Don't worry, they've been rehabilitated, right? In another demonstration that the government in California has more compassion for convicted criminals than it does the victims of their crimes, the state is set to release 10,000 convicted sex offenders back into the community.
Why are they doing this? It's because of prison overpopulation and the fact that citizens voted in 2016 on Proposition 57, which is supposed to allow for early release by those in jail who are alleged to have not been engaged in a violent crime.
According to The Daily Caller, "Now, those convicted of pimping minors, incest, or child pornography possession are eligible for release."
I'm sorry, but seriously? Some of these should warrant a death penalty, not jail time.
However, according to the LA Times, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Allen Sumner preliminarily ordered prison officials to rewrite part of the regulations for Proposition 57.
While the ballot seemed to give provisions that might apply to all inmates, Governor Jerry Brown promised to exclude sex offenders. No surprise here, is it?
"If the voters had intended to exclude all registered sex offenders from early parole consideration under Proposition 57, they presumably would have said so," Sumner said.
Sumner's order states that any sex offender who has served time for their offense, even a violent one, but is now serving time for another offense must be eligible for early release.
Say what? This is a huge problem, as you can see.
The LA Times reports:
That could allow earlier parole for more than half of the 20,000 sex offenders now serving time, said Janice Bellucci, a Sacramento attorney and president of California Reform Sex Offender Laws. Her lawsuit on behalf of sex offenders argued that the rules conflict with the ballot measure's language and voters' intent in approving Proposition 57.
Bellucci argued the measure requires earlier parole consideration for any sex crime not on the state's narrow list of 23 violent felonies, which includes murder, kidnapping and forcible rape.
That could allow earlier parole for those convicted of raping a drugged or unconscious victim, intimately touching someone who is unlawfully restrained, incest, pimping a minor, indecent exposure and possessing child pornography.
The judge said corrections officials can make the case for excluding those offenders as they rewrite the regulations, but Bellucci said she will sue again if officials go too far.
"Until they figure something else out, they have to consider anybody convicted of a nonviolent offense even if it was a sex offense," Bellucci said outside the courtroom. "We believe we've won a battle, but the war continues."
While some think that the response should be bigger government and building more jails, I say that we should be executing justice on violent criminals, as in put them down, not keep them up. Second, jails are full in California, like in several other states due to a lot of "crimes" that have been created by government (mostly I'm referencing the war on drugs), in which no crime actually occurs. The only offended party is the state and as we've seen before, they have a conflict of interest when they are both the plaintiff and prosecutor.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty MediaDon't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.