tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post1016241734922007798..comments2024-03-15T05:45:01.402-05:00Comments on Grits for Breakfast: Cornyn among sponsors of federal Criminal Justice Reinvestment ActGritsforbreakfasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-20640393378774402252010-04-08T06:18:28.476-05:002010-04-08T06:18:28.476-05:00In this blog good pints of view related to topic,I...In this blog good pints of view related to topic,I was waiting for your blog updation.Tell me when you are update this blog. ThanksHospice in Californiahttp://www.hospiceca.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-19656979302610448892010-04-02T17:01:34.257-05:002010-04-02T17:01:34.257-05:00No, I do not believe they are all incurable; yet I...No, I do not believe they are all incurable; yet I know some of them are. It is possible to be both hopeful and realistic. <br /><br />As to most of your other points, I agree with you. <br /><br />"the inclusion of so many people that show no pre-disposition of re-offense is exactly how he flew under the radar. We have tests today that can give a good idea of the one time offenders and the much lower percentage re-offenders. Currently in the US we include 100% of all sexual offenders on the registry, but only 3 to 7% of them will ever re-offend. This is proven in study after study, yet they continue to move low level crimes on the registry as a way to control a certain part of the population. Take out the kids having consensual sex with other kids, take out the urinators, the flashers, the one timers, and you will have your 3 to 7% of true hard core offenders who DO hit their victims over the head and kidnap them. Keeping the guy who picked up the fake ID at the bar on the registry for life is not only counter productive, it is also allows the Phillip's of the world to continue to go under the radar."<br /><br />Yep, I agree with all of that (except for maybe the one timers because it would depend on the nature of the offense; and how do you know they are only one timers until they become a two-timer?), but in your original post you did not differentiate between the categories you are now discussing nor were you as specific concerning your opinion. <br /><br />I disagree with your assumption that just because someone is offense free for say, 20 years, you are guaranteed they will never offend again. While time does show a positive correlation with lower recidivism rates for SOME offenders, crime is not an exact science and things do happen so, in my opinion, the nature of the committing offense needs to be a big factor while deciding length of supervision.<br /><br />I agree more comprehensive assessment IS needed and it has been something I have advocated for on the juvenile level for three years now. On the other hand, no test is an exact science either. It is only one indicator of possible outcome and we are dealing with people. We don't keep people locked up JUST on the basis of a test result so we should not free them JUST on the basis of a test result. Our lives are not always reflected by the bubbles we fill in on a test. <br /><br /><br />So what I meant by type of offender in my original post is exactly as you defined it: "your 3 to 7% of true hard core offenders who DO hit their victims over the head and kidnap them."<br /><br />Had I known the only folks you were referring to were the other 93-97% of sex offenders I did not use as an example, I could have clarified my thoughts better originally, especially since the issue of parole applies to more than sex offenders. <br /><br />Thanks for helping me to further clarify my thoughts on the issue. <br /><br />Enjoy the weekend.CharityLeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13803166437052095340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-76278130473654327202010-04-02T12:47:10.916-05:002010-04-02T12:47:10.916-05:00"Some inefficiency, in my opinion, can be tol..."Some inefficiency, in my opinion, can be tolerated in the name of public safety."<br /><br />Sorry I don't follow. You mentioned "type of offender he is", meaning what exactly/ Please don;t say you're one fo the people that believes that because they individual is a sex offender they are incurable, or re-offending because ' they all do'...<br /><br />The main reason that Phillip Garrido got away with it for so long, is exactly the reason the sexual offender registry needs to be looked at again and completely overhauled. The inclusion of so many people that show no pre-disposition of re-offense is exactly how he flew under the radar. We have tests today that can give a good idea of the one time offenders and the much lower percentage re-offenders. Currently in the US we include 100% of all sexual offenders on the registry, but only 3 to 7% of them will ever re-offend. This is proven in study after study, yet they continue to move low level crimes on the registry as a way to control a certain part of the population. Take out the kids having consensual sex with other kids, take out the urinators, the flashers, the one timers, and you will have your 3 to 7% of true hard core offenders who DO hit their victims over the head and kidnap them. Keeping the guy who picked up the fake ID at the bar on the registry for life is not only counter productive, it is also allows the Phillip's of the world to continue to go under the radar.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-30785524236447644742010-04-01T18:15:38.616-05:002010-04-01T18:15:38.616-05:00"Some people are on parole over 20 years, sug..."Some people are on parole over 20 years, suggesting inefficiency. One would think that after violation free decade or two, that the offender has demonstrated enough of whatever entitles them to live in the community." Anon 2:45<br /><br />Anyone on parole for 20 years has committed a SERIOUS crime.<br /><br />Think Jaycee Dugard. Her captor was on parole for both state and federal charges stemming from another kidnapping and sexual assault for when he kidnapped her. She was held captive for years, raped repeatedly, and had two children of his. Just because one appears to be violation free does not mean they are. Granted, the entire parole system dropped the ball in this case in a horrible way but, being the type of offender he is, long term parole supervision was not a bad idea. Data and research support there are some types of offenders who need supervision, maybe indefinitely. Some inefficiency, in my opinion, can be tolerated in the name of public safety.CharityLeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13803166437052095340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-53824608978807264642010-03-31T15:15:24.167-05:002010-03-31T15:15:24.167-05:00Anon 2:45,
To be released from supervision, a rel...Anon 2:45,<br /><br />To be released from supervision, a releasee must be granted permission from a Regional Parole Supervisor.<br /><br />The specifics would take up too much space so, you can do an internet search for Texas Government Code 508.1555.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04635306052293548869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-7747885827388787292010-03-31T14:45:15.657-05:002010-03-31T14:45:15.657-05:00New to the sight and like what I see.
I would like...New to the sight and like what I see.<br />I would like to know more about early release from PAROLE in Texas. Is this a reality yet? I thought at one time I'd caught a new item about this, but have been unable to locate any further information.<br /><br />Texas has a ridiculous number of people on parole, largely because of a system that requires supervision until expiration of the sentence. Some people are on parole over 20 years, suggesting inefficiency. One would think that after violation free decade or two, that the offender has demonstrated enough of whatever entitles them to live in the community.<br /><br />Thanks for any information your community may have.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-11621128809956719392010-03-31T10:45:26.550-05:002010-03-31T10:45:26.550-05:00i know it wont happen, but maybe they should also ...i know it wont happen, but maybe they should also look at the programs that damn people that have completed their time, and also to allow those that accepted Deferred adjudication to restart their lives without the hangman's noose above their head for the rest of their lives. It costs little to keep a database, but the amounts spent on programs to continue the punitive effects on released persons would save Billions over the life of the projects.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-79682134501819652042010-03-31T08:45:00.310-05:002010-03-31T08:45:00.310-05:00Glad to see something being done. I guess our fed...Glad to see something being done. I guess our federal dollars do work sometimes.Davenoreply@blogger.com