Sex offender proposition has very little opposition

Proposition 83, or "Jessica’s Law,” gained 76 percent of voter support out of 762 likely voters in the November election. Eleven percent of voters were against the initiative.

"It has widespread non-partisan support,” said Karen King, chair of the San Mateo County Republican Party and the Bay Area chair on the Yes on 83 Campaign. "I really see this staying way ahead and staying there.”

Sex offenses are considered a felony, and Jessica’s Law would require sex offenders to stay in prison for a longer term and would make them live 2,000 feet from schools or parks, where children would congregate.

It also increases penalties for offenders, stating they can be considered sexually violent predators after committing one crime, compared to two as it is now. It also would remove the current two-year period sex offenders must stay at a state hospital, and instead they will be committed to a term subject to an annual review.

Jessica’s Law also states that convicted sex offenders must register and wear satellite-tracking devices for life.

"You can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again,” King said.

Those in support of the initiative say the tracking device allows police to rule out certain offenders when a child goes missing.

"If someone was falsely charged, it could say that felon wasn’t in the area at that particular time,” King said. "It could rule people in or rule people out.”

Tracking device

There are approximately 87,000 sex offenders in California, 500 of whom are already wearing a tracking device.

Becky Warren, a spokeswoman for Proposition 83, said there have been less crimes since offenders have begun to wear the GPS devices.

"They seem to have been proven really effective,” Warren said. "I think it’s proven that it’s a great law enforcement tool. It saves them time.”

However, a large number of sex offenders never register, which leaves them without mandatory tracking devices.

Those against Jessica’s Law are concerned about the estimated $500 million cost to taxpayers without increasing children’s security.

But King said it is the wrong way to look at the initiative.

"Criminals are always going to be a drain on our tax system. If people are going to do the crime, they need to do the time,” she said. "This is to protect society from these creeps and I don’t think you can put a price tag on that.”

The law is named after 9-year-old Florida-resident Jessica Marie Lunsford, who was taken from her bedroom February 2005 and was molested and killed by sex offender John Evander Couey.

The opposition also asserts that members of one’s household are the true victims in sex offenses. The argument also states that police will less effectively monitor sex offenders because they would rely on the tracking system.

It would also monitor those who have committed minor offenses decades ago versus high-risk offenders living in the neighborhoods.

Carleen Arlidge, president of the California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, and who drafted the rebuttal argument on Proposition 83, could not be reached for comment.

There also is no opposition committee at this time. There are two committees in support of the initiative.

King is confident the proposition will pass.

"The magic number is 60 [percent],” King said. "For any proposition this early in the game to be 76 percent, your job’s already done.”

Gaining support

It is about time for this proposition to become a law, King said, and she isn’t surprised it is gaining support.

"The public has gotten more and more fed up and said, ‘Look, we’re not going to take this anymore.’”

<