Proposition 57 Will Hit Minority Communities the Hardest

By Eric Siddall

We have an incarceration problem in this country. Minority communities bear the brunt of this harsh reality. We need to acknowledge this fact and discuss a smarter, nimbler, and more humane approach to this challenge.

But we also have another problem. Far too many people of color are victims of crime, a fact often overlooked in the current criminal justice debate. We need to acknowledge and address this harsh reality as well.

Prop. 57 presents itself as an answer to this problem, but a closer look at the initiative indicates it will only make things worse for California’s minority communities.
First, a few important statistics. Despite representing 6.5 percent of the state population, blacks comprise 24 percent of its prison population. Male blacks who drop out of high school face a 70 percent chance of going to prison, compared to 17 percent of similarly situated whites. These facts should give us pause and demand reflection.

However, behind these incarceration numbers are numbers that are equally terrible. In the United States in 2015, according to the FBI, more than 50 percent of all murder victims were black, despite the fact that blacks comprise only 12 percent of the US population. 7,039 African-American men and women were the victims of homicide, out of a total 13,455 homicides nationwide. This means blacks suffer a rate of victimization more than four times higher than their representation in the overall population – this is unacceptable.

To be sure, overall homicide rates have dropped substantially since the early 1990s, which is something for which we should be thankful. In 1993, the year before California’s Three-Strikes was enacted, there were 1,944 homicides in Los Angeles County. By 2015, this number had dropped to 649.

Despite this remarkable reduction in the overall rate of homicides, minority communities still face the most significant impact of crime. Today, within a 5-mile radius of the Compton courthouse, there are approximately 118 criminal street gangs. In the past six months, there were 528 violent crimes in Compton per 10,000 residents, including 21 homicides. Fourteen of the 21 homicide victims were black, despite the fact that Compton is 40 percent African-American. Compare this to Brentwood which had a mere 18 violent crimes per 10,000 residents and suffered no homicides.

Frankly, considering these numbers, it might seem easy for the Westside family to vote “yes” on Proposition 57. Crime is not something they experience on a daily basis. They don’t have to take a different route to school in the morning because there is a yellow tape blocking off a crime scene. Crime for that family is an allegory. It is a conversation piece.

For the family in Compton, crime is a daily reality. Every other week, there is a body bag carrying a young male away to the coroner’s office. Every night there is an airship hovering over the city while a pursuit occurs on the ground of a carjacking suspect. If you look at a gang map, almost every inch of Compton is covered by a gang claiming a part of the city. Brentwood doesn’t even have a gang map.

My opposition to Proposition 57 is personal. For the past eight years, I was assigned as a prosecutor in the South Central Judicial District. This is an area that covers Compton and Watts. When I see these numbers, it makes my blood boil, because behind each number is a wounded family and community. Too often, I have sat in my office with a mother and father grieving over their young son. What I find morally reprehensible is that we continue to allow neighborhoods like Compton and Watts to experience huge murder rates while Brentwood is safe and sound.

This is no doubt that we need to take a compressive approach to crime that goes well beyond incarceration. We need to acknowledge that our high incarcerations reflect a societal failure. We need to address the socio-economic issues that underline the many problems of lower income communities.

Proposition 57 does none of the above. Read the one-page summary – the Proposition allows tens of thousands of violent, dangerous and career criminals to be released early.

It disarms us from attacking the criminal element, it releases prisoners back into vulnerable communities, it does nothing to address recidivism, and it breaks the promise we made to victims and witness. Proposition 57 is a well-intentioned disaster that will only lead to more crime, more death, and devastated communities.

