Prop 83 Jessica's Law Was Designed to Overflow Prisons

Rev. Dr. B. Cayenne Bird, Director of United for No Injustice, Oppression or Neglect, in: American Chronicle, November 11, 2006

Long before the elections, I spoke of Conservative politicians
posturing "tough on crime" and using fear tactics to get votes. One
of the worst applications of this tactic was the writing of and
campaigning for the initiative patterned after other "Jessica's
Laws." State Senator George Runner and his wife, Senator Sharon
Runner, Republicans - Lancaster (Los Angeles County) wrote the
initiative and it was placed on the November 7 ballot as Proposition
83, in spite of these facts: 

	It duplicated provisions of recently passed Senate Bill 1128.
	It contained false statistics on recidivism rates of sex offenders. Child molesters have less than 5% recidivism rates according to the Bureau of Justice, the lowest of all categories of crime.
	No place on the actual ballot did it mention "GPS devices for life" or any details about what would be required to enforce such a broad and redundant Proposition.
	Its language was vague on whether it could be enforced retroactively on sex offenders who have served their time, have completed their parole terms and now have homes, families, and jobs.
	It was deceitfully touted as a law targeting child molesters while in reality its vague language didn't clearly differentiate between most sex offenders and those at highest risk of repeating their crimes. This means that the law could be used to track all 90,000 sex offenders in the state -- even those convicted of less-threatening crimes like indecent exposure, urinating outside, streaking, and a myriad of other minor crimes that fall under the PC 290 law.
	It did not take into account how it would be implemented or who would foot the bill.
	Its writers and supporters ignored the widely publicized accounts by Iowa state officials of not only the dismal the failure of their Jessica's law to protect children, but worse it caused Iowa law enforcement to lose track of 50 percent of the state's sex offenders.

Proposition 83 prohibits all - minor and major - sexual offenders
from living within 2,000 feet of schools, parks or playgrounds;
increases sentencing and parole terms; and monitors their
whereabouts of for life using satellite tracked, GPS ankle
bracelets. Its proponents publicized it as being targeted to child
kidnappers, rapists, and murders, but in reality it targets all
child molesters (90 percent of which are known and trusted by their
victims) and most sex offenders.

As the first person to oppose Jessica's law in print, I published
two columns in January and February 2006 that exposed Proposition 83
as purely political and, though costing the state millions per year
in resources, would do nothing to reduce the incidence of child
molestation. UNION members mobilized on many fronts for months to
educate the public about the deceit behind this initiative, the
unconstitutionality of its being enforced retroactively (ex post
facto) and on broad categories of sex offenses. Read these earlier
columns:

Don't sign Jessica's Law - Political Scam Targets Mentally Ill
Prisoners, Families 

Sex Offender Hysteria Good for Getting Votes and Keeping the Prisons
Stocked but not much else 

In addition, a Vote "No" on Jessica's Law Prop 83 page on the UNION
home page, was developed and regularly updated. UNION members wrote hundreds of letters to editors and hundreds more commentaries on
articles and editorials statewide. They registered and educated
voters everywhere they went.

UNION efforts brought the percentage of Yes votes down from 78
percent to 71 percent -- all with no financial resources whatsoever,
simply with volunteer effort day after day. The families of the
mentally ill do not have funds to effectively to advertising
campaigns against the law enforcement labor unions that constantly
oppress them for that very reason.

Our voices were heard, and by October, the editorial boards of
dozens of the major California newspapers went on record as opposed
to Proposition 83, in spite of the fact that unscrupulous
politicians, including the two corporate candidates were in support.

Other organizations, such as the California Attorneys for Criminal
Justice, Libertarian Party of California, San Francisco Democrats,
California Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Progressive Jewish
Alliance, Friends Committee on Legislation, Center on Juvenile and
Criminal Justice, California Libertarian and Green Parties, and
more, also stood opposed. Several crime victims groups were
publishing letters of strong opposition as well.

At the last minute after prisoners began to be shipped out of State,
even the California Correctional Peace Officers (CCPOA) President
Mike Jimenez who put up $25,000 to the "Yes on 83" campaign withdrew
support and called it "a bad law" even though the prison guards and
all law enforcement clearly benefit from a fresh supply of humans
being supplied to further worsen the prison crisis by such conveyor
belt laws.

The list of opposition was still growing on November 7, and it
continues to grow today because it is a giant step backwards to the
scarlet letter days of the shame-and-blame puritan era that never
was a deterrent to crimes commonly committed by the mentally ill.

On November 8, a federal judge blocked local enforcement of a
provision forbidding past sex offenders from living within 2,000
feet of a school or park. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston in San
Francisco issued the temporary restraining order, which barred
enforcement of the residency restrictions until November 27, when a
hearing is scheduled before another judge on a preliminary
injunction that would extend the ban.

