Wednesday, September 25, 2013

AL - Ex-police sergeant (Jason Glen Thomas) in Alabama sentenced in sexual assault

To protect and serve... NOT!
Original Article


TUSCALOOSA - An ex-police sergeant accused of sexually assaulting a woman while he was on duty has been sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Jason Glen Thomas was sentenced earlier this week in a federal court in Birmingham after pleading guilty to violating a 42-year-old woman's civil rights in April.

Thomas, an 11-year department veteran, was accused of stopping the victim without placing her under arrest in late May of 2011. Authorities have said Thomas sexually assaulted her on the side of the road outside his patrol car.

The Tuscaloosa News reports 35-year-old Thomas is also ordered to pay a $100 fine and serve time on supervised release after his sentence.

The victim's civil suit is still pending against Thomas.

UK - Police to run courses to help tackle child sexual exploitation

Internet Safety
Original Article


Police are running free courses to show parents how to teach their children to stay safe from sexual predators.

The events, which will be held at Leicestershire Police headquarters in Enderby, will be run by local officers and experts from the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, (CEOP).

Inspector Rich Hiom, of Leicestershire Police, said: “There have been some high profile court cases in the media in recent months, both nationally and locally, which relate to child sexual exploitation.”

This type of abuse is rare in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland, and can be difficult to detect because often the victim is unaware that they have been sexually exploited.”

In many cases the adult abuser will befriend the child online.”

It is important that parents, carers and those who work with children are aware of the signs and know what help is available.”

These seminars are free to attend although places are limited, so I urge anyone interested to please contact me to secure their place.”

The seminars will take place at Leicestershire Police headquarter, in Enderby between 6pm and 8pm on Tuesday, October 1, Monday, October 14 and Monday, November 11.

To book a place e-mail:


Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
On June 9, 2008, the State filed a petition pursuant to the Sexually Violent Persons Commitment Act (Act) (725 ILCS 207/1 to 99 (West 2010)) seeking to have respondent, Johnny Butler, adjudicated a sexually violent person (SVP) and committed to the care and custody of the Department of Human Services (DHS). The petition alleged that respondent had previously been convicted of three separate sexually violent offenses. Specifically, respondent was convicted of the sexually violent offense of attempted rape under Cook County case number 75 I 4184 and was sentenced to a term of 15 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections. Next, respondent was convicted of the sexually violent offenses of rape and deviate sexual assault as well as the offenses of robbery and aggravated kidnapping under Cook County case number 80 C 3720 and was sentenced to a term of 22 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections. Lastly, the petition alleged that respondent was convicted of the sexually violent offense of attempted aggravated criminal sexual assault as well as the offense of aggravated kidnapping under Cook County case number 97 CR 13916 and was sentenced to 22 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections. The petition further alleged that respondent was presently incarcerated pursuant to the sentence imposed on 97 CR 13916 and was scheduled to be released within 90 days of the filing of the petition. Respondent had been evaluated by a clinical psychologist who had diagnosed respondent as suffering from "Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified, Non-consenting Persons," and "Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified, With Antisocial Features." Finally, the petition alleged that respondent is dangerous to others because said mental disorders make it substantially probable that he will engage in acts of sexual violence.

CA - People v. Zapata

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
In March 2005, defendant was driving his vehicle when he was stopped by police officer Ramiro Vergara for not wearing a seat belt and failing to signal before turning. A DMV check revealed the vehicle was registered to Juan Zapata, defendant's brother, and that the registration was expired. Defendant identified himself as Juan Zapata, with a birth date of December 18, 1984, and told Vergara the vehicle belonged to his girlfriend. A records check showed Juan Zapata did not have a driver's license. After backup arrived, Vergara found a pipe in defendant's pocket, plus bullets and a loaded gun in the vehicle. Defendant was arrested and taken to the police station, where he maintained his name was Juan Zapata. Vergara completed a prebooking form with the information defendant provided. He collected evidence from defendant's hands to test for gunshot residue (GSR) under the name of Juan Zapata and sent it to the lab for testing under that name. A DNA sample was also taken from defendant and booked under the name Juan Zapata. Fingerprints later revealed defendant was actually Jesus Zapata with a birth date in 1978. Upon being confronted with the information, defendant pleaded the Fifth Amendment.