Monday Morning Memo for October 17, 2016

Law Enforcement
Lancaster mayor blames Gov. Jerry Brown in sheriff’s sergeant death
The mayor of Lancaster claimed Thursday that a Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department sergeant who served his area until being shot to death on duty last week would be alive if not for Gov. Jerry Brown’s “realignment” plan to reduce the state prison population. The governor’s spokesman said the mayor’s “wild claims” are baseless. 
GoFundMe account for Sgt. Steve Owen raises more than $40,000
A GoFundMe page created for deceased Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Sgt. Steve Owen has raised more than $40,000 as of Monday morning. Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association president Brian Moriguchi created the fund on Oct. 6 for Owen, who was a member of the association.
Officer’s Kevlar helmet deflects gunman’s bullet, but mother and 9-month-old baby are wounded
A suspect who barricaded himself inside a home is dead after he gravely wounded his girlfriend and 9-month-old daughter Thursday, then fired numerous shots at police, striking an officer’s Kevlar helmet, authorities in Tulare said. Larry Zamora, 37, died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound following an hours-long standoff and gun battle with law enforcement, Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux said at a news conference.
It’s time for our input on use-of-force policies
News headlines from around the nation make clear the concerted effort by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) to convince the public and legislators to enact its principles on the use of force. The national debate on police training regarding “de-escalation” have portrayed the PERF principles as the vetted solution to the issue of police use of force.
Deputies hailed as heroes after saving suicidal woman from 5-story fall
Three sheriff’s deputies were hailed as heroes Wednesday for preventing a suicidal woman from falling several stories at the Gov. George Deukmejian Courthouse in Long Beach. The incident occurred about 4 p.m. Tuesday at the facility at 275 Magnolia Ave., the sheriff’s department reported. The 44-year-old woman had just appeared in court “regarding a family law matter,” a sheriff’s statement said.
Killings of officers increases stress for SoCal law enforcement 
When Long Beach police Lt. Steve James first heard that three Palm Springs police officers had been gunned down Saturday afternoon, he immediately texted a friend at the desert town department. James, the president of the Long Beach Police Officers Association, endured some tense moments when he believed his friend could have been one of the officers shot.
Latest fad in policing: ‘de-escalation’
Among the challenges faced by today’s police officers is trying to stay abreast of the latest fashions in law enforcement training. The challenge is all the greater when those fashions are dictated by politics, and greater still when adhering to them can get you killed. Witness the latest fashion in police work: “de-escalation.”
Social media companies suspend Geofeedia’s access after reported police tracking
Facebook, Instagram and Twitter have suspended Geofeedia, a platform that collects real-time social media information based on location, from having access to its data. The decision follows an investigation that law enforcement used the tool to track activists and protests, the American Civil Liberties Union of North California (ACLU) published in a blog post Tuesday.
Death of LAPD detective investigating Derrick Rose rape allegations called likely suicide
Los Angeles Police Department detective who was investigating rape allegations against NBA star Derrick Rose died of an apparently self-inflicted gunshot wound, authorities said Wednesday. Officers found LAPD Det. Nadine Hernandez, 44, suffering from a single gunshot wound to the chest Tuesday afternoon in a Whittier home, according to the Whittier Police Department.
Crime rose in California in 2015
In a new report, the California Police Chief Association calculates violent crime increased more than 2 percent from 2014. There were almost four incidents of violent crime for each thousand state residents, a similar increase to the country as a whole. But police chiefs blame Proposition 47 for an even larger uptick in property crimes. The measure, which voters approved in 2014, reduced some nonviolent felonies to misdemeanors, particularly those involving theft or drugs.
LA County Sheriff seeks dialogue after law enforcement deaths
LA County Sheriff Jim McDonnell is calling for a community dialogue following the shooting deaths of three law enforcement officers recently in Southern California. “There’s an opportunity I think to use these tragedies as a springboard to hopefully get past some of the things we’ve seen over the past couple years … and be able to address grievances that people have with the police but also for us in the profession to be able to explain why we do what we do,” he said.
‘Ferguson effect’? Savagely beaten cop didn’t draw gun for fear of media uproar, says Chicago police chief
A Chicago police officer who was savagely beaten at a car accident scene this week did not draw her gun on her attacker – even though she feared for her life – because she was afraid of the media attention that would come if she shot him, the city’s police chief said Thursday. Chicago Police Department Superintendent Eddie Johnson said the officer, a 17-year veteran of the force, knew she should shoot the attacker but hesitated because “she didn’t want her family or the department to go through the scrutiny the next day on the national news,” the Chicago Tribune reported.
How an amateur genealogist solved a 48-year-old ‘Jane Doe’ case
The petite woman with bleached blonde hair was found slumped over a picnic table near Mount Hollywood Drive inside Los Angeles’ scenic Griffith Park. The brown-eyed beauty in her 20s was clad in a red-and-white polka dotted bikini, a white or light tan overcoat and dark sandals. On her manicured finger was a gold wedding ring with the inscription “C.B. to E.J. 9-4-20.” The date was June 8, 1968.
LA County to approve $1.5 million settlement for man killed by sheriff’s deputy
The family of a man killed by a sheriff’s deputy in 2012 is expected to receive a $1.5 million settlement from Los Angeles County. The county admits no wrongdoing in the settlement. On Tuesday, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors is expected to approve the settlement for the lawsuit brought by the two minor sons of Kenneth Rivera III and their biological mother.
San Bernardino County Sheriff’s bomb/arson truck stolen, recovered in Los Angeles County
A San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department Bomb/Arson Detail utility truck was recovered Saturday, Oct. 8, after being stolen from a deputy’s home in Victor Valley. The deputy noticed the truck was missing from his driveway about 9:30 a.m. after waking up, according to a Sheriff’s Department news release. The truck was listed as stolen and investigators began canvassing the area in search of it.
Ballot Measures
Proposition 57 proposes earlier release for some non-violent prisoners
For the fourth time in five years, California voters are being asked to weigh in on the earlier release of certain prisoners, in this case, those convicted of “non-violent crimes.” Proposition 57, titled “The Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016,” would consider certain state-prison inmates convicted of non-violent felony offenses for release earlier than through previous release guidelines.
Law enforcement speaks out against Proposition 57
SLO County’s law enforcement community is trying to warn voters against supporting a ballot measure that would shorten prison sentences for less-violent offenders. SLO County District Attorney Dan Dow led a press conference Oct. 12 with representatives from multiple SLO County law enforcement agencies and police officers associations to oppose the passage of Proposition 57, which they claim could put dangerous criminals back on the streets and endanger public safety.
Santa Clarita’s legislative panel says “no” to the release of more prisoners
The Santa Clarita City Council will stand up and be heard on the controversial issue of Proposition 57. Meeting on Tuesday, the council’s two-member Legislative Committee embraced a recommendation that the full council oppose Prop 57 – the state-wide ballot measure that would hasten the release of some non-violent offenders from prisons, as part of a federal-court-ordered means of addressing overcrowding.
Ventura County opponents of Proposition 57 speak out
Members of local law enforcement agencies and city officials say a ballot initiative that would amend sentencing credits for inmates convicted of “nonviolent” crimes would increase violent crimes and endanger the lives of peace officers. Flanked by top law enforcement officials from throughout the county, District Attorney Greg Totten spoke to members of the media Tuesday at the Ventura County Deputy Sheriffs’ Association headquarters about what they say are “false claims” made by supporters of Proposition 57.
Proposition 63 won’t keep Californians any safer from gun violence
This summer the Legislature and Gov. Jerry Brown did something remarkable: They approved $5 million of taxpayers’ funds over five years to create the University of California Firearm Violence Research Center. We applauded the start of such a center at UC Davis because we believed strong steps must be taken to end the gun violence epidemic that has a maddening and deadly grip on our country.
California’s bad example for criminal-justice reformers
The vagrancy endemic to San Francisco seems to be spreading to the Golden State’s suburbs. Blame it, at least in part, on Californians’ well-intentioned efforts to reform the criminal-justice system by releasing low-level offenders from jail. Encampments with an estimated 500 homeless have formed in the dry Santa Ana riverbed by Angel Stadium and the city’s civic center.
Californians to decide fate of State’s death row
Stunted by federal challenges and a litany of habeas corpus petitions that have overwhelmed the courts, California’s seldom-used death penalty has come to a standstill. Despite having the most inmates awaiting execution – 700 currently housed on death row – the Golden State has not executed an inmate since 2006.
How could a sergeant’s alleged killer be in a program that worked with parolees?
On Friday, prosecutors filed a capital murder charge against 27-year-old Trenton Lovell for the shooting death of Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Sgt. Steven Owen. Authorities say Owen was shot multiple times in Lancaster Wednesday as he confronted Lovell at a burglary call. Sheriff Jim McDonnell called it a “calculated execution.” Michelle Egberts is the founder of AV East Kern Second Chance, a group that helps former offenders integrate back into society.
Prop. 57: Voters asked to allow earlier parole
For the third time in four years, California voters are being asked to approve an initiative that would soften the state’s tough-on-crime laws – this time by allowing prison inmates to seek parole earlier. Gov. Jerry Brown and other proponents, including the Democratic Party, say Proposition 57 is necessary to keep the prison population permanently below a cap imposed in 2011 after a panel of federal judges found that appalling health care services in the crowded lockups constituted cruel and unusual punishment.
California voters once again eye legalizing recreational pot
