Source: calmatters.org 4/22/26
State legislators are taking aim at California’s parole system after two high profile sex offenders were granted opportunities for release from prison last year.
David Allen _____ and Gregory Lee _____ each had been convicted of multiple sexual assaults against young children in the Sacramento region, but were both found suitable for parole in 2025 by California’s Board of Parole Hearings.
Under elderly parole statutes, many convicted felons with life sentences may become eligible for their first parole hearing if they are at least 50 years old and have served at least 20 years.
_____ is 67 and _____ is 57, and politicians are challenging the notion that 50 is an old enough benchmark for sex offenders to age out of criminal behavior.
Lawmakers put forward several bills that would restrict parole for sex offenders, a change they say reflects the severity of the crimes as well as doubts about the potential for sex offenders to safely reenter society.
Some civil rights and prisoner advocacy groups are raising concerns…
Why is it so hard to disprove this lie? It has been studied and studied, and the conclusion is that the recidivism rate is extremely low. So, where and how is the disconnect? It’s easy to lie, but it is easier to PROVE that it’s a lie. End of story!
The fear these people are propagating is nothing new as we are aware. The system is set up as it is to take of those who cannot take care of themselves, e.g., committed, if needed. These people don’t like that. So, with that, you have to take the route of fighting fire with fire…you merely tell them they are a greater statistical probability of doing harm to a minor due to their proximity and positions they hold in relation to minors and you do that so it is on the record while they are hearing or reading it. Until they understand this fact, being nice with them does not always work and may never work. Let’em take exception to it, but the truth is out there and the stats prove that. It is nothing personal, well, it is actually, but it is just who they are in relation to the minor.
The article was a well written article that showed both sides of the argument. One side shows fear mongering and wants to cut out a portion of the community from the immunity, which violates CA Constitution Article 1, Section 7(b) that states, “A citizen or class of citizens may not be granted privileges or immunities not granted on the same terms to all citizens.” The other side shares facts, research, and the fact they belong to the immunity passed by Californians.
In the article, it actually shares a lot of facts from low recidivism rates to years of research the recidivism rates lessen the older one becomes.
Please don’t let this immunity be stripped away like it already has been stripped away from 1203.4 registrants.
Yeah California used to be the most strict place to live for PFR they started this madness. Back in the early 2000’s a lot people were fleeing California to different parts of country and different parts of US territories, it got so bad every time they caught one out of state they were from California. Florida was the first state to take action making anyone who ever had to register whether they were removed from the registry or not have to register in their state, and that started a chain reaction. After that the race was on states were creating all kind of laws and ordinance to make their state less desirable for people on the registry. Oregon was the last state left in the US and alot of people stated running there too but Oregon soon was forced to comply with SORNA as well.
If you guys pay attention the California DA is closing the 290 petition process and gonna make it harder in the future to petition. That first wave was lucky and believe it or not their only on their second wave but the door is getting narrower by the day and once that new law passes where you must have completed treatment and all the other stuff, people are gonna have hard time getting off because their using everything u said and did in treatment in court and a reconciliation from the treatment instructors and they’ll wright what ever the DA ask they ain’t gonna lose there funding over a PFR.
I just feel like people are focused on the wrong things. People who are placed in tier 3 are focused on abolishing the registry completely or 30 year offramp and the people who are tier one and tier 2 are just sitting back quietly in the shadows, waiting for their mandatory minimum registration time period to end BUT what everybody doesn’t understand is it ain’t gonna matter if you’re registration time period is up once the DA applies All these new qualifications to successfully petition and if they’re making it harder for tier 1 and tier 2 then tier 3 never will receive an off ramp.
If the registry is such a great, necessary public safety tool as they claim, then there’s no reason to oppose parole for these two or anyone else. The threat they supposedly pose would be mitigated by registration, would it not? [/sarc]