PA - Commonwealth v. REMENTER

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
The chilling facts of this child rape case are clear from the record. . . . [Appellant], then 23, met H.D. when H.D. was just 8 years old and they were both students at a local karate school. [Appellant] immediately became obsessed with the 8-year-old H.D., developing the deranged delusion that "[t]he day we met I felt a force so strong between us that it felt like destiny was pushing us together." [Appellant] became H.D.'s karate instructor when she was 11, and he immediately seized upon the opportunity his new position of trust provided him to prey on her. [Appellant] began asking her personal questions, and he set about convincing her that no one cared about her and he was the only person she could trust. In August of 2011, the relationship turned sexual as [Appellant] continued to exploit his position of trust. [Appellant] admitted that he had sexual intercourse with H.D. at least six times in H.D's home while her parents were at work. He wrote her numerous letters addressed to "Cinderella" and signed "Prince Charming," and he sent her an assortment of inappropriate gifts including vibrators, lingerie, and a wedding band. He also sent her nude photographs of himself and he requested that she send the same to him. Most disturbing of all, [Appellant] sent H.D. used condoms filled with his semen and told her to place the condoms inside of her body when they were not together. The relationship only came to an end when H.D.'s mother came home from work on December 27, 2011, and discovered H.D. engaged in sexual intercourse in H.D.'s room. As H.D's mother was calling the police, [Appellant] fled the home but was later arrested.

CA - People v. BACHA

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
We need not set forth a detailed statement of facts to resolve appellant's sentencing claim because, as he admits, it involves a "pure question of law" and is "not fact-based." Suffice it to say, the record shows appellant repeatedly sexually molested his girlfriend's daughter when she was 10 and 11 years old. He was convicted of six counts of lewd conduct with a child and one count of attempting to commit a lewd act on a child. (Pen. Code, §§ 288, subd. (a), 664.)[1] As to four of the counts, the jury found appellant had substantial sexual conduct with the victim, thus prohibiting a grant of probation. (§1203.066, subd. (a)(8).) In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true allegations appellant had previously been convicted of one serious felony and six violent "strike" felonies. (§ 667, subds. (a), (d), (e)(2)(A).) The court also found appellant had served a prior prison term. (§ 667.5, subd. (b).) Pursuant to the Three Strikes law, the trial court imposed consecutive terms of 25 years to life on each of the underlying counts. It then added a five-year term for the prior serious felony conviction, bringing appellant's total term of imprisonment to 180 years to life.


Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
While appellant Rolando Reyes was imprisoned for residential burglary, the Attorney General petitioned in 2004 to commit Mr. Reyes to the Special Commitment Center (SCC) to await trial as a sexually violent predator (SVP). The petition was dropped after he was convicted of twice committing custodial assault with sexual motivation while at the SCC. The petition was refiled in 2008 when his 36-month sentence for the two custodial assault convictions was ending. He moved to dismiss, arguing that the Attorney General lacked authority to bring the petition and that it should not have been filed in Benton County. The motion was heard by telephone, with the Assistant Attorney General appearing from her office in Seattle. The record reflects that the judge, two attorneys representing Mr. Reyes (one of whom was then serving as guardian ad litem), and a court reporter were present in chambers for the motion hearing.[2] After hearing argument, the court denied the motion to dismiss. Counsel for Mr. Reyes indicated that they had a signed jury trial waiver on hand and asked for the State's telephonic approval of the waiver. Counsel for the State noted that she had filed the jury demand and advised the court that she would withdraw it at that time. The court accepted the withdrawal.

OH - State v. Noles

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
{¶1} Billie Noles appeals from a judgment of conviction and sentence following a jury verdict finding him guilty on four counts of rape in violation of R.C. 2907.02(A)(1) (b) and (B). For the following reasons, we affirm the judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas. {¶2} When G.B. was in the third grade she watched a sexual abuse video at school. After the video, G.B. approached her school counselor and reported that she had been sexually abused when she was a small child. The school counselor notified the proper authorities. The Toledo Police Department assigned the case to Detective Shelli Kilburn. Detective Kilburn interviewed G.B., G.B's mother, and G.B.'s grandmother. She also interviewed appellant, Billie Noles.

TX - Phillips v. State

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
In this case, appellant, William Ray Phillips II, was charged with failing to register as a sex offender. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. § 62.102 (West 2006). Prior to trial, appellant was determined to be indigent and attorney Seth Sutton was appointed to represent appellant. However, a few days later, appellant signed a waiver of his right to counsel in the case pending against him. The trial court allowed appellant to represent himself; however, Sutton remained assigned to assist appellant as stand-by counsel. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury convicted appellant of the charged offense, and the trial court assessed punishment at ten years' incarceration in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. This sentence was ordered to run consecutively with another conviction in the United State District Court for the Western District of Texas—Cause #W-02-CR-117(01). After the trial court certified his right of appeal, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.


Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
Mother and Father have two children: F.L. born in 1999 and B.L. born in 2002. During their marriage, Mother and Father engaged in sexual activity with other individuals in their home. In fact, Father would drive Mother to meet men she met on-line for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity. Mother was sometimes paid for the sexual encounters. The children were often present in the family's home during these encounters and would also travel with Father when he provided transportation for Mother to meet other men. On or about June 17, 2011, when B.L. was eight years old, Mother took both children to a neighbor's home. Father suspected that the neighbor was capable of molesting his children, particularly his son, B.L., but did not prevent Mother from taking them with her. While at the neighbor's home late that night, Mother allowed the neighbor, who had been drinking alcohol, to take B.L. on an ATV ride.

TX - Downey v. State

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
A grand jury indicted appellant with committing indecency with a child, alleging that he had touched the breast of a child while intending to arouse and gratify his sexual desire. Appellant pled guilty to that offense while receiving admonishments about the effects of doing so, waiving constitutional and statutory rights, and judicially confessing. The trial court deferred its adjudication of appellant's guilt and placed him on community supervision for ten years. As conditions of the community supervision, the trial court ordered him to, among other terms, abstain from using narcotics or other habit-forming drugs, complete 240 hours of community service, pay monthly supervision and sex offender fees, successfully complete a sex offender treatment program, and submit to polygraph examinations.

OH - State v. Dawson

Diigo Icon
Original Article

Diigo Post Excerpt:
The facts in the case before us are not in dispute. In March 2002, a complaint was filed in Montgomery County Juvenile Court (J.C. No. A XXXX-XXXX 02), alleging that Dawson had committed a sexually-oriented offense at the age of 14. The juvenile court found Dawson to be a delinquent child in May 2002, following his admission to having committed gross sexual imposition in violation of R.C. 2907.05, which would have been a felony of the third degree if committed by an adult. At disposition, which was held on September 20, 2002, the juvenile court ordered Dawson into the custody of the Department of Youth Services (DYS) for a minimum of six months and a maximum period not to exceed Dawson's 21st birthday. However, the time in DYS was suspended, and Dawson was ordered to serve a period of probation until September 30, 2003. He was also ordered to attend the Dora Tate Juvenile Program for eight days, pay restitution, have no contact with the victim, and attend outpatient therapy after school at the Lighthouse Program. The juvenile court did not impose classification as a sex offender registrant at that time.

FL - Joint Meeting of the Senate Committees on Children, Families & Elders Affairs and Judiciary (09-24-2013)

Joint Meeting of the Senate Committees on Children, Families & Elders Affairs and Judiciary (09-24-2013)
Click the image to view the video

AL - Dothan police officer (Lanice Clifton Bonds) charged with sex act with student

Lanice Clifton Bonds
Lanice Clifton Bonds
Original Article


A Dothan police officer who worked as a school resource officer has been charged with engaging in a sex act with a student.

Lanice Clifton Bonds, 37, of Drexel Court, was arrested Tuesday and charged with “School employee engaging in a sex act with a student under the age of 19.”

Court records show the offense allegedly took place in October 2012.

According to information from Dothan police, the Dothan City Schools forwarded a complaint to the Dothan Police Department on Sept. 17, alleging there was an inappropriate relationship involving a high school student and a school resource officer.

An internal affairs investigation was launched, which led to a criminal investigation. Police say Bonds was interviewed and confessed to his involvement. Termination proceedings against him are under way.

Bonds served as a school resource officer at Dothan High School for six years.

Bonds’ bail has been set at $250,000 by Circuit Court Judge Michael Conaway.

If convicted of the class B felony crime, school official or employee having sex with a student, Bonds faces two to 20 years in prison.

AL - Former Tuscaloosa police officer (Jason Glenn Thomas) sentenced to 10 years in prison in sexual assault of woman

To protect and serve... NOT!
Original Article


By Kent Faulk

BIRMINGHAM - A former Tuscaloosa Police sergeant was sentenced to 10 years in prison this afternoon for his guilty plea to depriving a woman of her civil rights related to a sexual assault of a woman in March 2011.