For the second time in six years, California voters will consider legalizing recreational use of marijuana. This time, supporters of the move have much more financial backing and professional campaign help than they did in 2010. And polls show Proposition 64 with more than the 50 percent of voter support needed to pass. Silicon Valley billionaires and wealthy backers from the already legal medicinal marijuana industry are among the top financial supporters, contributing a combined $21 million.
Garcetti eyes LAPD video policy change, advocates 2 tax measures on ballot
On ABC7’s “Eyewitness Newsmakers: Ask the Mayor,” Mayor Eric Garcetti said the Police Commission will begin hearings on the release of Los Angeles Police Department video, and in a few months, there is likely to be a change in policy. He cautioned that while video may be released sooner, it will not be released immediately after an incident. Garcetti pointed to the recent police shooting of a suicidal 16-year-old.
Legislation
Assemblyman Steinorth proposes tax deduction to combat the costs of increased crime
Assemblyman Marc Steinorth has outlined a plan for new legislation to provide relief for citizens forced to purchase additional security measures to ensure their families’ safety. The cost of crime prevention in California is growing and previously safe neighborhoods are seeing a rise in crime. Under the proposal, all taxpayers would be allowed to claim a tax deduction against the cost of specified security equipment, including alarms, security cameras, and fencing.
Prosecution
Rapper Coolio charged with felony firearm possession in Los Angeles
Grammy-winning rapper Coolio was charged on Thursday with unlawful firearm possession stemming from a handgun that prosecutors said was found in his backpack during baggage screening at Los Angeles International Airport last month. The recording star, whose legal name is Artis Leon Ivey, 53, could be sentenced to as much as three years in state prison if convicted, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office said in a statement.
Pressure builds on Los Angeles DA Jackie Lacey – Prosecute killer cops
Eight months after the LAPD killing of Jose “Peruzzi” Mendez – the 16-year-old killed by LAPD, and four other police killings of young Chicanos in Boyle Heights, an Oct. 6 call-in day action was organized by Centro CSO. “It felt good to call DA Jackie Lacey’s office today,” says Juan Mendez father of Jose “Peruzzi” Mendez.
Lawyer: Backpage.com CEO will fight sex trafficking charges
Handcuffed and dressed in an orange jail jumpsuit, the chief executive of an internet site authorities accuse of being “a hub for the illegal sex trade” waived extradition to California on Friday, and his attorney vowed to fight the “trumped up” sex trafficking and money laundering charges he faces. Backpage.com CEO Carl Ferrer was arrested Thursday and his Dallas headquarters was raided after officials in California accused him of felony pimping a minor, pimping, and conspiracy to commit pimping.
District attorney mulling charges after Sikh man was beaten and his hair was cut off
Sikh community leaders are urging that hate crime charges be filed against two men who were arrested on suspicion of severely beating a Sikh man in Richmond, Ca., last month and cutting off some of his hair. Maan Singh Khalsa, 41, was attacked in what Sikh leaders say was a hate-motivated assaulted directed at Khalsa’s religious beliefs and ethnicity.
Man pleads no contest to manslaughter in West Covina stabbing death of father
A man pleaded no contest Wednesday in the fatal stabbing of his father at their West Covina home in 2015, according to the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office. Maverick Jacob Jimenez pleaded no contest to involuntary manslaughter in the killing of Joey Alfred Jimenez, 49.   Prosecutors said that on Aug. 16, 2015, Maverick Jimenez stabbed his father during a fight in their home.
Man charged in death of 70-year-old mother, who was pushed from a window and stomped on, police say
A 40-year-old man was charged Wednesday in the death of his 70-year-old mother, who police say was pushed out of a second-story window in Van Nuys and then stomped on. Fernando Vargas faces one count of murder in the attack, which occurred Tuesday at 2:52 a.m. at an apartment complex in the 7400 block of Hazeltine Avenue, according to the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.
Man charged with trying to kill 2 L.A. sheriff’s deputies at Santa Monica Metro station
A 31-year-old man was charged Wednesday with trying to kill two Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies who were patrolling a Metro station in Santa Monica, authorities said. Thomas Napack, 31, faces two counts of attempted murder of a peace officer. If convicted, he faces up to life in state prison, according to the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.
Conviction & Sentencing
On way to prison, defendant tells prosecutor: ‘Better hope I don’t get out’
A Fresno man was sentenced Tuesday in Fresno County Superior Court to 44 years to life in prison for shooting his unarmed friend in the back in a domestic violence case. Before George Xeng Fang was sentenced he took a verbal shot at prosecutor Andrew Janz: “Better hope I don’t get out.” In July, a jury found Fang, 33, guilty of assault with a firearm, being a felon in possession of a gun and shooting at an inhabited dwelling in the shooting of Dao Vang in February.
No death penalty for convict found guilty in 1979 rape, murder of Glendale woman
A man convicted of raping and murdering a Glendale woman in 1979 was spared the death penalty after a jury deadlocked Thursday on the third day of deliberations. Ten jurors voted for Darrell Gurule to spend the rest of his life in prison, while two felt he should be executed. The same jury convicted Gurule last month of killing Barbara Ballman, whose naked body, lying across the front seat of her Volkswagen Beetle, was found by fourth-graders on their way to Thomas Edison Elementary School one September morning in 1979.
Torrance wrestling coach found guilty of lewd acts with 25 students
A South Bay high school’s former head wrestling coach was found guilty Thursday of molesting 25 students – a conviction that could put him in state prison for life. The conviction of Thomas Joseph Snider, 48, came after a dramatic trial in Torrance’s courthouse, where victims testified that the longtime educator touched their genitals under the pretense of nude “skin inspections,” according to the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.
18-year-old is convicted of murder in 2014 beating death of USC graduate student from China
A jury convicted an 18-year-old woman of murder on Thursday for her role in the 2014 bludgeoning death of a USC graduate student from China that led to heightened campus security and shock across the Pacific in the victim’s homeland. Alejandra Guerrero – who was 16 at the time of the attack near the university campus –  fidgeted with her hair as a clerk read the verdict in a downtown courtroom.
Man sentenced for fatal Monterey Park pizza parlor stabbing
A Bakersfield man received a sentence of more than 16 years in state prison Thursday for stabbing another man 15 times, killing him, at a Monterey Park pizza parlor four years ago, officials said. A Los Angeles Superior Court jury in Burbank convicted Jose De Jesus Ruiz, also known as Jose De Jesus Salas, 26, in July of second-degree murder for the Oct. 6, 2012, stabbing death of 25-year-old Patrick Raymond Ortega at Shakey’s, 1955 S. Atlantic Blvd.
Man to get 10 years in hit and run of Arroyo Seco teacher
Lucas Guidroz, 26, of Canyon Country, is expected to receive 10 years in state prison as a result of his plea to one count each of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and hit-and-run driving resulting in death. Deputy District Attorney SuSu Scott prosecuted the case.
Sentencing is scheduled for Nov. 7 in Department I of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, San Fernando Branch.
Courts
New $350M federal courthouse unveiled; first case ex-LA Sheriff Baca
Almost four years in the making, downtown Los Angeles’ new $350 million federal courthouse was unveiled Thursday for the first time. While the U.S. Marshals Service has begun operations at the mirror-and- glass building, judges will begin moving to the sleek structure at Broadway and First Street in the next few weeks.
Justices appear inclined to preserve plea bargains affected by Proposition 47
The California Supreme Court appeared unwilling Wednesday to allow prosecutors to withdraw plea bargains affected by Proposition 47, which reduced some felonies to misdemeanors. During a hearing, several justices cited a precedent that said plea bargains can’t be revoked even if a subsequent change in the law results in a different penalty.
How a judge’s ‘horrible experiences’ with plumbers led to a murder conviction getting tossed out
If Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Eleanor J. Hunter’s experiences with plumbers had been better, the murder case of Vincent Tatum might have gone differently. Addressing a panel of potential jurors in her Compton courtroom, Hunter explained the importance of not prejudging witnesses and used her unfortunate run-ins with the tradesmen to illustrate her point.
Ruling challenges prevailing view of pension law
Three appeals court justices, citing the alarming view of critics that unaffordable public pensions are headed for the financial cliff, looked for a new way to allow a change in direction and found one. In a ruling in a Marin County case last August that reformers called a “game changer,” the panel weakened the “California rule” protecting the pensions of current workers. Most cost-cutting reforms have been limited to new hires, which can take decades to yield savings.
Guns
Sacramento County annual gun sales increase 406 percent in last 15 years
Sacramento County residents continue to buy firearms at an unprecedented rate, according to data released Wednesday by the California Department of Justice. Annual gun sales increased 406 percent in Sacramento County during the last 15 years, a larger jump than in any other urban California county. Each year since 2001, on average, about three guns were sold for every 100 county residents.
California Attorney General
Attorney General releases Reentry, Recidivism Reduction Programs report
Attorney General Kamala D. Harris today released a report outlining best practices for developing reentry and recidivism reduction programs, based on the Attorney General’s “Back on Track – Los Angeles” pilot program. Back on Track – Los Angeles, an evidence-based pilot program, is an initiative of the Attorney General’s Division of Recidivism Reduction and Reentry.
Prison & Parole
Manson follower denied parole for 1969 murder
California officials said Friday that they have again denied parole for a follower of cult leader Charles Manson who is serving a life sentence for a murder he committed 47 years ago. Parole officials decided that Robert Beausoleil, 68, should remain in prison for the 1969 death of musician Gary Hinman. He can seek parole again in three years, said board spokesman Luis Patino.
State gains control of Los Angeles-area prison’s health care
California is regaining responsibility for providing medical care at an eighth state prison after 10 years of oversight. The federal court-appointed receiver who runs the inmate health care system on Friday gave the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation control over care at the California Institution for Men. The prison houses nearly 3,800 minimum- and medium-security inmates in Chino, about 35 miles east of Los Angeles.

