Violent Criminals Could Get Out Early, Claim Prop. 57 Foes

By City News Service

A group of law enforcement officials blasted a measure on the November ballot billed as an effort to keep “non-violent” convicts out of prison, saying the proposition will put dangerous people back on the streets.

“Do we really need more parolees and hard-core criminals on the streets? That’s what Proposition 57 does,” said Brian Moriguchi, president of the Professional Peace Officers Association of Los Angeles at a press conference in Downtown Los Angeles last Friday.

The proposition, backed heavily by Gov. Jerry Brown, would allow parole consideration for people convicted of “non-violent” felonies after serving the minimum amount of time required as part of their sentence and authorize the awarding of sentence credits for rehabilitation, good behavior and education.

It would also give judges the final say over whether juvenile offenders at least 14 years old should be prosecuted as adults.

Brown and other backers of the measure insist it will put an emphasis on ,rehabilitation, reducing the likelihood of felons to commit new crimes. They also deny that it will put violent offenders back on the streets, and even non-violent offenders eligible under the proposition would have to prove they are
rehabilitated and do not present a danger to the public before they are released.

But Moriguchi and other officials — including Sheriff Jim McDonnell, District Attorney Jackie Lacey and county Supervisor Mike Antonovich — said the measure is essentially an effort by the state to relieve its prison-overcrowding problem at the expense of community safety.

Moriguchi said the recent killings of Los Angeles County sheriff’s Sgt. Steve Owen and Palm Springs police Officers Lesley Zerebny and Jose Gilbert Vega were carried out by parolees.
Antonovich said Proposition 57 will follow the path of legislation known as AB 109, which redirected some low-level offenders to county jails instead of state prisons, often leading to them serving less time than they otherwise would. He said that legislation was also expected to apply to only “non-violent” offenders.

“What happened? Seventy percent are either high-risk or very high-risk,” Antonovich said.

“It’s time that we wake up and get realistic,” he said. “We need to protect our communities, we need to protect our people. … We need to unite to return this state to a Golden State where it’s safe to walk the streets instead of having fear where people in the community are now having to buy private security to supplement the local law enforcement to protect their property and protect their lives and families.”

Supporters of the measure deny allegations that the measure would result in felons being automatically released from prison or authorize parole for violent offenders.

“Overcrowded and unconstitutional conditions led the U.S. Supreme Court to order the state to reduce its prison population,” Brown and other supporters wrote in its ballot argument in favor of the measure. “Now, without a common-sense, long-term solution, we will continue to waste billions and risk a court-ordered release of dangerous prisoners. This is an unacceptable outcome that puts Californians in danger — and this is why we need Prop 57.”

Print This Post Print This Post

October 27, 2016  Copyright © 2012 Eastern Group Publications, Inc.

Comments

Comments are intended to further discussion on the article topic. EGPNews reserves the right to not publish, edit or remove comments that contain vulgarities, foul language, personal attacks, racists, sexist, homophobic or other offensive terminology or that contain solicitations, spam, or that threaten harm of any sort. EGPNews will not approve comments that call for or applaud the death, injury or illness of any person, regardless of their public status. Questions regarding this policy should be e-mailed to service@egpnews.com.





 characters available

Copyright © 2019 Eastern Group Publications/EGPNews, Inc. ·