CA: Elderly Parole Program Exclusions AB 47 Approved by Assembly Committee

Source: ACSOL

The Assembly Public Safety Committee today approved Assembly Bill 47, which if passed, would exclude many people convicted of a sex offense from the Elderly Parole Program.  That program currently allows individuals who have spent at least 20 consecutive years in prison and are at least 50 years old an opportunity to be considered for release from prison.  

No one is automatically released from prison because of the Elderly Parole program.  Instead, they must participate in a hearing led by representatives from CDCR.

“More than 20 people testified today in opposition to Assembly Bill 47 and only three people testified in support of that bill,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “The committee members, however, chose to ignore the voices of reason and instead voted with their emotions.” 

ACSOL Board Member Sherri Harlow Moreno was the first person to speak in opposition to AB 47.  She testified that she is the mother of a child who was sexually abused by her stepfather and that both she and her child wanted restorative justice, not a long prison sentence for the perpetrator.  

The second person to speak in opposition to AB 47 was Emma Tolman, an attorney from Home After Harm, a non-profit organization based in Oakland.  Tolman countered the testimony of a deputy District Attorney in Orange County regarding the rate of re-offense for those convicted of a sex offense.  Tolman said that according to CDCR statistics, only 2.4 percent of elderly persons on parole re-offend.  

Tolman then explained to the committee members that the Elderly Parole Program is a multi-state process during which prisoners must demonstrate their rehabilitation.  She added that money saved due to early release should be spent on prevention and treatment.

One member of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Dr. LaShae Sharp Collins, voted against AB 47 and reminded her fellow committee members that the Elderly Parole Program does not guarantee anyone will be released from prison on that basis.  She also stated that the exclusion of registrants from the Elderly Parole Program could lead to an increase in the rate of re-offense.

Another member of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Tom Lackey, voted in favor of AB 47 after he described registrants as “extreme offenders” and the “worst of the worst.”  He added that he has “strong feelings” against anyone who has committed a sex offense.

 

Related posts

Subscribe
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 or abbreviate 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.  
 

8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Another member of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Tom Lackey, voted in favor of AB 47 after he described people forced to register as “extreme” and the “worst of the worst.” He added that he has “strong feelings” against anyone who has committed a sex offense.

There’s the crux of it, feelings. I would contest that the entire registry scheme, and every decision regarding those who commit the “wrong type of crime”, exists solely because of “strong feelings”. Not logic, rationality, reason, intelligence, research, data, or any higher brain function that is uniquely human.

No, nothing more than primal, reptilian, infantile feelings. Any opposition to this blatant, unremitting, irrational hatred and slavoring stupidity will almost certainly be hijacked by sheer emotion and impulse.

Well… I have “strong feelings”, too, and what I feel is that all those harmless, tired old men rotting away in prison are nowhere near as dangerous or horrible as those who’d have them die in there, never to breath a single breath of free air ever again.

Restrictions based on feelings are destined to cause more harm than good, but that’s just my feelings. Oops I’ve become woke.

Screw them all. We need names and we need to vote them out. If they push us around they should lose their seats.

What is the whole point of the California Constitution if the state doesn’t follow it?

Article 1, Section 7(b): A citizen or class of citizens may not be granted privileges or immunities not granted on the same terms to all citizens. Privileges or immunities granted by the Legislature may be altered or revoked.

This means there are no exclusions of a class of citizens with respect to privileges or immunities. Either all get the privileges or immunities, or none get the privileges or immunities.