Five members of California’s parole board have been reappointed by top Democrats despite an outcry over the release of child abusers under the state’s controversial parole program.
Commissioners William Muniz, Michael Ruff, Rosalind Sargent-Burns, Mary Thornton and Jack Weiss were approved by the Senate Rules Committee on Wednesday over Republican opposition, and now head to a full Senate vote.
The team – all appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom – has faced intense scrutiny from GOP lawmakers over a string of high-profile releases, including convicted child abusers and sex offenders.
That includes the parole of David Allen Funston, 64, who prosecutors say kidnapped and molested at least eight children — seven girls and one boy — after luring them with Barbie dolls and candy.
In March, commissioners also freed Gregory Lee Vogelsang, 57, who was serving more than 300 years in prison for sexually abusing children as young as five.
Another case involves Roberto Antonio Detrinidad, 39, who was released despite a life sentence for breaking into a San Francisco apartment and sexually assaulting a sleeping woman.
Senate Minerals leader Brian Jones criticized the decisions, saying they had “shaken badly” confidence in the board.
“Mr. Vogelsang admitted that his sexual attraction to children will always be there,” Jones said.
“As a board member, can you explain how factors such as age, time served, and good behavior can outweigh the risk to public safety when an inmate admits to ongoing sexual attraction to minors?” he asked.
Commissioners declined to discuss specific cases but said they were guided by the law and evidence – not emotion.
“We’re grateful for the intense emotional impact of each of these cases,” Weiss said, adding that the board needed to make “a strong, evidence-based decision.”
Muniz said the decisions must follow the principles set by the courts.
“It is not based on emotions… The Supreme Court has said that after a long time, the crime may not show the danger,” he said.
“Just saying because we don’t like crime, a person will not be released, it can be arbitrary and careless.”
Board members said parole decisions are based on risk assessments and psychological evaluations, including whether inmates understand their triggers and how to treat them.
But Jones dismissed the process as unrealistic.
“Does science ever go back and test whether those coping mechanisms actually work, or are they just fancy ideas?” he said.
He added that the decisions are not in line with common sense.
“Would I want Vogelsang or Funston to live near my grandchildren? … the answer is absolutely no,” Jones said.
“They both admitted they still have ideas.”
Republican Sen. Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh pressed the panel on transparency, asking if they would support making the hearings public.
“There is integrity in maintaining the negotiation process within the board,” Muniz said, saying it protects against political pressure.
Several commissioners refused to answer, saying they would have to consult with advisers first.
Ochoa-Bugh said he was not convinced.
“I’m not satisfied with the answers… in terms of accountability,” he said.
Even Democrats have acknowledged the public’s concerns.
Senate President Monique Limón said cases involving crimes against children make parole decisions “even more difficult” – and raise serious questions about whether parole is a public good.
He outlined proposed legislation aimed at giving commissioners more discretion and increasing transparency in the system.
