Families of SOs Community Group

WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...

1,307 Members

11,281 Posts

0 Online

Sam66 02/19/2016

Washington, D.C. – The House Judiciary Committee today approved by voice vote the Corrections and Recidivism Reduction Act (H.R. 759) to reform the federal prison system, strengthen public safety, enhance prison security, provide inmates the help they need, and protect civil liberties. This legislation is one of many bills that have been approved by the House Judiciary Committee as part of its bipartisan criminal justice reform initiative.

http://chaffetz.house.gov/press-rele...rm-legislation

There are restrictions on those convicted of violent crimes, terrorism, etc. And it does not apply to those convicted of producing, distributing or receiving child porn, but does NOT restrict those convicted of possession of child porn unless it's a second conviction. At least it acknowledges (in it's current format anyway) that not all non-contact is punishable/treatable.

Sam66 02/19/2016

http://chaffetz.house.gov/press-release/house-judiciary-committee-approves-bipartisan-prison-reform-legislation

sorry, not sure why it abbreviated the address.

corvuscorax 02/20/2016

I can't seem to find where it references first time, non violent possession felonies. Can I please ask that someone point me to it so I can review it?

Thank you

Sam66 02/20/2016

Below is a direct quote from the "amendment in the nature of a substitute" link within the article (I've copied the header and then quoted the section regarding child porn):

(C) INELIGIBLE PRISONERS
—A prisoner serving a sentence as a result of a conviction
for an offense under any of the following provisions of law shall be ineligible to receive time
credits:

(skipping impertinent information here)

(xxvi) Any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 2252(a) of title 18, United
States Code, relating to certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors.

(xxvii) A second or subsequent conviction under any of paragraphs (1) through (6) of section 2252A(a) of title 18, United States Code, relating to certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography.

(they have made all of the specifics of 2252A very vague, but in my LO's case they used section A5B for the possession....while A2A was used for Recept that was dropped as part of the plea)

october2014 02/20/2016

Not everyone on this forum is here because of child porn, so the exclusions for (xxiii) sexual abuse and (xxiv) sexual exploitation may be relevant to some.

Sam66 02/20/2016

I apologize if I offended anyone with the term impertinent. I realize we are all here for different reasons and I was in no way excluding anyone nor judging in any way. I was only point out the section that does allow for a little hope for some....and hope for future gain for everyone here. There are so few times when there is any allowance for "rehabilitation" when it comes to any sexual crime that the fact that a recidivism reduction act includes at least non-contact cases a little allowance seems like a victory. If we can promote for chances of rehabilitation with non contact we can move on to contact cases....but we must start somewhere in the public eye. This bill also promotes a lot more tracking of recidivism rates and successes of methods...so maybe the correct recidivism statistics will be readily available (instead of the inflated scare the public to justify the registry ones!)

Regardless, I apologize to anyone I may have offended! I sincerely meant no harm.

october2014 02/20/2016

No offense taken here. My loved one is not in for CP, so I'm always looking for more. I'm grateful for our researchers and updaters because that's not my knack. Thanks!

catspaw1954 02/20/2016

This is the first thing official that I seen that did not group all SO together. We have a long way to go, but it is a start. Hope it goes through.

Join the Conversation