in the Sunshine Law.

After the lawsuit was filed, the County Commission changed the rule to allow an exception for attending commission meetings. But the lawsuit continued, until the plaintiffs and the county agreed to the settlement.

Appearing before commission: Registered sex offenders address county commission after rule changed to allow them

In commenting on the settlement, the plaintiffs’ lead attorney in the case, Ray Taseff of the Florida Justice Institute, said: “We’re happy that the Brevard County government is now truly open to everyone. Cities and counties should take note that they cannot restrict who attends their public meetings.”

Taseff added that “it is quite unfortunate that this lawsuit had to be filed in the first place.”

Another attorney for the plaintiffs in the case, Jessica Travis of the law firm DefendBrevard.com, said: “It is important that every single citizen be able to address their elected officials, regardless of who they are or what their background may be.”

Taseff noted that, before the County Commission carved out an exception for its meetings, the plaintiffs could not even address commissioners when the commission in 2020 was considering making sex offender ordinances more restrictive by barring offenders from entering within 1,000 feet of businesses where children typically congregate, a proposal that commissioners approved.

Brevard County Communications Director Don Walker said the county would have no comment on the settlement other than saying the payments of the legal fees and the payment to the plaintiffs would be covered by insurance.

After the County Commission modified the ordinance in March 2022 to allow sex offenders to come to County Commission meetings, the plaintiffs attended a May 17, 2022, meeting. During the public comment period, they spoke about how the remainder of the ordinance negatively affects their lives, such as restricting their ability to take loved ones to the hospital or attend events with their grandchildren.

By settling the lawsuit, the case did not go to trial, and no formal judicial ruling was issued.

Now they’re suing.

At least 11 men and the nonprofit group North Carolinians for Rational Sex Offender Laws accused Cherokee County and Sheriff Derrick Palmer of violating their constitutional rights in a lawsuit moved to federal court Wednesday. The case was originally filed in state court in early October but defense attorneys opted to change venues, citing issues related to federal case law.

Attorneys for the offenders, defense attorneys and a representative for Cherokee County and the sheriff’s office did not immediately respond to McClatchy News’ request for comment Thursday.

The lawsuit seeks $5 million in damages and a jury trial, according to court filings.

According to the website of the North Carolinians for Rational Sex Offender Laws, the group was created in 2016 as an affiliate of a national chapter and advocates for “legal reforms that will protect and restore (sex offenders’) fundamental rights to life and liberty.”

READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE

The staff of NCRSOL has been approached by an attorney with a specific request to gather as many stories about the registry as possible. The purpose of this is to demonstrate “how the registry impacted your life”?  

The purpose of the letter campaign is to submit as many letters as possible to a judge to hopefully sway the court to overturn the registry or parts of the registry. But this task starts with anyone currently on the sex offender registry. 

First, the criteria: 

1. You must be convicted of a sexual offense in North Carolina,
2. You must be on the NC Sex Offender Registry, 
3. You must be able to provide your real name for the story, (we won’t publish your story online)
4. You should provide an email and phone number where the attorney can contact you at a later time, (this information will remain confidential)
5. The information will NOT be published online, on a website, or for commercial purposes. Your story could be read to a judge to describe “life on the registry” and how it has created barriers in your life. 
6. Your story must be completely honest. Do not embellish. Use as many facts as possible. (ie. Cannot attend family graduation, cannot attend church, cannot attend library, cant go swimming, cannot go to a McDonalds, cannot drive a bus, unable to use social media such as Facebook, cannot live in a house because of residential restrictions, people use the registry to harass you, the registry has been a tool to harass family in the home, etc…). Information where the registry has impacted you,
7. Tell your story boldly of why the registry has turned your life upsidedown. Be completely honest about every detail, date, and event.
8. You do not need to tell the story of what or why you landed on the registry. The attorney only wants to hear “how the registry has affected you” from being unable to do things or restrictions that have stopped your day to day routines that you did before the registry.
9. We require your story no later than May 15th, 2020, 
10. Your story must be signed and dated. 

Please mail your typed or neatly handwritten letter to the following: 

North Carolina RSOL

Attn: Attorney letter project

PO Box 25423

Raleigh, NC 27611

There will be an update on the status of the NARSOL conference held in June 2020.

As usual, even though not required, we ask that you register your intention to attend so we will have an idea of how many callers to expect.

The phone number is 605 313-5169, followed by 957605#. You may call in directly with a telephone or, if you have a speaker and microphone or a headset with a mic, you may access the call through your computer by going to  https://www.freeconferencecallhd.com/dialer and following the on-screen directions for inputting the number and the code.

We also are going to live stream the call on You Tube. There won’t be any video, just an audio stream, so you can try this if you’d rather not call in. You can use your Roku, AppleTV or ChromeCast to have the call played over your TV.

Disclaimer

Keep in mind, responses provided on the program are merely intended to offer guidance and should not be construed as legal advice. We cannot cover the specifics of any individual’s situation sufficiently to know what the most prudent course of action is, so NARSOL advises all participants to consult with an attorney in their jurisdictions to determine the best course of action.

“They put a perimeter around the fairgrounds, a quarter of a mile. And, when a person comes through that perimeter with an ankle bracelet on or whatever they have, it sets off an alarm,” said Wake County Sheriff Donnie Harrison.

A new law took effect last year barring many of the state’s roughly 17,000 registered sex offenders from being on the fairgrounds during the State Fair.

“We just feel like it’s patently unfair,” said Robin Vanderwall, who is a registered sex offender in Wake County and with the organization North Carolinians for Rational Sexual Offense Laws.

He said the law unfairly targets some people who’ve served their criminal sentences and fulfilled their probation obligations. His group is seeking to have the law overturned.

“We understand people’s concern for safety,” he said. “We believe there’s probably a better solution to addressing that concern.”

Read the full article by clicking here.

Robin’s comments:

While I can’t say I’m terribly disappointed by the final news story, I am disheartened that most of what I felt were the very best clips didn’t make it into the cut. For example, when asked what I believe people most misunderstood about registered citizens in North Carolina, I pointed to low recidivism rates and made glowing claims about the more recent scientific data that backs that up. When asked why I thought it was unfair that registered citizens couldn’t attend the fair, I responded that there would be thousands of ex-felons at the fair on opening day and throughout the following week, but that only one particular sub-class of citizens are categorically denied admission. I suggested that the more appropriate concern of law enforcement regarding the state fair was the potential for a domestic terrorism incident much like what we witnessed in Las Vegas.

I wrote Michael, the reporter, an email after the story aired and politely chided him for allowing Sheriff Harrison to paint the image that all sex offenders are wearing ankle bracelets when the reality is that very few individuals in North Carolina actually do. The policy restricting access by individuals wearing ankle bracelets has been in place for quite a long time and there is nothing about a complete ban on all registered citizens that changes it or even improves law enforcement’s capacity to monitor anyone who is NOT wearing an ankle bracelet. Sheriff Harrison merely took advantage of the interview to perpetuate the myth that all sex offenders are equally–and highly–dangerous to the public. We know that is certainly not the case.

It’s important to note that this press opportunity was not solicited by NCRSOL. Instead, Michael reached out to NARSOL and was referred to me as someone local enough to do an on-air interview.

Emboldened by a recent decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that set aside similar amendments and enhancements imposed by the state of Michigan, NARSOL and NCRSOL are joined by individual plaintiffs who seek to set aside legislative enactments since 2006 that have incrementally expanded the scope of restrictions imposed upon citizens required to register as sex offenders.

For more than a decade, the North Carolina Legislature has continued to add increasingly burdensome restrictions on its registrant population as evidenced by its recent passage of a revised premises statute (§ 14-208.18) even despite significant push back from the federal courts.

Such restrictions include prohibitions on where registrants may live and work, go to school, dine, recreate, attend sporting events, or even worship. Registered sex offenders are forbidden to change their names, access a wide variety of social media websites, and are generally restricted from being within 300 feet of any location where children frequently congregate including libraries, shopping malls, and many restaurants.

“The time has come to confront these laws more aggressively. They simply do not protect the public. The research is clear that laws such as North Carolina’s actually increase the danger to the public by preventing people from effectively reintegrating into society. At the same time, too many people are being denied basic constitutional rights under the guise of public safety. Nobody disputes the state’s compelling interest in protecting children and adults from sexual abuse. But no American citizen should have to give up fundamental, guaranteed, First Amendment freedoms in the name of a policy that simply doesn’t work,” said Robin Vanderwall, president of NCRSOL.

Paul Dubbeling, a Chapel Hill attorney who was successful in a previous challenge to the state’s defunct premises statute, filed the new complaint in federal district court on Monday. When asked about this new suit, Dubbeling stated: “This is ultimately about public safety. The North Carolina registry law simply fails to actually protect the public while at the same time unnecessarily denying basic constitutional rights to tens of thousands of citizens. To protect both the public and the Constitution, we need to return the power to decide who is dangerous and who isn’t to those best able to judge – the judges themselves.”