Jason Glenn Thomas, 35, is to report to prison on Oct. 23 to begin serving the sentence, U.S. District Court Judge David Proctor ordered after imposing the sentence. The hearing was held at the Hugo L. Black U.S. Courthouse in Birmingham.

Proctor said he agreed that the crime is "despicable" and was a situation "where the judiciary must speak and not stutter" on what is sufficient but not greater than necessary sentence.

The unidentified victim of the sexual assault spoke to Proctor before he pronounced the sentence. "This has affected my life - every aspect of my life," she said.

The woman, who has a civil lawsuit pending against Thomas, also told the judge Thomas should not be allowed to use his authority to victimize her or anyone else again.

Assistant U.S. Attorney George Martin also told the judge before sentencing that Thomas committed a premeditated crime - turning off his body recorder, positioning her outside of the video recorder before raping her. Thomas also threatened the woman with jail. "This was a premeditated abuse of trust ... It's beyond comprehension that a law enforcement officer would do that," he said.

According to court documents filed in connection with his guilty plea, Thomas admitted that while on duty shortly after midnight on March 27, 2011, he stopped and detained a female pedestrian without placing her under arrest. Thomas then transported the woman in his department issued patrol vehicle to a remote area and sexually assaulted her, according to a previous statement from federal authorities.

Martin said a 10-year sentence would send a message others in law enforcement.

Thomas told the judge that he would accept the punishment Proctor dispensed. "I never intended to be here. ... I take full responsibility for what I did. I sincerely apologize," he said.

Defense attorneys Joel Sogol and Tommy Spina represented Thomas and noted his 15-year career in law enforcement.

Martin had asked that Thomas' bond be revoked today and that he be placed in jail until the Federal Bureau of Prisons designated a prison for him. But Spina told the judge that one concern is that Thomas could be in danger if placed in the general population of a jail with inmate who he may have had contact with as a police officer.
- Yes he would be in danger, but how ironic that this is never considered when it's the average citizen who has been convicted of a sexual crime!

MI - Sexual assault case involving Kalamazoo County deputy being reviewed by Calhoun County prosecutor

Kalamazoo Sheriff
Kalamazoo Sheriff
Original Article


By Rex Hall Jr.

KALAMAZOO - The decision on whether a Kalamazoo County sheriff’s deputy may face charges in connection with an alleged sexual assault at the county jail will be made by the Calhoun County Prosecutor’s Office, authorities said Tuesday.

Calhoun County Prosecutor David Gilbert said he received the case Tuesday from the Michigan Attorney General and hopes to make a decision about charges in the case by Friday.

Absent further investigation, we should be able to make a decision this week,” Gilbert said.

Michigan State Police submitted their investigation of the deputy to the Kalamazoo County Prosecutor’s Office on Sept. 6 and sought a charge of first-degree criminal sexual conduct.

Prosecutors then asked the AG’s office to assign another county prosecutor’s office to review the case because of the deputy’s employment with the sheriff’s office.

State police began investigating the deputy, whose name has not been released, earlier this summer at the request of the sheriff’s office.

TX - Recently-passed sex offender laws in Nederland on hold

Sex offender residency restrictionsOriginal Article


By Brooke Crum

A restrictive sex offender ordinance recently passed by Nederland's City Council is on hold for six months while the city explores its legal defensibility.

The ordinance, which was in effect for about a week, banned sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of dance studios, libraries and churches.

It was suspended Monday by the city council.

City Manager Chris Duque said the city's attorney advised suspending the rule for 180 days to allow time to examine pending and recently resolved court cases in other cities that apply to sex offender residency restrictions.

Mary Sue Molnar, executive director of Texas Voices, a group that advocates for "common-sense laws and policies" regarding sex-offender registration, said that she was pleased the ordinance had been suspended for now because "it's neither necessary nor legal."

She said Nederland's ordinance was drafted out of the misguided concern that sex offenders have a high rate of recidivism, which she said voluminous research contradicts.

She said 90 percent of such offenses are committed by people not on the registry.

Such laws are driven by "fear and hysteria," Molnar said.

"There is no evidence, no studies, no statistics that support the theory that imposition of residency restrictions or child safety zones improves public safety," she said.

Courts, meanwhile, have questioned the constitutionality of communities imposing restrictions that effectively make it impossible for sex offenders to live anywhere at all.

Last month a federal judge in Colorado tossed out an ordinance similar to Nederland's, stating that if every city and county in the state enacted a similar policy, sex offenders would be banned from the entire state.