Law Enforcement Murders Expose the Bankruptcy of “Criminal Justice Reform”

By Eric Siddall

The recent murder of Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Sergeant Steve Owens, Palm Springs Police Officers Jose Vega and Lesley Zerebny by career criminals is a bitter tragedy for their families, and a great loss for all of law enforcement and the communities they bravely served.

In the Palm Springs murders, the suspect charged has gang ties and was convicted in a prior shooting. In Los Angeles, Sheriff McDonnell commented that Steve Owens death should start a serious conversation about policies that allowed the gunman to cycle in and out of custody for years.

The recent and proposed changes to our criminal laws, led by Governor Brown, the State Legislature, and via ballot initiatives foisted on the public by pro-criminal “justice reform” groups, have made and will make all Californians less safe. They are the driving reason why California’s violent crime rate increase was more than twice the national average in 2015, and why California suffered near double increases in the property crime rate in 2014 and 2015 while the rest of the nation saw property crime rates decline in both those years.

First, let’s start with the supervision of the violent career criminal charged in the execution murder of Sgt. Owens following his release from prison in 2014 after he served a six-year sentence for armed robbery. According to news reports, we have learned that on three separate occasions in the last two years he was arrested for new crimes, suffered two new criminal convictions, but no parole hold was ever placed on him by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). A September 2015 arrest for driving under the influence resulted in a 28-day jail sentence and probation; an April 2016 arrest that resulted in another sentence of probation and credit for 15 days’ custody, and in July 2016 he was arrested again.

