Episode 26 – How Lea Bickerton Is Helping Registrants

11 comments on “Episode 26 – How Lea Bickerton Is Helping Registrants

  1. Don Anthony Johnston says:

    Thanks Andy for dumbing down the questions.

    1. andys says:

      That’s why I’m here LOL 🙂

  2. Mr.Anonymous says:

    I had read that article about Amazon on an ACLU alert, asking me to sign a petition, which I did for whatever that’s worth.
    But I also called Amazon and told them that they were on the wrong side of history and I cancelled my eleven year old Amazon account and told them I was quitting to hit them in the pocketbook. (Of course the lady on the phone was in Manila (and we talked about adobo…) so I asked her to pass it on and she said she would.)
    Not having an Amazon account isn’t hard at all; I bought a hard drive for a laptop the next day from newegg.

    1. andys says:

      Of course you can live w/out Amazon. But it is crazy convenient.

  3. Tim Lawver says:

    Wisconsin does have a backward Supreme Court.
    The last three elections were won by the candidate who expressed ideas supporting the state’s treatment against the S.O. One claimed to have closed a loophole the permitted convicted to escape registration. The loop closed was a constitutional prohibition. The people do not believe in the constitution. We live in a nation of police states enhanced by electronics. John Roberts himself argued for upholding the obvious ex post and was rewarded by his appointment to the Top Seat. He was rewarded precisely because he subverted (or permitted the subversion by congress) via the Whetterling Act. They deep state needed that ruling to advance their desire to utilize databases in Utah to monitor internet use by the citizenry as a whole(felons or not). The two parties will do anything and everything to maintain their power, so they can continue to line pockets with the tax pie.

    1. andys says:

      I know about the Utah facility. But I don’t understand the comments about deep state. Conspiracy theories never make sense to me

  4. WC_TN says:

    I personally think there should be some sort of law or procedural rule that forbids any court to avoid any legal issue simply because it might be controversial. Our judges are not on the bench to win a popularity contest. They’re on the bench to uphold the law. No judge should be allowed to ignore a valid legal argument simply because the way they’d have to rule would run 180 degrees against popular and political sentiment. That’s what that avoidance amounts to. It’s the judge’s way of saying, “I’m not going to be the one to make THAT ruling! The second I do, folks will be out on the streets with torches and pitch forks coming for my hyde.

  5. WC_TN says:

    What about a contact for Lea for those of us who can’t access Twitter? Some of us can use the Internet, but still can’t access social media even after Packingham v. North Carolina.

  6. Mel Gregory says:

    Lea Bickerton is not about Civil Rights at all she uses this mechanism as a platform to get more clients and act as if she cares but once she gets your money she will not represent you. I had her as my attorney she didn’t care at all about my Civil Rights she continued to let the court violate mine and didn’t do anything at all to fight it. I am an Army veteran and everything that I am saying is true. If you hire her for any legal help it will be as if you’re hiring a Wal-Mart Greeter to represent you. All of these Civil Right sites and different things are just ploys or blinders for to portray something she is not. She what I refer to as a Ghetto attorney that has no clue of professionalism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *