ROCKLIN — Outrage in Placer County over the placement of a legally designated sexually violent predator (SVP) was met with a possible solution Friday put forward by Republican Assemblyman Joe Patterson of Rocklin.
Patterson introduced a new bill looking to ban all release of SVPs as transients into California communities. He wants to strengthen the definition of acceptable housing when these offenders are released from state hospitals after they complete their mandated treatment.
“If they are going to be released, they have to be released in a way that is not going to jeopardize public safety. Transient status does jeopardize public safety,” he said. “What this bill would do is it would define what a qualified ‘house’ is when they are released.”
Patterson said the transient release of SVPs to date has been a misinterpretation of the existing law, which is why he argues more strict definitions of what constitutes housing are needed.
“The legislature never intended going back decades to allow transient releases of SVPs. It never would have been allowed,” he said. “The state has allowed this to happen for too long.”
It’s elections again – time to role out bills no matter how outrageous and stupid they are to get re-elected again.
Maybe they need to do a better job of helping these people get back into society instead of being obstacles.
So it seems their “solution” would be to simply keep “SVPs” incarcerated indefinitely (kind of like what’s happening in many places already…), by ensuring that pretty much nowhere is “acceptable” for them to live.
Also, when they claim that at least half of them “fail”…I’m guessing that most likely just means some kind of “technical violation” of their conditions (such as “failure to register”, or failure to find a job and/or residence…which is almost always caused by their status as registrants/”SVPs” to begin with…)
And, like any other panicky, rushed, emotionally driven policy, this one is based on an individual who does not reflect the majority of registrants, as most will never commit another offense again, and most only ever committed a single offense in the first place…
In 1620 “We” had had enough. “We” left England to escape king George and his nonsense. In 1755 King George decided he didn’t want to allow us “freedom”. During that war 8600 what would be Americans died. The British lost over 31,000 men. Just a historical fact. It just proves by example that if you drive a large number of people away then choose to pursue them they WILL rise up and fight back. “We” are over a million strong. Push us far enough and….
[MODERATOR’S NOTE: ACSOL agrees that all registrants SHOULD be united in fighting for justice. ACSOL never endorses violence of any kind since that just justifies people saying registrants are dangerous. Only a tiny percentage of registrants ACSOL take part in our events. We appreciate those of you who have signed up for our March 6 event. ACSOL hopes that those who have not signed up yet will overcome fear and other excuses and join us. No people group in history has ever gained civil rights by staying home. Show Up, Stand Up, and Speak up!]
I don’t live in a state that has a sexually violent predator (SVP) designation. I’m curious how a person is determined to be an SVP. Does it have to do with the specific law he was convicted of? Or does it depend upon some sort of objective psychological evaluation?
Considering their handling of the Kiely Rodni matter, I would argue the Placer County Sheriff’s Department is the last organization that anyone should look to for suggestions regarding crime prevention.
Even the circumstances of the registrant at the heart of this particular matter seem dubious. The article claims he was re-arrested in 2017 for CP, but didn’t mention a conviction. Makes me wonder if it was actual CP (and if it was, did LE put it there?) or an innocuous picture or video that was determined “porn to him”?
I’d be curious to see if fearless Joe Patterson can provide anything along the lines of statistics distinguishing the number actual crimes of any kind committed by transients with priors contrasted with status offenses (re: release condition violations) committed by them during the course of trying to get this stupid bill passed.
Well, as long as they can expand the definition of “sexually violent” and “predator” then they can keep everyone in prison indefinitely. Attaching the word “violent” of an offense simply for the inclusion of people to stay in prison is unethical, but this country is about as corrupt as a 3rd world country to begin with anyways, so… Yeah. I do know the word “aggravated” just gets attached simply for inclusion of further punishment and management of whoever is unfortunate enough to find themselves in the cross hairs of some over zealous DA working together with a corrupt judge for further prosecutions. This country is toast.
So did they releasees complete their therapy and be deemed safe for release or not? If they were deemed safe for release then it does not matter where they are released or whether they are homeless or not, if they are not safe for release then they should not be released (all should be released, no one should be held indefinitely after finishing their sentence). This just seems like an attempt to get a second bite of the apple after the registrant jumped through all the hoops and succeeded to add another insurmountable hoop to ensure no one ever leaves.
Ok then, what should happen for the SVP’s released…is for them to be released into a halfway-house until they acquire support via a job and housing. This way the system is encouraged to succeed.
So if a released “patient” doesn’t have a home to go to, he should stay in treatment forever? What if the “patient” already owned a home on the outside? He’s more deserving of not remaining locked up? Now I see why advocates have been pushing bail reform. Money & resources shouldn’t be the only thing that buys freedom
The scary part is every PFR who’s been to prison had to undergo some type of mandatory sex offender therapy or while on parole, so in a sense they all have been committed to some type of psychiatric facility.
Another thing I’ve notice is people don’t like to use the word “SEX OFFENDERS” in public anymore, here in California they call us 290 registrants, only law enforcement and the DA office still use the derogatory term.
So now they’ve come up with a new term one five times scarier than the last “The Sexually Violent Predators” this is just a small glimpse into the future of life on the registry in California.
People placed in tier3 better start lobbying and fighting back in protest because California politicians are coming for everyone placed in that tier.
I’m guessing this bill is not likely to pass. For one thing, this is a Republican writing it. That puts it at a disadvantage in the California State House. Even when Melissa whatshername, a conseervative Democrat trying to impress her red district, authored an anti-pedo bill a few years ago, it failed. On the other hand, if this was about releasing [People Forced To Repeat Unfamiliar Acronyms] from prison, that would be even less likely to pass in California. Because it’s the “SVP’s” being released specifically from Coalinga State Hospital, sympathy for their rights will be further reduced. Still, I would guess that it won’t go through. It does require some letter-writing and phone-calling, though and we should be willing to do it because many of us could easily have ended up in Coalinga considering how little many of the men there had to do in order to get thrown in there. Many are non-violent “Sexually Violent Predators.”