Had the justice system worked properly, this violent criminal would have had his probation revoked for the April 2016 or July 2016 arrest, and this felon would not have been on the street and able to murder Steve Owen. Instead, in what it is clearly an attempt to game statistics and make the recidivism rate for violent ex-felons look lower than it actually is, it appears that parole holds are not be being placed on violent felons when they violate probation by having either new arrests or convictions for new crimes.

What keeps me up at night is that if Prop 57 passes, the people at CDCR are the ones Governor Brown assures us will be carefully screening the tens of thousands of inmates his Prop. 57 makes eligible for early release from prison.

Next, thanks to Prop. 47, the stolen firearm that the career criminal had in his possession was only a misdemeanor offense. The pro-criminal folks behind Prop. 47 reduced the crime of possession of a stolen gun from a felony to a misdemeanor offense; Governor Brown vetoed a bill earlier this year that overwhelmingly passed the state legislature and restored the crime to a felony.

Further, although this career criminal has two prior robbery convictions, Prop. 36 wiped away the potential 25-life sentence, the judge previously had the discretion to impose for being an ex-felon in possession. Passed in 2012, this proposition changed the three strikes law by permitting life sentences only when the current crime is a serious or violent offense. Felon in possession of a gun is not a qualifying offense. Also, AB 109 ensured that if this felon had been sentenced to prison for possessing the gun, a violation of parole upon release would result not result in a return to prison, but instead a short stint in local jail.

If Prop. 62 is approved by the voters in November, the career criminals charged in these recent cold-blooded murders of peace officers will not face the death penalty. Instead, they will at most face a sentence of life in prison without parole. I say at most, because if you read the writings of those who lead the campaign to repeal of the death penalty you know a ballot initiative to eliminate life without parole is next on their agenda. In their view, replacing the death penalty with life without parole removes “one terrible idea only to replace it with another” as in their view “life without parole is as dehumanizing as death itself, and in some ways, it is even worse.” This is one reason why I, like other Deputy District Attorneys, support Proposition 66 – would preserve the death penalty for the most heinous criminals by enacting critically needed reforms to the system.

California ended the crime wave that started in the 1970’s and continued into the early 1990’s with measures such as determinate sentencing and three strikes. Incarcerating for lengthy periods of time felons who had committed violent crimes and had long criminal records led to a remarkable and sustained drop in crime. Proponents of lowering criminal penalties claimed that public safety would be enhanced, but that has been disproved by crime statistics, just as their estimates of “cost savings” through decreased incarceration have not materialized but in fact have in fact been dwarfed by the increased costs to residents and businesses from the rising crime rate.

In years past, Steve Owen’s death in the line of duty by this poster boy of a criminal justice system gone awry would have led to the serious conversation Sheriff McDonnell called for. However, since California is only in the early stages of a crime wave unleashed by these changes, with the proponents still claiming it is “too early” to draw conclusions, I am not optimistic that a serious conversation will occur. Instead, it will take a few more years for the public to accept statistics proving the arguments of the pro-criminal crowd for reduced penalties only led to more crime. Sadly, those statistics will consist of tens of thousands of real people unnecessarily victimized because of foolish experiments on the hardworking residents of California.

Please share this blog on social media.

Eric Siddall is Vice President of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy District Attorneys, the collective bargaining agent representing nearly 1,000 Deputy District Attorneys who work for the County of Los Angeles. To contact a Board member, click here.

Prop 47 Fallout Continues: Once Again CA Suffers a Rise in Property Crime Rate as Nation Sees a Decline

By Michele Hanisee

Just released FBI statistics for 2015 document that as in 2014, following the passage of Prop 47, California suffered a significant rise in the property crime rate.  By contrast, the rest of the nation saw the property crime rate fall in both 2014 and 2015. Thanks to Prop 47, California continues to stack failure when it comes to the property crime rate while the rest of the nation enjoys 13 straight years of decreasing property crime rates.

Prop 47 was a bill of goods sold to voters as an enhancement of public safety and was specifically aimed at reducing punishment for property and drug crimes.  A large number of felony theft offenses were made inconsequential misdemeanors with no threat of arrest, conviction or incarceration.  As we have documented in prior blogs, thieves in California have been emboldened by Prop 47 to commit theft and then refuse to appear in court when caught and cited. Tens of thousands of Californians have become victims of crime, thanks to this terrible initiative.

The increase in the 2015 property crime rate over 2014 in California was substantial and across all areas of the state as measured in the FBI metropolitan statistical areas.  Here in Los Angeles/Long Beach/Glendale, the property crime rate increased by 9.72%. Examples from both northern and southern California tell the same story of a rising property crime rate. Anaheim/Santa Ana/Irvine saw property crime rate increase by a staggering 23.88%; in Francisco/Redwood City/South San Francisco the property crime rate soared by 13.99%, and in San Diego/Carlsbad the rate jumped 5.99%.

Keep in mind these increases are stacked atop the increase in the property crime rate across California in 2014, a year the rest of the nation saw property crime rates fall 5%. After the release of the 2014 statistics, the Prop 47 apologists claimed that nothing could be garnered from a single statistical year.  The 2015 statistics, with the rest of the nation again seeing a drop in property crime rates, demolish that argument.

As it has become clear that Prop 47 has driven the rise in property crime rates across California, Prop 47 proponents have resorted to inventing bogus benchmarks in attempts to hide its impact.  For example, as detailed in an article by Susan Abram, the Center for Juvenile and Criminal Justice claimed last week that California counties reporting large jail decreases did not see greater increases in crime than those California jurisdictions that did not release prisoners.  That is akin to that saying that after several boats capsized, everybody on the one boat drowned at the same rate-never mind those in the other boats made it safely to shore. The figures on crime that tell the true story are published by the FBI and the California Attorney General, and both show increases in crime.

