It sounds like a great program. Homeless military veterans who have been sleeping in their cars and risking arrest for violating a new law making it illegal to sleep in your vehicle in a residential area overnight, can now park their vehicles in the VA parking lot and get a good night’s sleep and access to bathrooms.
According to California Radio Station WMOT, “Last month, a non-profit group called Safe Parking L.A. partnered with the Department of Veterans Affairs to offer 10 parking stalls for vets to spend the night in their cars. The number could expand if there’s enough demand. A security guard and a portable bathroom with a hand washing station are available on site from 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m., seven days a week.” Another non-profit group, Village for Vets, had teamed up with Meals on Wheels to bring brown bags of nighttime snacks and breakfast food to the cars.
What better way to help those who have served our country and are down on their luck! Except the new program excludes sex offenders.Other crimes are not checked for – in fact, the individual featured in the WMOT story had served prison time – but sex offenders are.
It’s another scenario where a program intended to help people get back on their feet and become productive members of society, is categorically excluding a class of person whose range of offenses is so broad.
If you have an opinion on this or would like to know why, contact Safe Parking L.A. via phone: 213-793-8493 or email: [email protected] if you email, we encourage you to share your letters here.
*** UPDATE FROM MEMBER: I just got off the phone with The person in charge of the safe parking at the VA. He told me that rso ARE allowed to park there but there is a screening process but they are not stop from parking there!***
I called the number on the post & was informed that this post is erroneous. ” We are not excluding Veterans, who are Sex Offenders, at all!”
What happens IF they do not have a car?
*** UPDATE FROM MEMBER: I just got off the phone with The person in charge of the safe parking at the VA. He told me that rso ARE allowed to park there but there is a screening process but they are not stop from parking there!***
call them
When it comes to California, what less could you expect from a state that welcomes illegals, drug dealers, MS-13 members, etc? I am usually loaded with words to say about such idiotic situations but I am at a loss for words to find out so many of our leaders throughout the nation are totally ignorant of RSO’s and their propensity to not reoffend.
Yup, and before that California was a state full of nut jobs, hippies and snobby Artsy-Fartsy folks. In some sense, it still is. You couldn’t pay me to live there. Especially LA.
Never the less, the whole nation has the same common goal and that is the war on sex and registered citizens and glad there are people across the country fighting for registered citizens as well as registered citizens fighting for themselves.
I would like to share Fed. Job possibilities with other Honorably Discharged Veterans who are registered citizens. If You know any whom have not been classified as a predator & have 7 or more years since sentencing, they can possibly gain Federal Employment
Here is what I emailed them.
Hello, my name is Michael and I just had to respond to your exclusion of veterans that have been convicted of a sexual offense from taking advantage of any of your programs. I find it very disgusting that you are willing to help all other criminal offenders but refuse to help those that need it the most. The fact that you exclude those convicted of a sexual offense, just like the rest of the world, shows that you are not a compassionate organization and that you will bend toward public opinion and help instill the hysteria, myth, and hyperbole that surround the sex offender label. Please consider the following statistics and compare them to any other criminal offenses and see how foundation-less your exclusion really is. Those that were convicted of a sexual offense and have served 1, 2, 3, or more deployments to try to liberate a society that hates our guts just because the government thinks it will serve our society as well are no less deserving of support than any others and our barbaric attitude towards these individuals is a perfect example at how uncivilized our criminal and societal approaches to this growing problem really is.
Thank you for your time
Michael
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) 2014 Outcome Evaluation Report
CA 0.8% recidivism rate. [p. 30 Figure 11]. http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 4 ¶ 12.
California sex offender management Board January 2008, An Assessment of Current Management Practices of Adult Sex Offender in California
CA 2.4% total returned for new sex offense within the first year, 0.84% returned in the second year of release, and 0.28% in the third year, making a total of 3.5% returned for new sex offense in first three years after release. [p.74 table 3-2]. http://www.casomb.org/docs/sombreport1.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 4 ¶ 12.
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 2010 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report
“Recidivating flagged sex offenders are most often returned to prison for a new nonsex crime than for a new sex crime. As seen in Figure and Table 12, [] those who return to prison for a new sex crime (5.0 percent).” [p. 24]. https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/ARB_FY0506_Outcome_Evaluation_Report.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 43 ¶ 176.
California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014
“Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the lives of registrants and those – such as families – whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety.” [p. 12]. http://www.casomb.org/docs/CASOMB_End_of_Year_Report_to_Legislature_2014.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 4 ¶ 12.
