On Sept. 30 I received a call from someone claiming to be a police officer saying that I was now non-compliant and would be arrested if I didn't bring $3500 to the county courthouse to post bail. He went on to say I had been sent a registered letter and had signed for it and had missed a court appointed hearing date. This was all a scam, which I got sucked into because I knew people who have been arrested, without warning for similar circumstances. It was also made possible because the registry is "public." These scammers had access to that information. I nearly went through with the scam and spent over an hour on the phone with this guy because he said I had to stay on the phone with him until I reached the courthouse. I thought that was very odd, but I complied, not wanting to be arrested. I finally realized it was a scam when he told me I had to convert cash into electronic cards. When I finally realized that the cards, he was talking about were "GIFT" Cards, I hung up and called my registry office. I was glad that the officer picked up immediately and I told him what had just happened. He told me it was definitely a scam and that there were no warrants on me.

I am telling this story for two reasons.

ONE - If you have not put out a warning for this scam in your newsletter please do so. (If you already knew about this and put it in a previous Newsletter, I may have missed it.

TWO - The fact that they used the public registry record to suck me in is just another example of why the registry does more harm than good. It's is obvious that the wrong people are looking at it. I read somewhere recently that the people who view the registry information most are landlords and business people doing employment background checks. The registry, as I have always contended, doesn't protect the people and children it was proposed to protect. It is clearly punitive in nature, causing hardships for the offender and their family members way beyond a sentence laid down. A completed sentence should be complete, not lingering years beyond. I have no problem with law enforcement keeping a private list requiring notice of address changes, and even living requirements with a distance from schools, etc. But the public access to this information is just too much of an invasion of our privacy, a basic right under the Constitution. Additionally, the registry assumes an offender might re-offend. Doesn't the law already have a way of dealing with repeat offenders? The list, by its nature, doesn't allow a first-time offender the benefit of a doubt.

Received from a WAR Member

WAR National Directors