Realizing this rather a futile smokescreen attempt failed to explain the post-Prop 47 crime wave, the study’s author resorted to the forlorn claim that with the passage of Prop 47 the “voters have spoken.” Actually, the voters didn’t speak; they were fooled by slick propaganda of Prop 47 proponents.  Voters were told Prop 47 would save money, that criminals would flock to drug treatment, and that public safety would be enhanced by not incarcerating thieves. Instead, the promised “savings” from Prop 47 failed to appear but residents and businesses have borne the heavy costs that come from increased crime, drug courts have collapsed across the state as defendants are no longer forced to attend and complete drug rehabilitation, and for the second year in the row Californians are less safe than fellow residents nationwide.

Of course, Prop 47 is only the warm-up act for a public safety disaster in California.  As we have repeatedly blogged, Prop 57 – A “Criminal’s Bill of Rights”  is on the November ballot. It will allow early release via parole of tens of thousands of dangerous California state prison inmates serving lengthy prison sentences due to the harm their crime caused, weapons they used, or their serious and violent prior criminal records.  It will also accelerate the release of all other prison inmates by allowing the California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation to invent sentence credits and decrease time to be served.

The old saying goes “Fool me once, shame on you-fool me twice, shame on me.”  With FBI statistics documenting the public safety disaster that is Prop 47, it remains to be seen if voters will take this adage to heart as they contemplate the next public safety disaster known as Prop 57.

Please share this or our other related blogs on social media.

Michele Hanisee is President of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy District Attorneys, the collective bargaining agent representing nearly 1,000 Deputy District Attorneys who work for the County of Los Angeles. 

False statements might be Prop 57’s winning formula

By Michele Hanisee

Early polling shows Gov. Jerry Brown’s dangerous felon-freeing initiative is being supported by state voters, according to a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll. The falsehoods the Governor continually repeats-that his initiative only applies to “non-violent” felons-has crowded out the truth. Two-thirds of the people surveyed said they agreed with Proposition 57’s goals of freeing “non-violent” felons, while just 26 percent said they were opposed.

The ADDA sounded the alarm early on about Brown’s misguided bid to free thousands of dangerous felons from state prisons. Under this initiative, felons would be eligible for parole after serving the sentence for their primary offense, regardless of any enhancements that had been added onto the sentence, and regardless of previous strikes for brutal crimes such as rape and murder.

Though disturbing, the poll results should not be surprising. Opponents have raised virtually no money, while Brown has hauled in $7.5 million in support of the initiative. The Governor, knowing that his initiative is complex and that he has received no pushback about his demonstrably false statements from journalists, is also using his political muscle to reduce opposition to a simple “no position.” As an example, last month the governor maneuvered to quell potentially powerful opposition to it from the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) to take no position on the measure – even though the California District Attorneys Association strongly opposes it.

It’s unfortunate that media in this state has refused to ask Brown the tough questions about his initiative. When the Governor chastises a county sheriff for correctly identifying a dangerous inmate eligible for release, you would think that might pique some journalist to critically examine the initiative. As Deputy District Attorneys, we understand all the Penal Pode sections affected, know the inner workings of the criminal justice system, and have done our best through our blogs to expose the truth. However, absent media scrutiny, voters will simply accept the false assurances of the Governor as to the scope of his initiative. Failed policies such as Prop. 47, which reduced a number of serious felonies to misdemeanors and is widely seen as a contributing factor to the recent surge in crime statewide.

If Prop. 57 passes, you can bet it won’t be long before there’s a direct link between its perverse provisions and an even greater explosion in crime than we’re already seeing. Combined with Prop. 47, it could deal a brutal blow to safety and security in every California community. When the voters realize the Governor misled them on the scope of his initiative, it will be too late.

Sadly, the people who will be hammered hardest by this latest disastrous experiment will most likely be low-income, minority neighborhoods that are already battered by disproportionally high crime rates. The hardened criminals who will reap the benefits of Brown’s folly will be unleashed on the poor, primarily minority neighborhoods to prey upon the hard-working residents.

If there’s any silver lining to this week’s Prop. 57 news, it’s that the poll is the first public poll on this measure. But with the election less than seven weeks away, it should nonetheless be deeply disturbing news to everyone who cares about public safety. We can only hope that the media pins the Governor down on the specific sections of his initiative, and runs his explanations by those such as us who can explain in detail if the answer is accurate. We believe the public would have a different reaction to Prop 57 if there was a factual explanation of its scope.

Please share this or our other related blogs on social media.  To read or share the blogs, please click on the hyperlinks below: (1) Prop 57-A “Criminal’s Bill of Rights.” (2)  Governor Brown, Time to Debate Prop 57 (3) Jerry Brown, Line 1 – It’s Your Flawed Initiative Calling (4) Proposition 57 Unmasked: A Detailed Analysis of the Misleading Initiative (5)Those Who Care About Victims of Sex Crimes Should Oppose Gov. Brown’s Initiative (6) Stanford Sexual Assault Case Typifies California’s New Approach to Criminals (7) Governor’s spokesperson confirms his initiative will allow early release of violent inmates (8)  Gov. Brown: Longing for the 70’s (9) Governor Brown’s Power Grab (10) The truth will defeat an oft-repeated lie (11) Low-income communities will be devastated by felon-freeing fiasco (12) L.A. Gangs Will Love Governor’s Ballot Initiative (13) Felon-freeing initiative advances (14) A Radically Dangerous Experiment with Public Safety and (145 Wait in Line Governor

New polling data should alarm responsible gun owners

By Michele Hanisee

Law-abiding gun owners in California have cause to be gravely concerned these days.

With the November election just seven weeks away, a new California Counts poll indicates state voters overwhelmingly support Proposition 63, the misleading anti-gun ballot measure that Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom is pushing.

The so-called “Safety for All Act” would, among other things, make it harder to obtain ammunition and guns, prohibit the possession of large-capacity magazines and criminalize the failure to report lost and stolen guns.

As we wrote back in March, the initiative might seem to make sense on the surface. But in this case, the image is at stark odds with reality.