(1) Dr. Karl Hanson Declaration ¶ 41 in Doe v. Harris 772 F.3d 563, 572 (9th Cir. 2014):
“Research also contradicts the popular notion that sexual offenders remain at risk of re-offending through their lifespan. Most sex offenders do not re-offend. Hanson Dec. ¶¶ 19-25; Abbott Dec. ¶¶ 13-15. The longer offenders remain offense-free in the community, the less likely they are to re-offend sexually. Hanson Dec. ¶¶ 7-13, 22, 26-38; Abbott Dec. ¶ 16. On average, the likelihood of re-offending drops by 50% every five years that an offender remains in the community without a new arrest for a sex offense. Hanson Dec. ¶ 27. Eventually, persons convicted of sex offenses are less likely to re-offend than a non-sexual offender is to commit an “out of the blue” sexual offence. See id. ¶¶ 28, 31-33. For example, offenders who are classified as “low risk” pose no more risk of recidivism than do individuals who have never been arrested for a sex-related offense but have been arrested for some other crimes. See id. ¶ 30. After 10 to 14 years in the community without committing a sex offense, medium-risk offenders pose no more risk of recidivism than individuals who have never been arrested for a sex-related offense but have been arrested for some other crimes. See id. ¶¶ 30, 34. The same is true for high-risk offenders after 17 years without a new arrest for a sex-related offense. See id. ¶ 35. Ex-offenders who remain free of any arrests following their release should present an even lower risk. See id. ¶ 39. Importantly, post-release factors such as cooperation with supervision, treatment, can dramatically reduce recidivism, and monitoring these factors can be highly predictive. See id. ¶¶ 23, 39-40; Abbott Dec. ¶¶ 17-18. Based on this research, criminal justice and recidivism experts recommend that “rather than considering all sexual offenders as continuous, lifelong threats, society will be better served when legislation and policies consider the cost/benefit break point after which resources spent tracking and supervising low-risk sexual offenders are better re-directed toward the management of high risk sexual offenders, crime prevention, and victim services.”. Doe v. Harris 772 F.3d 563, 572 (9th Cir. 2014). Also see, Hanson Declaration https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/024_hanson_decl_11.7.12.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint pp 45-46 ¶¶ 182, 183.
(2) Video presentation generated by California Sex Offender Management Board 2016
California leading expert’s testimony of facts along with the fallacies of the California registration scheme, see http://www.casomb.org/ [visited April 13, 2018]. Complaint p. 4 ¶ 12.
(3) Out of state report citations:
Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009
“The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation.” [p. 1]. https://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 43 ¶ 176.
Iowa Department of Human Rights Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning and Statistical Analysis Center
“Sex-offense recidivism was low at 3.0 percent for the registry sample and 3.5 percent for the pre-registry sample.” [p. 10 Table 4]. https://humanrights.iowa.gov/sites/default/files/media/SexOffenderReport%5B1%5D.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 44 ¶ 176.
Delaware Sex Offenders, Profiles and Criminal Justice System Outcomes, January 2008
Re-arrest for a new sex crime at 3.1%. Furthermore, re-arrest rates are not absolute rates as absolute rates are extremely lower. [p.50 table 26]. https://cjc.delaware.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/61/2017/06/SO_report_2008-min.pdf [visited on April 15, 2018]. Complaint p. 43 ¶ 176.
Patrick A. Langan et al., Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994, BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS (2003)
“Within the first 3 years following release from prison in 1994, [] The rate for all 9,691 sex offenders (a category that includes the 4,295 child molesters) was 2.2%.” [p. 1].
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsorp94.pdf [visited on April 7, 2018]. Complaint p. 25 ¶ 103.
From Justice Policy Institute
“Registries and notification have not been proven to protect communities from sexual offenses, and may even distract from more effective approaches. Given the enormous fiscal costs of implementing SORNA, coupled with the lack of evidence that registries and notification make communities safer, states should think carefully before committing to comply with SORNA.” [p. 1]. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 25 ¶ 102.
National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America
Abstract: “The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, [] Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses”. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=247350 [visited April 4, 2018]. Complaint p. 24 ¶ 101.
(4) Government Reports outside Plaintiff’s Complaint:
California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB). Letter to Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher Regarding Chelsea’s Law (AB 1844)
“CASOMB has seen the unintended consequences of well-meaning laws intended to protect communities from sex offending, which in some cases have made are people less safe.” [p. 1 ¶ 2]. http://www.casomb.org/docs/CASOMB%20Letter%20to%20Assemblyman%20Fletcher.pdf [visited April 4, 2018].
U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Office of Justice Programs: Are Sex Offenders Dangerous?
