IA: Prisoner advocates feel more hopeless after sex offense civil commitment presentation

Source: newtondailynews.com 12/5/23

Families and advocates of incarcerated individuals at Newton Correctional Facility had been waiting months for the Iowa Board of Corrections to provide some semblance of an answer to their questions regarding the state’s civil commitment program. It was finally put on the agenda. Open for all to see.

Although the department of corrections and its board members acknowledged their concerns, advocates left the meeting last month feeling hopeless.

Despite a presentation about the sex offender civil commitment referral process from its program manager, Ken Pirc, those in attendance were still left scratching their heads and questioning whether the code directing the process is adequate. Final words from board member Webster Kranto further solidified their anguish.

“What I’ve learned over the years on this board and the conclusion I’ve come to is that I can’t actually change anything. I don’t think we can change anything. As time goes on, the rules change constantly to give us less and less power, less and less access,” he said. “In real life I don’t think there’s anything we can do.”

Reads the full article


Related posts

Notify of

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


  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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

Interesting quote seemingly justifying endless civil commitment: “someone who completes a substance abuse program may not change their ways. That’s a choice they make, but that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t offer them programming,” Nelson said

Indiana residents, if you want change, Show Up, Stand Up, and Speak Up

Related: Is Graydon Comstock still in civil confinement? He was the person who, six days before he was to leave after serving his full sentence with no parole in the mid-2000’s, was sentenced (yes, I know “committed” is the correct term, but “sentenced” is the ACTUAL result) to civil confinement, and SCOTUS ruled civil confinement was legal in 2010.

I have a hard time comprehending how this article can talk about CIVIL commitment, but talk about the process in legal terms such as the individual being referred to the AG for prosecution and then having to go in front of a judge. There’s nothing civil about the process at all.
So I am suggesting a solution to this. How about just getting rid of civil commitment and let the judge decide everything during the criminal sentencing. In other words, if the crime is so heinous, or the individual demonstrates predatory behavior, let the judge pass down a sentence of life with the possibility of parole. That way, the individual will at least know where he stands because no one seems to get released from civil commitment anyway.