Thursday, January 14, 2010

LET'S BE REASONABLE WITH THE REGISTRATION OF SEX OFFENDERS (3)

Proposition 83, Jessica’s Law, is a bill passed overwhelmingly last November by 70 percent of California voters that prohibits convicted sex offenders from residing anywhere within 2,000 feet of any schools and parks. According to Sacramento Sheriff's Sgt. Mike Jones, supervisor of the department's sex assault felony enforcement team, "If you drew a 2,000-foot radius around any school or park, the centers would overlap to where there would be almost nowhere sex offenders could live."

As a former California parole agent, I know exactly where Paco is coming from when he slams PC 290. And I don't blame Paco for sprinkling the following story of the Pariah family with a good dose of sarcasm. For those of you who are not from California, PC 290 is the sex offender registration section of the California Penal Code. To top it off, the Pariahs may soon find themselves homeless because the problem they experienced with PC 290, as described by Paco, occurred prior to the passage of Proposition 83.

MEET THE PARIAH FAMILY
By Paco Villa

PacoVilla Corrections blog
January 14, 2009

Ed and Edna Pariah are a stable couple, married for over 20 years, who provided a loving and prosperous home for their children (now adults). Ed, who had always held down several jobs, found a stable career as a long-haul truck driver a few years ago. Edna, a skilled professional, has been out of work due to an industrial injury--She requires crutches or a wheel chair and has years of physical therapy ahead.

When he was 18, Ed committed a rape. He served a decade and a half in prison and paroled in the early 90's as a High Control Sex Offender. I was his parole agent.

Pariah was a compliant parolee. Both his institutional and parole records indicated Ed accepted full responsibility for his crime and consistently expressed appropriate, apparently sincere remorse. He had no criminal history prior to the commitment offense, complied with all instructions and fullfilled all requirements.

In the mid 90's he discharged from parole, following the mandatory 36 months of violation-free community supervision. Of all the parolees who successfully completed parole under my supervision, Ed was one of a handful I would bet a paycheck against re-offending--Whatever he was 25 years ago, he was a productive, well-balanced member of society then...

Last year, the police knocked on Ed's door. He figured it was a routine compliance check at this, his duly registered home. Instead, he was arrested for violating PC 290's (then) recently added requirement to participate in an exit interview with one agency prior to moving to the jurisdiction of another. In the estimation of the officers, and later DA, Ed was illegally registered at 2 addresses since he didn't UNregister. And yet, the arresting officers knew where to arrest him by checking the DOJ distributed database.

In any case, there was no question Ed's oversight violated 290 PC. So, he pled guilty and received a grant of probation.

In the meantime, the freight company Ed worked for terminated him after the 1st week of his 4 month jail stay. And, even though the firm was fully aware of his sex-offense when he was hired, he was denied re-employment. Company policy prohibits hiring active probationers.

So, Ed and Edna had to move in with family members. However, pressure from neighbors wore out their welcome. The couple, in their mid-40's, have been living in an old mini-van for months. Edna's disability check is their only income--It won't cover rent.

Even so, Ed reports, "I'm doing what the system wants me to do: I live in the shadows and never sleep in the same spot 2 nights in a row. As long as I stay in the county but don't have a roof over my head, it's all good to the police."

Let's take a moment to consider Ed and Edna's situation, shall we?

Clearly, Ed deserves to be punished for the rest of his life. He committed a rape nearly 30 years ago. The fact he led an exemplary life thereafter only serves to show how dangerous he is. After all, if all rapists are likely to rape again, he has been repressing those sick urges for decades!

Of course, we know the overwhelming majority of rapes are singular crimes as opposed to those of the serial variety but, HEY, why not treat all sex offenders as though they were typical, compulsed child-molesters anyway?

Voilà: Jessica's Law!

Now, the system has gone to great lengths to make certain this otherwise productive member of our society remains a permanent outcast. AND, as it stands, he's a burden to his wife, whose disability stipend isn't enough to house and feed one, much less two people. Fortunately, PC 290 says Ed really isn't a whole person like the rest of us. In that context, Edna could stretch her limited income two-fold if she:

1. Doesn't have to feed Ed and,
2. Can eat Ed.

Have a heart, California. Eat the 290's.

No comments: