State may shrink parole violator list

November 10, 2012

Some California parole violators may soon be able to stop looking over their shoulder. State corrections officials are contemplating a program which would ignore thousands of warrants now outstanding on people who have somehow violated terms of their parole. (San Francisco Chronicle)

The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation  will review more than 9,200 outstanding warrants with the intent of dismissing many determined to be “older and less urgent.” Those considered would be on parole for nonviolent crimes, and sex offenders would be excluded from the plan entirely.

The plan would allow parole agents to concentrate on the most serious offenders. It “is not a matter of letting any parolee off the hook,” said Corrections spokesman Jeffrey Callison.

Parole agents union representatives were taking a dim view of the proposal.


11 Comments

  1. Citizen says:

    The problem, not mentioned in this story, is that we have a high recidivism rate and these people are crowding our prisons. The feds have limited the number of prisoners we can accommodate, so we either send these people to the county jails (and we don’t have room for them) or change the parole violation laws, or dismiss charges for parole violators.

    My suggestion is that we dismiss parole entirely for prisoners who will relocate to other states and never return to California. This would be a win/win situation for California. I wonder if we could actually do it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

    • The Gimlet Eye says:

      How about we stop the “War on Drugs”?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    • spankinztine says:

      Genius here, just pure genius. And obviously written by someone that knows that convicted felons always keep their word. Sure, they’ll just stay away. Why the hell would they do that? Not to mention that it’s just indicative of some douchebag wanting to push his problems off on someone else. Just that line of thinking is so weak it makes me ill. Try taking responsibility for your own problems. Try paying attention and voting. Try thinking past what you read in the newspaper or see on the TV.
      What CDCR doesn’t want you to know is that more than a year before Jerry’s realignment took place, is that they completely changed their classification system to work with Brown’s plan. Had classification not been turned upside down to fit, they wouldn’t of been able to round up an 1/8th of the felons they needed to release. The fact is, they didn’t have 40,000 people locked up for smoking weed.
      You speak of recidivism as if you have knowledge of the word. This would be GREAT for the State’s recidivism rate wouldn’t it? Just wipe those guys off the books, let em go. All the sudden recidivism rate drops and it looks like rehabilitation is working, and the sheep (people like you), buy it all.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  2. willieslo says:

    CWP

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  3. slojustice says:

    Wow, looks like a perfect storm is brewing. With our intelligent electorate gutting the three strikes law and also letting out criminals to prevent over crowding in our jails and prisons. Combine that with our ridiculous gun control laws and we are in for interesting times.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2

    • OnTheOtherHand says:

      Well you were on the money with your last comment (gun control laws). The voters didn’t choose to let criminals out because of overcrowding — federal judges required it for reasons of humane treatment. Maybe the voters finally figured out that treating every social misfit as a criminal to be tossed into prison was going to be too expensive to be practical. (The effectiveness of that belief system is also questionable.)

      Many of us who oppose overly-restrictive gun control laws use a phrase something like “when you need help right now, the police are only minutes away.” We need to be have more legal ability to handle situations ourselves rather than relying on LEOs and paying excessive taxes to maintain grad schools for criminals (a.k.a. prisons). Reducing gun control restrictions would be a step in the right direction but some other laws related to use of force and defense of property should be loosened up too.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  4. justme says:

    Dammit, that’ll hurt my prison stock.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5

  5. chachki says:

    I understand the state is attempting to save money, however they should not put communities safety at risk in doing so. In my opinion the majority of parolees pose a huge risk to the community. By ignoring their warrants they will only continue to commit crimes and victimize our community.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

  6. willieslo says:

    Odds have always been against us
    i.e. The ulgy and the bad are two against the working law abiding.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0

  7. easymoney says:

    Hope it doesn’t happen.
    Personally we have had a perp, a repeat offender shacking up next door and even though he offends over and over, parole dept. does nothing. He is a full time druggy and drunk who goes off the deep end in the middle of the night over and over including threatening people with a weapon, yet despite all the calls and appearance by the sheriffs dept he never does any real jail time. He either knows someone(a lawyer) or he gets bailed out.
    This is how the perps paly the system. I have heard the perp next door bragging about how many DUIs he has(yet he stil drives) and how he lectures others on playing the system once arrested and in the sheriffs lock up. Even down to what to say.
    Hopefully everyone voted against rolling back the 3 stikes laws, as this is exactly what these skidballs want…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1

    • Citizen says:

      Yes, we have someone like that whose mother lives in our neighborhood. Drugs, robbery, DUIs, underage girls, etc. never landed him in jail. When he ran from the CHP with the helicopter flying overhead, of course, the worthless piece of scum, drove straight to mommy’s house (our neighborhood). Mommy knew the Chief of Police, and mommy hired the attorneys. Mommy got him on SSI because after years of drug use (he’s in his fortys), he now has heart problems. When he got his SSI settlement, he used the money for a month long drug fest, courtesy of the taxpayer. What do you do with these people. We are paying for their drug use through the new, easy to get SSI.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

Comments are closed.