This is a pure matter of law which if the defense attorney is on the ball will never be presented to a jury. The judge needs to be pinned down to a ruling long before that and the issue preserved for appeal. The "citizen witness" in this case is actually a police officer that chose to take his children at a special time because the rest of the time the haunted house wasn't catering primarily to children. This is already in a sworn statement so he will have a very difficult time retracting that information.

Additionally Hawthorne was volunteering to fulfill a community service requirement so he was nominally there at the direction and supervision of a court.

Another issue is the statute does not define primarily or directly. In that situation Hawthorne is entitled to interpretations most favorable to him. Does jumping out from behind a wall wearing mask constitute "direct: interaction. Probably not. Direct interaction would be clear face to face communication, physical contact with a specific individual etc etc. Jumping out from behind a wall at a group of people is indirect interaction as there would be no way to determine if the action was directed at a specific individual or the group at large.

I'm not just splitting hairs here these are serious due process issues that are actually in Hawthorne's favor and they need to be challenged.

Having said that it was a bone headed move to work there.

"Having said that it was a bone headed move to work there"

Yep

Just like those bogus Halloween rules that do not apply to those off paper where I live but they make everyone sign it anyway ...we are fighting it now - it is the principal of the thing. Some say that it opens the door for the county to make an ordinance and if they try we will fight that too but even if they do the message is you can not just arbitrarily impose restrictions on RSOs just because ...

I am glad you are fighting this Advocate2, the more people that do this the better, I myself would never sign, law or no law, but easy to do and say since I am off paper. I will sue if they ever attempted this here. Hell they hate us anyway might has well try and win some.

I have no problem fighting this and I'm not saying don't fight this. Advocate you think I am saying that and I am not at all! If you are going to fight have a lawyer ready and make them eat crow like California RSOL is doing. They are sending a RSO in to a beach waiting for them to be apprehended so they have standing then suing on their behalf. If that is the game plan count me in. That was clearly not this gentleman's game plan.

Again it's a monumentally stupid for a RSO to do this! There isn't a registerant or former registersnt on here that thinks this is a good idea. I agree the law is also monumentally stupid, but in a battle of stupidity the RSO ends up a loser because the law is going to win.

Advocate do you think I'm okay with the law? You are showing personal vitriol towards me like I personally think it is okay to continue punishing people after their sentence is served. I am not okay with the law. I am simply stating what is the best way to survive while under these laws. What this guy did was as Aladdin put it, was "boneheaded". You can call that "rhetoric" but that is a fact. What I am advising is people don't go back to prison where you are around a bunch of people that will try to hurt chomos. You call that rhetoric I will call that common sense! Jeez!

No I do not think you are ok with the law - but what I am saying is that the laws are wrong and they are many, many, times misinterpreted by the LE or just plain made up! I was appalled when I started calling LE around here including the sheriff office asking about the basis for the "Halloween restrictions." Not one of them knew the answer! They said all kinds of insane stuff like "Well what exactly does your son want to do on Halloween ...?" Jerks! LOL My answer was "Live!" Another one told me that he had to comply just because ... I was like are you serious????

My point is it may very well turn out that he was not breaking the law and the LE who went there was misinformed (including the other LE that verified his status) - he made have had permission but we will likely never see that story if it turns out that way ... If he was breaking the rules by working there then I guess it was a mistake to do it but I doubt seriously that the guy said to himself I am going to risk prison for this job ... that is what makes it very relevant to me - I hope the judge that hears this case has some sense ... I doubt seriously it will go to jury

Remember just becasue he was arrested does not mean he was actually breaking the law ....

I do agree partly about one thing - sadly I think in our country today anyone (not just RSOs) is dumb to teach school (kindergarten thru 12th), or coach sports, volunteer for scouts or anything similar ....I would not do it for millions of dollars and that is a very sad state of affairs ....

The bible has a great add to this conversation:

"Everything is permissible"--but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"--but not everything is constructive.

This was clearly not a smart thing to do. Most registrants wouldn't do this even if it were lawful for the reason you mentioned, fear of being wrongly accused. You said it's not smart for people who aren't registered to do this, how much more is it for an RSO??

My statement was made not to say whether the guy is guilty or innocent, that is for a judge to decide. It was more to say to the people reading this we have to be smart! If the plan was to get a job so you have standing to sue that is one thing, and I clearly support that. I think fighting the laws like California RSOL is doing is incredible! However I think if you asked most other registerants or former registrants on here they will echo what Aladdin and that it was "boneheaded."

If I may...

From minute one when I saw the story as it first aired, I truly believe that this guy truly knew what he was doing regardless if he was desperate for [any] kind of job.

I say it wasn't "boneheaded", it was done on purpose.

Of course we will not learn all of the parameters until the case moves along; in my humble opinion he thought it was a perfect opportunity:

1. Because he could wear a mask to hide his identity
2. Because he would be in close contact (whatever his motivation was)

Either this guy was dumb, stupid... or both. I mean what does he think he is going to say in front of a judge or jury "if" he got caught even if he didn't think he was going to get caught, "Sorry... I needed a job?" C'mon.... REALLY?

This is my perfect example of what I said in other posts regarding people are going to do whatever they want to do when they want to do it. Whether good or bad. Regardless if they know the consequences or if they think that they can beat the consequences. I am most sure that this guy's "best thinking" that he could get away with it outweighed the reality that he had a better than 90% chance of getting caught.

He's not thinking about society as a whole or even his fellow RSO's. He was in it for what he could get. Not even thinking that now it's going to be that much harder not only for him... but for all of us.

(Most sarcastic tone ever) Gee thanks Halloween dude... you are really swell.

Sigh ... but the point is whether it is stupid or boneheaded for an RSo or anyone else - or whether it was permissible or not - It should not even be an issue at all for anyone! That is my point ...the fact that it is is scary and just plain unconscionable!

Steps - I hate to say it but that attitude is what "they" think - you are thinking the worst of the worst of this man and that is what the general public does ...the truth is none of us know him or his circumstances - the report says that the haunted house (most of the time except for the special day) was geared toward adults not children. It also says he did not do anything questionable at all. He also has not committed any crimes since serving his sentence. I, for one, choose to give him the benefit of the doubt ...I will not buy into the fear mongering that is fed to the people ....

"Sigh ... but the point is whether it is stupid or boneheaded for an RSo or anyone else - or whether it was permissible or not - It should not even be an issue at all for anyone! That is my point ...the fact that it is is scary and just plain unconscionable!"

Agreed. In a perfect world it wouldn't be a big deal. I am just trying to make sure everyone knows the consequences of the world we live in, not a utopian one I wished we lived in. We live in a minefield already, there is no reason to go looking for more trouble.

Unfortunately nothing has ever gotten changed when people choose to avoid trouble ....

I am NOT advocating that anyone break the rules and put themselves in jeopardy - but history shows that you have to push back to get results and sometimes that means suffering consequences

Again which is why I like what CA RSOL is doing. They are putting a guy in a situation to gain standing to sue. There is a way to do it, but just flat out not following the rules with no plan in place like this guy did is not smart. We already have enough problems, we don't need to be manufacturing more for ourselves.