Abstract: “The results of the research indicate that the overwhelming majority of sex offenders were not rearrested for another sex crime. This finding is surprising given the way in which DNA collection, registration, and notification policies have come about. Research would indicate that robbers may be better candidates for DNA collection, registration, and community notification than sex offenders. The results offered little support for the notion of predicate or “gateway” offenses to sex offending.” https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=203427 [visited on April 7, 2018].
(5) Reports concerning alleged under-reporting:
The following are governmental reports conducted concerning only alleged high rates of under reported of sex crimes. These reports are relevant since the proponents of these laws often use under-reporting as somehow justification for these laws.
Michael Planty et al., Female Victims of Sexual Violence, 1994-2010, BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS (2013)
“The data in this report were drawn from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The NCVS collects information on nonfatal crimes reported and not reported to the police from a nationally representative sample of persons age 12 or older who live in U.S. households.” [p. 2]. “Many of the variables examined in this report may be related to one another and to other variables not included in the analyses. Complex relationships among variables in this report were not fully explored and warrant more extensive analysis. Readers are cautioned not to draw causal inferences based on the results presented” [p. 10]. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvsv9410.pdf [visited on April 7, 2018].
David Finkelhor et al., Sexually Assaulted Children: National Estimates & Characteristics, JUVENILE JUSTICE BULLETIN 8 (Aug. 2008)
“Using proxy interviews to obtain information on crime victimization and other sensitive topics has never been a preferred methodology and has sometimes yielded poor results” [p. 10]. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/214383.pdf [visited on April 7, 2018].
(6) Static 99R Risk Assessment Tool:
Static 99R risk assessment that is a tool that is widely used by the CASOMB and is the leading risk assessment tool:
For the predictive factors for re-offense of sex offenders, and which can be found on the Internet at http://www.static99.org/pdfdocs/Static-99R_coding_form.pdf [visited on May 3, 2018]. Attached EXHIBIT 1.
(7) Relevant Academic Evidence:
REPORT TO THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE OCTOBER 2005 By Jill S. Levenson, Ph.D
“current social policies may contribute to dynamic risk factors for offenders in the community, ultimately becoming counter-productive.” [p. 10]. https://ccoso.org/sites/default/files/residencerestrictionsFL.pdf [visited on April 21, 2018] Complaint pp. 3, 25.
The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483
“The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. [] This pattern of ineffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates.” http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/658483 [visited on April 21, 2018] Complaint p .25.
Daniel M. Filler, Making the Case for Megan’s Law, Making the Case for Megan’s Law: A Study in Legislative Rhetoric: 76 IND. L.J. 315, 315-17 (2001)
“Clearly, Megan’s Law supporters used rhetoric designed to make opposition to the law politically impossible. They employed a three-part rhetorical strategy that advocates have used previously to push public support for other child protection legislation: typification, statistical manipulation, and melodrama. During the late 1980s, for instance, advocates argued for new stranger child-abduction laws by making these same three claims. First, citing particularly horrible, well-publicized abductions-cases like the Jacob Wetterling incident-they argued that these incidents were typical of the broader abduction problem1 6 Second, they grossly exaggerated the extent of the crisis, pointing to the high rate of total child abductions (a number which consisted largely of parental kidnappings) as evidence of a massive stranger abduction crisis.” Finally, they described their political struggle as a melodrama: a battle of good (child protectors) versus evil (child abusers).”‘ As a result of this effective rhetoric, activists successfully convinced the public that stranger child abduction was a scourge sweeping the nation.” [pp. 362-363]. https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1977&context=ilj [visited on April 7, 2018].
Wayne A. Logan, Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification: Past, Present and Future, 34 NEW ENG. J. ON CRIM. & CIV. CONFINEMENT 3, 5 (2008)
“One of the most striking features of the nation’s modern rush to embrace registration and notification is the utter disregard of empiricism. One would be hard-pressed to identify a public enterprise of similar national scope effectuated in utter disregard for its efficacy or impact. Yet at the same time, registration and notification laws have blanketed the nation precisely because of the perception, repeatedly parroted in legislative findings supporting the laws, that sex offenders recidivate at a far greater rate than other sub-populations. While we now know this to be untrue as we did in the 1950s.” [p. 5]. https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/media/publications/criminal_and_civil_confinement_vol_34-3_logan_re_sex_offenders_past_present_and_future_2007.pdf [visited on April 20, 2018].
