CA: Senator Brian Jones introduces bill to prohibit violent sex offenders from getting out of prison early

[ – 2/19/21]

SANTEE (KUSI) – Senator Brian W. Jones (R-Santee) has introduced Senate Bill 445, a measure to stop violent sex offenders from being eligible for early release from prison.

Senator Jones joined Good Evening San Diego to discuss his bill.

“Violent sex offense victims, and the families of victims, should not have to wonder if their attacker will suddenly get out of prison long before they finish their sentence,” stated Senator Jones. “Right now the law is rigged and forces the Board of Parole Hearings to justify why the violent sex offender shouldn’t get out of prison early. This is backwards and wrong. Law-abiding Californians, not violent criminals, should be protected by the law.”

A last minute gut-and-amend bill last year, Assembly Bill 3234 (Ting – 2020), lowered the age threshold for elderly parole from 60 years of age to 50 years of age. A loophole in that bill allows violent sex offenders to be eligible for elderly parole after serving only 20 years. Despite the significant societal and fiscal impacts of the bill, AB 3234 was not heard in a single Senate committee.

Read the full article


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Secret bills?! What’s going on in Kalifornia that they need such secrecy?

Isn’t that the bill where they introduced a misdemeanor diversion program? They ended up changing it to exclude people “charged” with sex offenses from the program. As if being “charged” makes a person guilty…

Hm, opponents to the bill were California Crime Victims United and the National District Attorneys Association. Looks like the usual suspects who oppose the constitutional right of the presumption of innocence. Almost looks like a coverup, maybe they have some wrongful convictions over there due to this whole “victim’s rights” nonsense…

I advise this senator and anyone else confused about the law to actually read it. No one and I mean no one except those found to be wrongfully imprisoned gets out of prison suddenly.

First off, I can’t think of one single reason why the parole board shouldn’t have to explain why they’re denying parole to anyone, regardless of the crime(s) of conviction.

Second, the phrase “eligible for parole after serving ONLY 20 years” is laughable. 20 years is a pretty damn long time.

Third, at least in Georgia no one convicted for sex offenses and served less than 20 years in confinement gets parole regardless of what the law says, always claiming “due to circumstances of the offense.” Betting California parole is the same (maybe a few exceptions), making the bill unnecessary. His seat looks to be up for election next year, so I bet he’s just grandstanding and fluffing for his campaign.

And finally, these tidbits:

“Violent sex offense victims, and the families of victims, should not have to wonder if their attacker will suddenly get out of prison long before they finish their sentence,” stated Senator Jones.

Does that include CP offenders? What about the state and federal agents that sent the CP to those convicted for having it? If the victims depicted in the media were “further victimized” by simple viewing, doesn’t that apply to those who sent ot to them? That would make them distributors (i.e. attackers), would it not?

“Right now the law is rigged and forces the Board of Parole Hearings to justify why the violent sex offender shouldn’t get out of prison early. This is backwards and wrong.”

That NEVER happens. Everyone denied parole gets the same “circumstances of the offense” reason, no matter what the charges or circumstances were. Personally, I would argue parole decisions should be based on conduct while in prison (as originally intended) instead of the charge(s) that put them there.

“Law-abiding Californians, not violent criminals, should be protected by the law.”

Laws don’t protect anyone. If they did, there would be no crime. Increase penalties for subsequent offenses all you want, but increasing penalties for those already convicted does absolutely nothing in terms of prevention or protection.

Sounds like their after the immigrants crossing the border from different parts of the world mostly people coming from Mexico.
Under the last administration they were aloud to capture and do whatever they wanted to innocent women and children crossing the border.
America lost/stolen thousands of children and baby’s from helpless people at the border who knows where all those children went So im glad Kamala Harris and joe Biden are shutting down these conservation camps
I bet If the government wanted to banded the usage of cellphones in public places all they have to say is SEX OFENDERS are using cellphones in public places to prey on minors and people would buy it.
I bet You could get any bill passed in this country if you throw words SEX OFFENDERS into it

Good luck

I can tell you personally… SANTEE is almost a REDNECK town… (just like its neighbor LAKESIDE… having lived in Santee (as its called Klantee) People drive around with swastikas etc… It was the town that recently had a person with a mask that had a 45 on it…. I have a PO BOX there but its all I go there for is my mail. The post office is horrible, The Sheriff there is a dISGRACE ! I think its pop is around 40-60K.. this bill will go nowhere santee is trash ! I know this as FACT as i used to live there !

What about the violent criminals whom get paroled and cause more crime while out? I know of one case where a career criminal went in front of the parole board and stated he’d commit more crimes. He got paroled and ended up killing 4 innocent people. Guess Senator Jones doesn’t care about those crimes, just sex offenses. This Senator has some serious issues with judgement and logic.

If this bill becomes law, all individuals convicted of rape (PC 261(2) and PC 261(6)), spousal rape (PC 262(a)(1) and PC 262(a)(4), rape in concert (PC 264.1), lewd or lascivious acts (PC 288(a) and 288(b)), sexual penetration (PC 289(a)), sodomy (PC 286(c)(2) and 286(c)(3)), oral copulation (PC 287(c)(2), 287(c)(3) or 288(d)), and continuous sexual abuse of a child (PC 288.5) will be excluded from the current elderly parole laws. Therefore, ACSOL opposes this bill and will soon post information on this website regarding how to stop this bill from becoming law.