One case Nederland will look at is pending against the City of Lewisville, which has a similar ordinance banning convicted sex offenders from living within 1,500 feet of places children typically gather, such as video arcades and public swimming pools.

A registered sex offender filed a lawsuit against Lewisville last year, citing the unconstitutionality of the ordinance.

After 180 days, the city attorney will present his research findings to the city council, Duque said.

According to the Texas Department of Public Safety's online Sex Offender Registry, Nederland has 27 registered sex offenders living in its city limits.

Nederland's suspended ordinance restricted sex offenders from living near places where four or more children would gather, such as twirling studios, karate academies and any other facilities that offer art or sport classes.

It also required sex offenders to post "no candy" signs, maintained and issued by Nederland police, in front of their homes for Halloween on Oct. 30 and Oct. 31 from 4 p.m. to 11 p.m.

Texas Voices' Molnar pointed out that since a significant majority of Texas' more than 72,000 registered do not live alone, such ordinances often unfairly force whole families to relocate.

She said that municipalities that pass such ordinances might "think they're doing a good thing, but they're not."

While Nederland's new ordinance is suspended, a 2006 regulation forbidding sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools, public parks and day care centers will be in effect.

OH - Sex offender legislation on the books

Ohio residency restriction changesOriginal Article


By Michelle Rotuno-Johnson

MARION - After two and a half months of discussion and revision, Marion City Council passed an ordinance Monday night making it tougher for sex offenders to live near where children play and congregate.

An offender looking to establish new residence in the city of Marion is now unable to live 1,000 feet from a school, park, playground, day care, library, public pool, YMCA or YWCA, Boys and Girls Club or city-operated recreational facility in the city.

Offenders living under the current state law are prohibited from living 1,000 feet from a school or day care. This new city ordinance does not affect them unless they establish new residency in the city. The city ordinance does not apply to offenders after their registration period is over.

It does something maybe no one thought about, prohibiting them from being near these areas,” said council member Josh Daniels, D-at large, who brought the ordinance forward.

Daniels originally planned to ban offenders from living 1,500 feet from these areas. But when Regional Planning drew up a map of the 1,500-foot radius, Council and city leaders decided that distance may not hold in a constitutional challenge.

There were not many neighborhoods left for sexual offenders to live under the 1,500-feet rule.

The Marion County Sheriff’s Office keeps track of sex offenders once they get out of jail. Deputy Larry Yoder is in charge of registry, and said he and other deputies check in on the offenders several times a year to make sure they live at the address they gave the sheriff’s office.

If a sex offender moves too close to a school, Yoder said, he will find out when he enters the person’s address into the office database. He and Sheriff Tim Bailey said it can take weeks, or months, to get through all the civil paperwork when evicting someone.

Yoder said offenders who just got out of prison are most likely to move into a restricted area, as they may not be familiar with the laws.

I tell them they need to move,” he said. “I give them a period of time.”

In the city, Law Director Mark Russell also is involved in the eviction process.

Daniels said it is up to the legislature to make a residency offense criminal. Currently, the only penalty for moving into a restricted area is injunctive relief (eviction). But, he said, Marion’s stricter ordinance may help “make the temptation less likely” for offenders.

I think it does some good,” he said. “It doesn't clean up the most serious elements. The legislature needs to criminalize.”

Sexual offender laws in Ohio
The law that prohibits sex offenders from living 1,000 feet from a school took effect July 31, 2003. Offenders who are juveniles do not have residency restrictions.

Offenders who completed their sentence before 1997 do not have to register, Yoder said. Offenders convicted from 1997 to 2007 are classified under legislation called Megan’s Law, which divides sex offenders into three tiers: sexually oriented offender, habitual sex offender and sexual predator.

The tiers decide how long a sex offender must register with the sheriff’s office in his or her county:
  • Sexually-oriented offender: Registration once a year for 10 years.
  • Habitual sex offender: Registration once a year for 20 years.
  • Sexual Predator: Registration every three months for life.

In 2008, the Adam Walsh Act went into effect. From Jan. 1, 2008, forward, sex offenders were divided into tiers with more aggressive reporting requirements:
  • Tier One: Registration once a year for 15 years (10 years for juveniles).
  • Tier Two: Registration twice a year for 25 years (20 years for juveniles).
  • Tier Three: Registration every three months for life (this includes juveniles).

According to the Ohio State Bar Association, Tier Three offenders are considered the most serious. They include those who have been convicted for offenses such as rape, sexual battery, murder with sexual motivation, etc.

Tier Two offenders include those who have been convicted of offenses such as gross sexual imposition with a victim younger than 13 years old, pandering sexually oriented material involving a minor, and unlawful sexual conduct with a minor when the offender is four or more years older than the victim.

Tier One offenders include those who have been convicted of offenses such as sexual imposition, voyeurism and pandering obscenity.

Yoder said once an offender reaches the end of his or her registration, as ordered by the court, they no longer have to register as a sex offender.

He said schools, colleges and daycare's are notified if a sex offender moves in or changes addresses anywhere in the county. Other businesses and homes are notified only if a Tier Three sex offender moves within 1,000 feet of that address.

He said he has tabs on all registered offenders in the county but one, who he believes moved out of state.

OH - Girard revises ordinance restricting FOUR sex offenders during trick-or-treat

Yearly Halloween sex offender hysteria continues
Original Article


By Mike Gauntner

GIRARD - Girard City Council has amended an ordinance designed to keep sex offenders from having contact with children on trick-or-treat night.

Law Director Brian Kren tells 21 News that council approved the original ordinance last year based on regulations adopted by some other U.S. cities to protect children taking part in trick-or-treat from the dangers posed by registered sex offenders convicted of offenses against minors.

Girard's original ordinance only applied to the date of October 31, the traditional day on which Halloween is observed.

Council has now amended the ordinance so it would be in effect if the city decides to hold trick-or-treat on dates other than October 31.

Under the ordinance, registered sex offenders must turn off all exterior lighting from 5:00 p.m. until midnight on the night trick-or-treat is observed.

The ordinance also bans sex offenders from putting up Halloween decorations on their home or in their yard.

Sex offenders must also refrain from answering the door for children who are trick-or-treating.

Law Director Kren doesn't beleive that the city could successfully enforce the rules on homeowners who have a sex offender living with them. So council has added another provision to the law which exempts property owners who fall into that category.

Asked if he believes the ordinance could survive a court challenge, Kren tells 21 News that the community of Simi Valley, California passed a similar ordinance. He points out that the courts struck down a provision of that city's law requiring that signs be posted outside homes to notify the public that a sex offender was living there, but other provisions were upheld.

According to the Ohio Attorney General's interactive database, four registered sex offenders live within Girard city limits.

CA - Family Emergencies Mishandled By Coalinga State Hospital

Coalinga State Hospital News
Show Description: (More Here)
On this episode, we'll discuss how family emergencies impact men residing at Coalinga State Hospital. Are they able to get 'Emergency Leave' to visit a parent, sibling, child or spouse who's near death? Can they make arrangements when their loved ones die? Hear about the unjust ways that patients are further abused when faced with a family crisis.

Even men in prison can apply for/be granted leave under these circumstances... why aren't there any provisions for people who are under a civil commitment, which is supposed to be a less restrictive environment? Why do these men have such a difficult time even getting information back/forth during an emergency?

CA - Patient Abuse By Coalinga State Hospital Employees

Coalinga State Hospital News
Show Description: (More here)
This vitally important show is a continuation of last night's SPECIAL REPORT on the life & untimely death of Coalinga State Hospital (CSH) resident Isidro "Cedro" Zavala Torres--simply Cedro Zavala to fellow CSH residents.

According to witnesses, Cedro Zavala--who was a wheelchair-dependant Mentally Disordered Offender--was violently attacked by approximately 10 CSH Staff/Department of Police Services (DPS) Officers on June 24. The incident began when Zavala refused to go to a medical appointment. Then, after he was forcibly removed him from his wheelchair & thrown to the ground, an aggressive officer allegedly stood on Zavala's neck w/ his heavy steel-toed boot.

Witnesses theorize Zavala's larynx was crushed by this blow. As he gasped for air, officers launched him back into his chair, threw a towel over his face & rushed him away. Isidro Zavala Torres, 30, died a short time later.

Sadly, this is one very serious incident in a long history of violence/intimidation against patients. CSH News has heard too many horror stories--the nightmare must end. No more statements from CSH Director Audry King saying this/that is a "serious issue," then doing nothing about it. CSH must pay for their crimes against the elderly & infirmed. It's time California's "Money Pit" stopped wasting billions in taxpayer money locking up men who've finished their prison terms. It's time everyone involved stood before CA taxpayers--and a jury of their peers--to be held accountable for what they've done.