By November 8, Judge Illston stated that Proposition 83 is likely
unconstitutional because it is "punitive by design and effect." The
same day, its main proponents admitted there are several unclear
areas in its language -- some of which might only be amended by a
supermajority of the Legislature. Local law enforcement officials
are confused as to who will enforce the measure. They are especially
confused about who will handle the GPS monitoring after a sex
offender is off parole.

Proposition 83 did not say whether its restrictions would apply to
California's 100,000 registered sex offenders or would only affect
future registrants. Senator George Runner says that the initiative
was not intended to apply to anyone who has already served a
sentence and registered as a sex offender, but only to those who are
now in prison or who will be sentenced in the future. So, why did he
not write it that way? Shame on George and Sharon Runner for using
this emotional campaign to get her elected to the Assembly
representing Lancaster which has one of the worst managed prisons in
California.

Proposition 83 is simply a bad law, which should have never even
been put on the ballot. Voters were misled by a fear-mongering,
emotional campaign that amounted to nothing less than a witch hunt,
Salem style, and deceived into thinking it would protect children
from snatch-and-run predators. It will not. Instead it will
unconstitutionally punish many others: mentally ill who could
benefit from treatment, eighteen-year-old offenders who had sex with
their seventeen-year-old girlfriends, older sex offenders who have
served their time, been released from parole, and who have become
law abiding citizens with families, jobs and support systems.

Snatch-and-run predators strike about once per year in each state
and it is almost never from a park or a school yard. When a mentally
ill person acts out their sickness in this way, even though it is
extremely rare, it grabs the headlines. But it makes far more sense
to invest in ways to prevent mental illness than to simply blindly
punish wide categories of "offenders" who had nothing to do with
child molestation whatsoever.

Most people don't realize that a huge percentage of "child
molesters" are teens age 13 to 17 years old, who simply made an
error in judgment. Your child is in much greater danger of being
falsely accused as a sex offender than they are of being molested by
someone in your circle of family and friends although vigilance is
always important.

Now we have a blustering new Attorney General Jerry Brown, the
person responsible for the horrid indeterminate sentencing laws
blustering that other categories of released prisoners should be
strapped with these awkward GPS devices. Bush has promised funding
to states who will use these contraptions that mark people,
preventing them from ever being hired for work even though they may
have committed a minor crime.

How will they support their families? There are at least one million
women and children connected to a "sex offender" through family ties
who would be uprooted, displaced and put into financial desperation
by such a ridiculous and cruel bill. This will harm many more
children than it could ever possibly protect, which is what the
editorials penned by the crime victims groups emphasized again and
again.

Imagine that the l.5 million people released from prison or jail in
California alone all had these ugly, black devices strapped to them
so that they cannot work a job and turn their lives around. The
device can signal where the individual is located but it cannot tell
what they're doing. They're already putting these on low level
offenders who certainly cannot become productive citizens. When the
batteries run low, many models cause a shock to remind its wearer to
re-charge. The signal can be easily blocked with a piece of aluminum
foil, even water causes them to malfunction meaning that the wearer
cannot take a bath.

We will need dozens more prisons and the police mobilization
required to enforce such ridiculousness will be the equivalent of
Iraq. Which the whole idea when law enforcement put up the money to
the Republican voting machine in the first place. The drug war will
be minor compared to the dark ages that Jessica's Law will throw us
back into and none of it will help deter the tiny fraction of
snatch-and-run child incidents as there never was any research
conducted that proved the bill's points.

The l.9 million plus voters who said "NO" to Jessica's Law during
the election were the intelligent ones who could not be duped by a
Republican law enforcement labor union voting machine and GPS device
manufacturers.

There is much work yet to be done to keep this bad law from being
implemented and enforced. If you believe that children can be better
protected by strengthening families and the prevention of the mental
illness that is at the core of those who are actually guilty of
serious crimes, please help us stand up and prevent the draining of
hundreds of millions of dollars from our tax dollars that could be
used in smarter ways. Your participation can prevent us from
slipping back further into the dark ages as a people.

People who can write simple letters to editors, who will attend
protests should that become necessary, who will attend hearings,
help with the hiring of more lawyers to do more lawsuits and if
necessary, raise at least $1 million to do a referendum that will
reverse this terrible law are needed.

The millions of dollars this is costing the taxpayers is taking away
from education and other programs and doing nothing to prevent or
deter the root causes of crime.

If you will help me work against the implementation of this
unconstitutional atrocity called Jessica's Law, please write to me
NOW as I cannot have too many funds and volunteers to campaign
against it. This will worsen the prison crisis that has our state in
turmoil that has already resulted in the preventable deaths of
hundreds of prisoners who are now being shipped out of state.

Rev. B. Cayenne Bird, Director

United for No Injustice, Oppression or Neglect

UNION
P.O. Box 340371
Sacramento, Ca. 95834
Rightor1@yahoo.com