(9) Vigilante Attacks:
“An Alaskan “avenger,” armed with a hammer, is accused of attacking sex offenders using an online registry to flesh out his hit list. Tracking down up to three victims using Anchorage’s public online sex offender registry, Jason Vukovich allegedly broke into his victim’s homes late at night and bashed their heads in with a hammer in June” http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/alaskan-man-allegedly-web-registry-attack-sex-offenders-article-1.2737330 [visited on April 20, 2018]. Complaint p. 19.
Washington vigilante who killed two sex offenders gets life in prison, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/unrepentant-washington-vigilante-killed-registered-sex-offenders-life-prison-article-1.1162753 [visited on April 20, 2018]. Complaint p. 19.
Another separate attack with a hammer “Griffin’s sentence, handed down by Judge Hugh Mullin in San Luis Obispo Superior Court, included a conviction for an attack with a sledgehammer April 22, 2010, on 58-year-old Frank Lindsay. Griffin tracked down Lindsay from the Megan’s Law sex offender list,” http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article39150873.html [visited on April 20, 2018]. Complaint p. 20.
The 19-year-old suspect was booked on preliminary charges of aggravated battery and mob action, “He acknowledged knowing that the (victim) was a sex offender, and that the three subjects involved had discussed battering him when they saw him walking down the street.” http://herald-review.com/news/local/sex-offender-attacked-and-told-to-leave-neighborhood/article_3360938d-471d-5411-b61b-0d0010261dd8.html [visited on April 20, 2018]. Complaint p. 20.
The Vigilante of Clallam County Patrick Drum was tired of seeing sex offenders hurt children. So, he decided to kill them. https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/12/the-vigilante-of-clallam-county/281968/ [visited on April 20, 2108]. Complaint p. 20.
Husband and wife ‘vigilante’ team kill two—planned to work their way through sex offender registry ‘hit list’ https://nypost.com/2013/07/25/husband-wife-vigilante-team-killed-two-planned-to-work-way-through-sex-offender-registry-hit-list/ [visited on April 21, 2018]. Complaint pp. 19, 20.
In 2006, for another example, two men listed on Maine’s sex offender registry were targeted and murdered by a Canadian man who found the offenders’ personal information on Maine’s online registry which prompted Maine authorities to briefly remove the state’s online sex-offender registry because of concerns that such websites may encourage vigilante-style justice https://bangordailynews.com/2006/04/17/news/state/2-men-slain-in-milo-corinth-suspect-from-canada-kills-himself-in-boston/ [Visited on April 21, 2018]. Complaint pp. 51, 52.
All these programs from coast to coast with the same type of discrimination. It has pretty much become automatic to include such language with excluding sex offenders for such programs.
from the article link,
” The organization also runs vets’ names through a sex offender database, but it doesn’t require a full criminal background check, according to Executive Director Scott Sale. ”
I don’t get it. If it doesn’t require a full criminal background check, why even run it through a data base all together ? Maybe I missed something. It would be interesting to know if any registered citizens who are vets have been turned away.
This is just, once again, proof that the registry is used as a tool for banishment. If an organization or government agency uses this list as a tool for banishment, then this registry MUST come down. What kind of a legal case will it take to make that happen?
It does sound like a great program, but then this …
Except the new program excludes sex offenders. Other crimes are not checked for.
LoL i love all of these stories about hope and in the end all say the same thing “except sex offenders”
Of course they all end that way we cant win a law suit that matters in restoring our rights, Everyone, everywhere treats us like monsters and the laws get worse for us on a daily basis.
when they have us all on an island away from everyone else like they used to do with leper colony’s then and only then will we be left alone
PS also after visiting the camp several times in Miami I know of several veterans that were there. It would be a great idea for Miami VA to do this.
I just got off the phone with The person in charge of the safe parking at the VA. He told me that rso ARE allowed to park there but there is a screening process but they are not stop from parking there!
I’m actually okay with this banishment trend of sex offenders. This inches us closer to total abolishment of registries because this further proves harm of the registry. It seems Florida is getting really good at being Stupid and one day they will begin to hang themselves.
More harm due to the registry
That proves it I put myself in harms way for the citizens of this country and it doesn’t mean a damn thing.
Sir, It DOES mean something !! It means ALOT to many of us !! Just because some people are bent in the brain, Doesn’t mean they all are !! One day things will change !!. Hopefully it will be one day soon, But regardless of anything you’ve “Done in your past” ! I/We GREATLY Thank You For Your Service !!!! Don’t give up on this country yet !! People are starting to see that just because someone has a label, Doesn’t mean their garbage !!. And the ones who do believe that way, There is a special place Deep on the pots of Hell waiting for them !!!. Again, Thank You For Your Service !!.
TOBM You sir are very welcome and thank you