For one thing, this initiative would do nothing to stop criminals from acquiring ammunition, guns or large-capacity magazines. But it would make it prohibitively difficult for responsible gun owners to obtain ammunition for sport and home defense. Plus, while imposing unreasonable burdens on responsible gun owners, it would actually incentivize criminals to commit residential burglaries and armed robberies of gun stores.

Even our liberal governor, Jerry Brown, recognizes the folly of targeting responsible gun owners. In vetoing a 2013 bill that would have criminalized the failure to report gun thefts, he noted that responsible owners would report a theft and irresponsible owners would not, regardless of what the law says.

Newsom has raised almost $4 million in support of Prop. 63. His massive money haul has clearly had an effect: 93 percent of Democrats and 60 percent of Republicans support the measure, according to the California Counts poll.

As prosecutors, we would enthusiastically support any proposed law that promised to be a realistic tool against gun violence. But Prop. 63 is simply bad public policy.

Its passage would have zero effect on criminals – other than to encourage them to commit more crimes. At the same time, it would criminalize the conduct of ordinary citizens.

The ADDA encourages all of its members to do everything they can to spread the truth about this misguided, and misleading measure. Please share this or our other related blogs on social media. To read or share the blogs, please click on the hyperlinks below: (1) The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend (2) Ballot measure on guns, ammo hinders law enforcement (3) Safety for All Act is a dangerous misnomer (4) The “Ammo Police” is not the answer to criminal use of firearms

Prop 57 – A “Criminal’s Bill of Rights”

By Eric Siddall

Governor Brown’s Proposition 57 is a “Criminal’s Bill of Rights.” It grants convicted felons a constitutional right to get released after completing only a minimal part of their sentence. In some cases this number can go as low as two percent of their original sentence. This new “Criminal’s Bill of Rights” trumps earlier constitutional amendments aimed at protecting victims. It effectively overturns anti-crime measures like “Three Strikes.”

Brown wrote Proposition 57 to overturn two decades of anti-crime legislation. He takes dead aim at Article 1, Section 28 of the California Constitution, otherwise known as the “Victim’s Bill of Rights.” However, he won’t directly call for the repeal of these laws because they are popular. So, instead, he made the ingenious move of creating a constitutional amendment to undermine and gut all these prior measures.

How does he do this? He grants the right to accelerated release via increased and unchallengeable sentence credits for all inmates. The governor’s appointed bureaucrats at the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation will now determine all sentencing credits.

He wipes out the effects of sentencing enhancements and priorable offenses. Again, he does not do this directly, because it would be incredibly unpopular. Instead he removes these additional sentences from consideration for parole eligibility. This means that someone who committed a drive-by shooting will be treated the same as a person who committed a drive-by shooting, but also did it for the purpose of benefiting his gang and had a prior armed robbery conviction.

Brown wanted this as constitutional amendment to make it difficult for reversal of these new rights for inmates when, as will happen, the crime rate climbs with the accelerated release of dangerous felons.

The governor ignores the reasons behind lengthy prison sentences.  Long sentences are the result of enhancements or consecutive sentences, designed to increase punishment for those criminals who choose to engage in more egregious conduct.  Whether imposing additional time for the physical or economic harm caused, the weapon used, or the choice to continue to commit serious or violent crimes despite having prior convictions for same, the increased prison time is reflective of increased criminality by the individual. It is rather bizarre to suggest that we should treat the first time offender the same as the harden criminal.

These enhancements are in recognition of the rights of crime victims and the harm they have suffered at the hands of the defendant.  They have been effective tools in reducing crime. The current crime rate for serious and violent crime is less than half what it was under the “indeterminate” sentencing scheme the governor adores.  Apparently the governor believes that the less than ten years typically served for murder under that scheme, and approximately three years for violent crimes such as robbery and assault, was more than adequate.

Governor Brown’s Prop. 57 “Criminal’s Bill of Rights” has been sold on the falsehood that its provisions will be sparingly applied to a select group of non-violent inmates.  However, the more the governor talks, the more it becomes clear that what he really wants is reverse the long sentences that have kept the worst offenders in prison, because of some theory that long sentences don’t lower crime rates.  Prop. 57 is his attempt to return California to what he believes were the halcyon days of the 1970’s when the law protected criminals and victimized the victim.

Michele Hanisee: A yes vote on Prop. 66 is a vote for justice

Click here

By Michele Hanisee, Guest commentary

This is in response to your editorial (Sept. 9, Herald) urging a no vote on Proposition 66.

Those in support of abolishing the death penalty point to the possibility of an innocent person being executed. In California this couldn’t be further from the truth. Those who commit a capital punishment-related crime will be prosecuted to full extent of the law. The innocent can take solace in knowing that a unanimous jury of 12 citizens must render the death verdict after an exhaustive trial where the accused murderer is represented by two highly competent attorneys and overseen by an independent judge who ensures a fair trial.

The death penalty is reserved for the worst of the worst offenders in California. These people have committed unspeakable atrocities against the citizens of California. People like Lonnie Franklin Jr. (the Grim Sleeper), who was just recently sentenced to death in Los Angeles for the killing of 10 young African-American women. Or Tiequon Cox, who was hired by an imprisoned Rolling 60s Crips gang member to kill. Cox entered the wrong home and murdered four people, including an 8-year-old and a 12-year-old. Then there’s Charles Ng, who was convicted of brutally murdering 11 people and most likely murdered 25 more. There’s also Lawrence Bittaker, who killed five young women after he raped and tortured them. The list goes on and on. To make matters worse, these horrific individuals, excluding Franklin Jr., have been sitting on death row for decades, costing California millions of dollars to house, feed, clothe, guard and provide health care to them.

There are 746 killers sitting on California’s death row. These inmates have murdered over 1,000 victims, including 226 children and 43 police officers; 294 victims were raped and/or tortured. These killers and their repetitive appeals are the reasons why a vote of No on Prop. 62 and Yes on Prop. 66 is recommended.

California’s death penalty is a dysfunctional mess that doesn’t bring justice to victims’ family members. However, by mending, not ending, the death penalty, we can change that.

