A three-day operation by law enforcement agencies in Sacramento County to make sure convicted sex offenders are complying with sex offender registration requirements resulted in 32 arrests.
The operation, which began Aug. 21, was carried out by the multi-agency Sacramento Sexual Assault Felony Enforcement Team in conjunction with the Sacramento County Probation Department, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Parole Team, California Office of Correctional Safety, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Problem Oriented Policing Teams, the U.S. Marshals Service and the Rancho Cordova and Sacramento police departments.
So did these people actually conduct any real criminal activity outside of arbitrary registry rules? And yes, they are arbitrary since there’s zero evidence that any of these rules actually do anything.
Janice, I do hope that as an organization as leader, we can at least see that these individuals do not get railroaded and address compliance checks as harassment. If not on parole or probation, there should be no reason for le to contact you.
What I find odd is the different agencies involved. Even represented at the federal level. Concentration camps and roundups are not that far off if nothing is addressed.
Let’s look at it the right way.
They targeted 300 people already suspected of something they found 17 new registration violation cases which did not result in arrests, meaning these were likely people who moved without saying, or they didn’t answer their door and this number is made to look like actual new cases when in reality it just means detectives have to do followup to make sure that it’s not just people at work our out for the day. Only 49 of those 300 checks were known address checks. This means that there were only really 49 known to be sex offenders targeted out of the 3,797 people and likely much of the homeless sex offender population which is 422 people. 422 is far more than 300, which means they only targeted sex offender with address out of all of the sex offenders, but only 49 of them.
As reality has it 49 targetted out of 3797 means that only <%2 of the registrants were selected for checking compliance with 17 of those people found to be out of compliance. This means that only 0.5% of sex offenders targeted are now suspected of being out of compliance but not charged or convicted yet with only 14 people currently charged for non-compliance, or less than <1% of the entire population being charged after the sweep targeted sweep.
There were 32 arrests with only 14 of them for sex offender violations.That means there were 18 people who were charged with OTHER crimes which means it's likely those 18 people are on parole or probation an and receiving violations of their conditions. If 18 arrested her not in violation of a sex offender law but were targeted, it means they were probationers or parolees who were NOT sex offenders, meaning that this wasn't just a sex offender sweep. This was a sweep of everyone being targeted in a wider net.
I'm going to guess that US marshals were involved because the number of non-sex offenders who were to be located with active warrants (fugitives from justice) and the fact that the remainder of those targeted were sex offenders who were on their radar.
Again, i want to emphasize that not a single sex offender was arrested for a new sex crime. Additionally, 14 out of the 3797 arrested with 17 others needing follow up. That's less than 1% of the entire population in their Jurisdiction.
I don't know if my numbers are right, but this is how i interpret it.
Did they get all them “obsconders” of that there Domestic Violence Registry?
This is the kind of crap that gives us all bad names. Just be compliant. Plain and Simple. Just do what is required to the best of your ability.
I guess that we need to buy more donuts… these guys must be really board… i can’t believe this, what are they trying to accomplish…?? Maybe end of year budget spending i hope they reached their goal… Pathetic!!!
And this makes the Sacramento area oh so much safer, everybody in the area can now sleep better at night.
Notice the timing with SB421
I think everybody’s been thrue this the cops love it
8 !!?? It takes eight gawd-damned law enforcement agencies to conduct such an operation?? WTF?? LEOs: “Let’s just waste a ton of taxpayers’ money and line our pockets with overtime pay!!”
Don’t forget they wear big bullet proof vests that say Police special unit and carry automatic looking rifles just to check on us. Not overkill or anything.
Plus it’s a lot easier than fighting antifa cucks in Berkeley or getting their feet wet lending some help in Texas.
I’m totally pro LE when it comes to fighting real crime, but this is a joke.
I’m in San Diego County…. And unincorporated (so its the Sheriff) SDSO… I am NOT ON PAROLE/PROB.
Thugs came out to my place (2 of them) Had a LIST in hand of names and faces… checking on.
They were on the OTHER SIDE of my 6′ locked fence/gate.
Couldn’t come through I saw them at the gate, I went near, they didn’t ask my name said my picture matched. I told them I know what they are here for, I live here and that is it HARASSMENT Plain and SIMPLE and there is NO LAW for them to do a COMPLIANCE CHECK unless I have committed or they suspect i’ve committed a crime. They asked If I had the same car and no job I said yes. They said…. DID I SEE THEM ON MY CCTV Cameras…. I said YES and that was it they left. (Property littered with CCTV Cameras recording 24/7)
HOW is any “compliance monitoring” LEGALLY JUSTIFIABLE? Any 290 registrant that is OFF PAROLE OR PROBATION, has their 4th Amendment right to PRIVACY back, AND there is NOTHING in PC 290 that allows for law enforcement to “monitor” ANY 290 registrant for alleged “compliance”!
Please advise how law enforcement is getting away with “compliance checks” on NON-PROBATIONER/PAROLEE 290 registrants!
No one seems to know or has found if it is written into CA law about compliance checks??? Is that right?