Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
I am currently renting a place of residence from an RSO who is on probation. He owns the house and I am one of his roommates. His crime, while a violation of Missouri law, was a misdemeanor. Subsequently, he got a felony charge because he was out past curfew on Halloween night a year ago.
The incident that occurred today raises an interesting legal question about the legal rights of those who are NOT and RSO in rental agreements that I believe is worthy to discuss here because of the substantive and procedural due process of law requirements involved.
Now, before everyone goes jumping on me here, keep in mind that the law is different in every state as to the legal authority of probation officers and read this thread before just assuming I am wrong.
Two probation officers came to the house today. They wanted to check on the guy I rent from, as he lives here as well. In the course of doing so, they also wanted to know who else is living here so the guy asked me if I would speak with them and I did so he was not caused any grief.
The female PO was polite. She identified herself and informed me the guy is on probation. She did not tell me why and she did not disclose that he is an RSO - which was very strange but good too. Anyway, she asked me for my personal information, e.g. full name and date of birth.
Exercising my legal right to know, I asked her why she needed this information. She informed me that part of the requirement of MoSOP (the Missouri Sexual Offender Program) the guy signed an agreement to disclose the personal information of everyone living here.
I informed the PO that while that may be true, I did not sign such so again I asked why she required my personal information, which I had every legal right to know and she was legally required to explain to me to establish a legally justified reason.
The female PO began explaining when the male PO interrupted her and proceeded to threaten to evict me if I did not comply with the demand to provide my personal information. It was clear he was brought along to be the muscle and act like an ass.
I made it clear that I was merely seeing to understand why they needed my personal information. I disclosed that I am an officer of the court and that I am very knowledgeable about MoSOP because my ward is an SO and I am litigating a federal suit involving MoSOP - there is no provision of MoSOP that requires those living in a private residence as a tenant to disclose their personal information.
This requirement falls under the general provision of probation and parole. But the female PO did not rely on this provision as she instead relied upon an alleged provision of MoSOP which does not exist and thus, she had no legal standing to demand my personal information, nor to threaten me with an eviction.
When dealing with those who are NOT on probation or parole, the legal authority of PO's becomes extremely limited and must be articulated in such a way as to show a legal standing exists to take adverse actions against the private citizen.
Obtaining the personal information from a private renter cannot exceed the reason of verifying whether the person has a criminal history, is on probation or on parole. If any of these things exist, then the PO can prohibit the person from living there, but still due process must be afforded to the person.
In other words, in Missouri there must be a judicial hearing to evict a private renter from their residence. The fact a renter does not give their personal information does not translate into the State's right to arbitrarily evict a renter out onto the street. To evict a person without a judicial hearing, in Missouri, is called a "self-eviction" which under Missouri law is an illegal eviction.
Now, it is clear the male PO was threatening me to retaliate against me for exercising my legal right to know and challenge their legal authority by questioning them on their legal right to have my personal information, which he took personal dissent against. And I let him know I did not care for his attitude.
When I informed him that I am an officer of the court, his attitude suddenly changed and he shut up which also means that he acted the way he did based on his own personal bias and not for any legally justified cause and standing.
So, while I gave them my personal information, I also sent his supervisor an email discussing the incident to insure it is documented and thus, have a point of reference in the event any further acts of retaliation occur against me or the guy who is on probation. And as I wrote in my email - just because they guy has a badge does not entitle him to act like an ass to people.
We will see what if anything transpires hereafter.
The incident that occurred today raises an interesting legal question about the legal rights of those who are NOT and RSO in rental agreements that I believe is worthy to discuss here because of the substantive and procedural due process of law requirements involved.
Now, before everyone goes jumping on me here, keep in mind that the law is different in every state as to the legal authority of probation officers and read this thread before just assuming I am wrong.
Two probation officers came to the house today. They wanted to check on the guy I rent from, as he lives here as well. In the course of doing so, they also wanted to know who else is living here so the guy asked me if I would speak with them and I did so he was not caused any grief.
The female PO was polite. She identified herself and informed me the guy is on probation. She did not tell me why and she did not disclose that he is an RSO - which was very strange but good too. Anyway, she asked me for my personal information, e.g. full name and date of birth.
Exercising my legal right to know, I asked her why she needed this information. She informed me that part of the requirement of MoSOP (the Missouri Sexual Offender Program) the guy signed an agreement to disclose the personal information of everyone living here.
I informed the PO that while that may be true, I did not sign such so again I asked why she required my personal information, which I had every legal right to know and she was legally required to explain to me to establish a legally justified reason.
The female PO began explaining when the male PO interrupted her and proceeded to threaten to evict me if I did not comply with the demand to provide my personal information. It was clear he was brought along to be the muscle and act like an ass.
I made it clear that I was merely seeing to understand why they needed my personal information. I disclosed that I am an officer of the court and that I am very knowledgeable about MoSOP because my ward is an SO and I am litigating a federal suit involving MoSOP - there is no provision of MoSOP that requires those living in a private residence as a tenant to disclose their personal information.
This requirement falls under the general provision of probation and parole. But the female PO did not rely on this provision as she instead relied upon an alleged provision of MoSOP which does not exist and thus, she had no legal standing to demand my personal information, nor to threaten me with an eviction.
When dealing with those who are NOT on probation or parole, the legal authority of PO's becomes extremely limited and must be articulated in such a way as to show a legal standing exists to take adverse actions against the private citizen.
Obtaining the personal information from a private renter cannot exceed the reason of verifying whether the person has a criminal history, is on probation or on parole. If any of these things exist, then the PO can prohibit the person from living there, but still due process must be afforded to the person.
In other words, in Missouri there must be a judicial hearing to evict a private renter from their residence. The fact a renter does not give their personal information does not translate into the State's right to arbitrarily evict a renter out onto the street. To evict a person without a judicial hearing, in Missouri, is called a "self-eviction" which under Missouri law is an illegal eviction.
Now, it is clear the male PO was threatening me to retaliate against me for exercising my legal right to know and challenge their legal authority by questioning them on their legal right to have my personal information, which he took personal dissent against. And I let him know I did not care for his attitude.
When I informed him that I am an officer of the court, his attitude suddenly changed and he shut up which also means that he acted the way he did based on his own personal bias and not for any legally justified cause and standing.
So, while I gave them my personal information, I also sent his supervisor an email discussing the incident to insure it is documented and thus, have a point of reference in the event any further acts of retaliation occur against me or the guy who is on probation. And as I wrote in my email - just because they guy has a badge does not entitle him to act like an ass to people.
We will see what if anything transpires hereafter.
Per my telephone voice message I left for you today, I wanted to discuss an encounter I had a few minutes ago with two of your probation officers at --------- Missouri.
The probation officer came to check on _________ who is a registered sex offender and currently on probation. Mr. _____asked if I was willing to speak with his probation officer because she wanted to know who is living here. I agree to do so, simply and only so that Mr. ______was not caused any issues with his probation officer.
Upon going to the door the probation officer explained who she is, though she did not disclose why Mr. _______is on probation even though it is a matter of public record, and she requested my full name and date of birth. Exercising my legal right to know, I questioned why she required this information - keep in mind that she did not disclose anything other than the fact Mr. _____is on probation and thus, she did not present any legally justified reason to have my personal information.
I am and have been fully aware that Mr. _____ is a registered sex offender since I moved here, when I moved to _______ a few months ago due to my state mandated legal duties, and Mr. _____and I previously discussed what took place to cause him to become a sex offender. I am also fully adverse in MoSOP not only because I am appointed by the court to be a guardian of a sex offender who is in an institution, but also because I have written reports for government officials about MoSOP and I am litigating a case involving MoSOP.
Since I am fully adverse in MoSOP and know there is no provision that requires a member of a household to provide their personal information as a stipulation of MoSOP, as that stipulation falls under the purview of probation / parole instead and not MoSOP itself, I had every legal right to question why the probation officer wanted my personal information.
While the female probation officer was polite, the male probation officer wanted to act like he is some goon squad and proceeded to interrupt the female probation officer while she was explaining why she was requesting my personal information, and the male probation officer decided to threaten me with an eviction from my residence if I did not comply with their demand to provide my personal information.
The male probation officer wanted to act like I am a common criminal and he wanted to be a complete ass in trying to flex his muscle with me and threaten me with an eviction. I have no criminal history and I informed both probation officers that I am an officer of the court. Upon doing so, the male probation officer changed his tone and demeanor with me to be polite - something he should have been doing from the very beginning rather than only after he found out that I am not a criminal.
I do not take kindly to being threatened nor more so than I take kindly to a state employee wanting to threaten me as an act of retaliation because I exercised my legal right to know and question why they wanted my personal information. I hope that you will discuss these things with the male probation officer and the need to treat everyone with respect. The fact he has a badge and works for the state by no means entitles him to be an ass and treat people whom he does not know like they are common criminals.
I had every legal right to know exactly why they wanted my personal information especially since they relied upon a purported standing of an alleged MoSOP stipulation that does not exist. Had they simply stated that it is a stipulation of someone being on probation or parole that would have been sufficient legal standing, but they did not rely upon such.
I also hope there will be no further efforts to retaliate against me, Mr. Owens, nor anyone else because I have filed this formal complaint against the male probation officer who didn't even bother to give me his name.
Advocate2 - He shouldn't as long as he reported he had a tenant and the tenant's name on his monthly written reports. There is a section where you list the people that reside with and your relationship to them so in this case it would have been "LegalGuardian - Tenant" and as long as the person could legally reside there, there isn't much more they could do or say. Even though a PO has the right to request more personal information from or about a tenant it can only be for the purpose of ensuring the person can legally be there and/or the probationer isn't in violation by associating with them.
Another way MO is different than Florida is generally a PO cannot enter a probationer's home unless invited in like a vampire even when a warrantless search provision is in place. Only an LEO can do that at will when there is a warrantless search provision.
Yea I was surprised that both of probation officers waited outside the house, as I figured when I went down to meet them they would be in the living room.
As for the owner of the house who is the RSO and lives here, he shouldn't get into any trouble. I have no criminal history, I am not on probation nor on parole and I am an officer of the court - they will be hard pressed to come up with a legitimate reason that does not smell of retaliation to try and have me evicted or take action against the owner of the house.
This is not only why I sent the supervisor my email so everything is documented but also why included that he he disclosed to me that he is an RSO so it did not look like he was trying to conceal things from me or play some game that would draw unwanted attention to him by the PO.
I really can't stand this "badge with an attitude" thing that LEO's and PO's have and it should not have mattered one bit that I am an officer of the court - the male PO should have acted professionally and talked with respect no matter who he is speaking with.