Source: ACSOL
The California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) today issued its annual report for calendar year 2021. The report is more than 30 pages long yet devotes less than one page to implementation of the Tiered Registry Law which became effective on January 1, 2021. According to the report, the California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) “has diligently worked to ensure that the (agency)…is sufficiently staffed to handle the increase in terminations that result from granted petitions.” This assertion, however, is inconsistent with the experience of registrants whose petitions were granted more than two months ago and have not received a letter from CA DOJ stating that they are no longer required to register.
In its annual report, CASOMB recommends the addition of an exclusion of registrants in a bill (AB 1950) that when passed significantly reduced the amount of time all individuals are required to serve on probation. According to the report, the absence of an exclusion for registrants was an “oversight” and “should be addressed.” The report does not address the fact that registrants already released “early” from probation have not re-offended at a significant rate.
Perhaps the most important information contained in Appendix C of the annual report which lists “active registrants in the community” by county. According to that list, Los Angeles county continues to have the greatest number of registrants — 15,127. In addition, there are four counties with more than 4,000 registrants — Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino and San Diego. Finally, there are eight additional counties that have more than 1,000 registrants — Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Orange, Solano, Stanislaus, Tulare and Ventura.
Download the report:
CASOMB has been discussing for many months its attack upon AB 1950 so it was no surprise to read in the annual report its recommendation to request the addition of an exclusion for all registrants. What was a surprise is CASOMB’s reason for the exclusion — the containment model. Please know that ACSOL will oppose CASOMB’s attempt to add this exclusion and we will need your help to do it. Please stay tuned.
This proves CASOMB is two face. Not surprising for a bunch of incompetent government hypocrites who also support junk sciences like the polygraph, Static-99/R, and now (what looks like to be), the STABLE-2007.
This is why I personally don’t trust any sex offender statistics that come out of CASOMB. I think they deliberately mislead and underestimate the true registrant count, as well as overstate reoffense and rearrest rates.
I also read a bit about the so-called “Containment Model.” Wow… so basically CASOMB also supports no confidentiality in sex offender treatment?
CASOMB is a trash can organization! CASOMB is emblematic of government incompetence, corruption, and waste.
I was wondering … what are the recidivism rates of other “violent” crimes in comparison to sex crimes? why are the parole conditions of sex offenders so much more restrictive than murder or domestic violence cases?