Should older sex offenders be eligible for early release from prison?

The Senate Appropriations Committee will determine on Friday if a bill to exclude sex offenders from a parole program for older offenders will move forward this year. For both offenders and survivors, the Committee’s decision will be life changing.

Under California’s Elderly Parole program, most prisoners who are at least 50 years old and who have served at least 20 years of their sentence are eligible to apply for parole. Exceptions include inmates sentenced to death or life without the possibility of parole, inmates sentenced under the Three Strikes law or convicted of first-degree murder of a police officer.

Under SB 286 – authored by Sen. Brian Jones (R-San Diego) and also known as Mary Bella’s Law – persons convicted of first-degree murder and those receiving an enhancement to their sentence for committing certain sexual offenses including, among others, rape, sodomy, or lewd and lascivious acts would also become ineligible for early release.

The Elderly Parole program was originally limited to inmates who were 60 or older and who had served a minimum of 25 years of their sentence. But in 2020, three years after it was established, Assembly Bill 3234 (Ting-San Francisco) lowered the age criteria for eligibility.

While not guaranteeing early release, it gives consideration to the elderly inmate’s risk for future violence due to age, time served and diminished physical condition.

Jones believes this leaves survivors and communities at risk from violent offenders who still have the capacity and physical ability to reoffend again.

“I’m 56 and I’m very offended that 50 is considered elderly,” he says. “It’s ridiculous, if I’m going to be honest.”

He also points to the lasting impact offenders have had on both offenders and their families.

Bella Clark with her child at the CA State Capitol building. Photo by Ellie Appleby, Capitol Weekly_

Bella Clark, one of the survivors the bill is named after, finds it difficult to talk about the traumatic event that changed her life after Charles William Mix kidnapped and sexually assaulted her at the age of five.

“A lot of people make you feel shame about it, and I don’t think that’s fair,” she says.

Mix was 49 when he committed his crimes and was sentenced to 350 years in prison for willful child cruelty, kidnapping for rape, and lewd acts on a child under 14.

Mix was denied early release, but will have another chance at a parole hearing in seven years.

Another offender, Cody Woodsen Klemp of Moreno Valley, was found suitable for parole under the Elderly Parole Act in 2023 after serving 29 years of his 170-year sentence for 10 counts of rape, 10 counts of oral copulation on a child, and 20 counts of committing lewd and lascivious acts on a child.

The state parole board cited Klemp’s age, low risk for violence and having marketable skills. For Klemp’s fifth victim, who goes by only her first name Mary, that turned her world upside down.

“I was absolutely shaken, my life was fractured, and in that moment, I kind of unwound,” she says.

Mary says she and her husband fought to keep Klemp in jail. The parole board ultimately rescinded its decision.

Mary at the CA State Capitol. Photo by Ellie Appleby, Capitol Weekly

“If we hadn’t challenged it, he would be out already,” her husband says. “Every time the perpetrator goes up for parole the survivors are a victim because they have to tell that story over and over again in front of strangers, and they want to hear how graphic it was. It’s horrible.”

But opponents argue the proposed law as it stands is also deeply flawed.

Su Kim, Senior Policy Manager for UnCommon Law, which opposes the measure, feels SB 286 is overreaching and diverts funding from real, life-saving solutions to address sexual violence. Kim points out that the bill also comes with a hefty price tag of at least $2.6 billion over 10 years.

According the California Legislative Analyst’s Office, the average cost of incarceration for one person in California is $133,110 a year, and it costs two to three times more to incarcerate an inmate over the age of 55.

“It is dangerous to pour billions into a policy that does nothing to improve public safety while California is facing devastating cuts in funding for victim services and violence intervention programs,” Kim says.

Kim believes the public has “stranger danger” fear of people that come out of prison and automatically believe they will reoffend. But Kim points to the data that says that the recidivism rate for those released on Elderly Parole is just 2.4 percent. In that regard she says she would love to see solutions that can actually tackle the issue of public safety for survivors, instead of focusing on the narrow group of people who are already elderly and unlikely to commit sexual violence after being released.

Aubrey Rodriguez, Legislative Advocate for ACLU California Action, which also opposes the bill, says they have empathy for victims, but believes if someone has done the rigorous work to change themselves, then that person should have an opportunity at parole.

That doesn’t sit well with Elaina Bentley, the Assistant District Attorney for Riverside County. She believes the focus should be on alleviating the trauma survivors have encountered that will affect them for a lifetime.

“If violent sex offenders are truly rehabilitated, then let them rehabilitate from within the confines of the prison,” she says. “They can advocate, they can talk and do all the great things that they are doing behind bars. These crimes are just to gruesome, too devastating to society.”

Jones agrees, arguing that many of the inmates in question have multiple victims. He also contends that most people will not feel safe knowing someone convicted of a violent sexual crime was living next to them.

“Would you want them living next to you? I don’t want them living next door to me. I don’t want them living next door to my son and daughter in law,” he says.

Rodriguez disagrees, saying he would feel comfortable having a former sex offender that was released on the Elderly Parole Program live next door to him.

“We believe people have the capacity to change, and that we don’t want to sentence them for the rest of their lives for a mistake that they committed in the past,” Rodriguez says.

He says that if someone has been convicted of a serious sexual felony, the incarcerated individual has to first demonstrate that they have transformed themselves, and then are reviewed by a parole board sometimes for years before being released.

“It’s a long process,” he says.

Kim also believes there are more than enough safeguards in place after release.

“Anyone who has been released through this process has gone through extreme hurdles to transform their lives to demonstrate that they’re prepared to come home, to be good neighbors, to be safe people for their community members and family members to be around,” she says.

She argues that not all survivors of sexually violent crimes feel the same way as Mary and other victims, and some survivors look to rehabilitation of the incarcerated individual as a solution.

Jones acknowledges that rehabilitation is at least a possibility for some, but he thinks it foolish to think it will be a hundred percent.

“They think that just because this person has been in prison for 20 years, everything is great and better with them, and they’re going to come out and be a polite member of society,” he says. “Well, maybe a couple of them will, but I think most of them won’t. If just one or two that come out reoffend, that’s a new victim that we did not have before the Elderly Parole Policy went into place. Is it worth having one more victim to let these people out early?”

Ellie Appleby is an intern with Capitol Weekly’s Public Policy Journalism Internship program.