Prop. 66 was written by legal scholars who know the ins and outs of the death penalty system. They have written Prop. 66 so that it speeds up the appeals process by eliminating legal and procedural delaying tactics while assuring due process protections for those sentenced to death. It ensures criminals sentenced to death are assigned a special appeals lawyer immediately by expanding the availability of lawyers to handle these appeals. Prop. 66 limits state appeals to five years instead of allowing for these convicted criminals to file appeal after appeal. However, the initiative does not impose a rigid deadline that must be met in every case as extraordinary cases may take longer. However, five years is generally sufficient to get through state appeals, even in the most complex cases.

While many point to the “exorbitant costs” associated with the death penalty, they forget how expensive it is to giving life without parole to these criminals. It’s estimated that it costs at least $50,000 per year to house, feed, guard and provide health care to someone in prison, and that it averages between 20 and 25 years from a jury’s sentence of death to an actual execution date. There are 746 inmates on death row, with an average age of 27, and average life expectancy of 74. Reducing someone’s punishment to life without parole will cost taxpayers $1.8 billion in housing costs alone.

What I along with other district attorneys, law enforcement officials and families of victims want is justice. Justice to impose a lawful sentence recommended by juries and imposed by judges across California. Some deem the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment; however, most Californians disagree and believe that those convicted of these horrible crimes are depraved. In fact, any time we are asked to vote on whether or not to abolish the death penalty, Californians repeatedly vote to keep the death penalty intact. This year seems no different. A recent poll conducted by the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley found that 75.7 percent of Californians surveyed support Prop. 66.

Voters understand that the criminals on death row have been convicted of the most heinous crimes. Voters also realize that those left behind, grieving families throughout California and their loved ones, don’t deserve anything less than justice.

Justice is a reformed, not eliminated death penalty. I urge a NO vote on Proposition 62 and YES on Proposition 66.

Governor Brown, Time to Debate Prop 57

By Michele Hanisee

Governor Brown recently visited the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board to sell Prop 57, telling them “I could talk about this all day.” What Governor Brown needs to do is talk about this initiative in a debate setting, where his statements about the scope and application of the initiative can be discussed with an informed opponent. Today, the No on 57 Committee challenged the Governor to a debate on Prop 57.

It has become clear that Governor Brown is selling a story about his initiative to audiences that he knows cannot challenge him because they do not know the case law and penal code sections which will govern the initiative. Earlier this year, columnist Dan Walters described deciphering which felons Prop 57 applies to as “difficult- perhaps by design, to minimize adverse voter reaction.”

The most recent example of Governor Brown’s sales pitch was his claim to the Sacramento Bee editorial staff that opponents are trying to “spook” voters by suggesting violent criminals will be let out of prison early under his initiative.   He told the editorial board his initiative only makes inmates “eligible for parole” but that the Board would be unlikely to release the type of felons that opponents have been featuring, echoing the voicemail he left for Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims (covered in this blog), where he incorrectly claimed the inmate in question would not be eligible for release under Prop 57.

First, one only needs to look at Parole Board releases since Governor Brown took office in 2011: the parole board has released 1863 inmates serving life sentences-more than the four previous Governors combined. In fact, Governor Brown has had to reverse many Parole Board release decisions, most recently that of Manson family member Leslie Van Houten.

Secondly, the Governor deliberately ignores the part of his initiative that states “The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation shall have authority to award credits earned for good behavior and approved rehabilitative or educational achievements.” There is no restriction on the inmates to whom it applies; thus, these Department of Corrections can invent and apply new sentence credits for all inmates, meaning earlier release dates for all receiving the credit.

Another recent claim by the Governor was that ceding power to the Parole Board to determine when prisoners are released is comparable to the discretion of prosecutors. “They have discretion, just like the district attorneys who have unfettered discretion to charge or not.” Wrong, Governor. While District Attorneys have the discretion to file charges that only begins the legal process, as there are checks and balances to their power. There is an ethical obligation only to file charges provable beyond a reasonable doubt, and if a guilty plea does not occur a judge or a jury makes the decision on guilt. In contrast, the Parole Board can parole whomever it wants by whatever criteria (or lack of criteria) they desire, and that parole decision is made in a forum that is closed to the public and which is, in most cases, unreviewable by anyone-not the Governor, the Legislature, or Judges.

Other reasons cited by the Governor to vote for Prop 57 also have gone unchallenged. For example, the Governor touted the wisdom of havingparole boards determine release dates because “there was a lower recidivism rate” when Parole Boards determined the release date. The last time we had a penal system where the parole board determined release dates was in the 1970’s before the determinate sentencing laws took effect. So let’s look back to that time.

In the 1970’s and before the determinate sentencing law went into effect in 1976, crime was soaring in California. The crime rate (per 100,000 people) documents the increase in crime from 1970 to 1976: murders rose from 6.9 to 10; forcible rapes from 35.1 to 44.7, robberies from 206.9 to 275.4; aggravated assaults from 225.9 to 338.7; and burglaries from 1,753 to 2,174. That rise continued for a few years after the determinate sentencing law went into effect before the crime rate began to decrease drastically. How drastic? In 2014, in comparison to 1976, the crime rate in California had decreased by more than 50% in all categories listed above. In 2014, the murder rate was 4.4; rape 21.6; robbery 125.5; aggravated assault 236.6, and burglary 522.3. One reason for a decreased crime rate is that under the current determinate sentencing system, inmates serve longer time in prison.

When the Parole Board determined release dates, little time was served for serious offenses. How little? In the 1970’s, most inmates convicted of homicide served less than ten years. For example, 70% of prisoners convicted of homicide in 1972 were free after serving six years.   Other categories of crime saw equally short sentences; in 1974, three years was the average time served for serious crimes such as robbery, assault, burglary and auto theft.

These are just but a few rebuttals to the Governor’s carefully crafted talking points that have gone unchallenged.

The No on 57 campaign’s request to the Governor comes in response to the overwhelming demand for political discourse and the statement the Governor made that he can “talk all day” about Prop 57. We want to take him up on that offer. Governor it is time to debate Prop 57 so that voters can make a fully informed decision regarding this critical public safety issue.