SACRAMENTO, CA- In California, 12-year-olds can consent to outpatient mental health counseling related to gender identity without parental consent. Nineteen-year-olds can get gender transition surgery. Heck, 21-year-olds can purchase firearms. Twenty-five? Those evil law enforcement officials will not be allowed to use so-called “deceptive law enforcement techniques” against incarcerated persons. Poor criminals. If this is criminal justice "reform," count us out.
According to CalMatters, the California legislature last week passed a bill, Assembly Bill 1905, that would ban law enforcement from using so-called “Perkins operations” on people under age 26 who allegedly committed a crime when they were 17 years or younger. Because 25-year-olds are, in liberal Lala land California, still considered “youths.”
A Perkins operation uses undercover agents who pose as incarcerated individuals to try to obtain incriminating information from suspects.
Since such practices are extremely useful for law enforcement officials to solve crimes, naturally a liberal cesspool like California opposes it. Remember, this is the same state where the legislature tried to (unsuccessfully, thank God) remove pedophiles and some other sex offenders from the sex offender registry.
Using deception, which the Supreme Court ruled constitutional, to solve crimes, however?
That’s a no no.
Conversely, the usual suspects—judges, lawmakers (Democrats), and criminal defense attorneys—claim that Perkins operations “disproportionately target black and Latino people.” Currently, there are ten cases before the California Supreme Court whereby people subject to Perkins operations are challenging their convictions.
Those complaining about the operations claimed in court filings that undercover agents are “older and physically larger than their targets and frequently presented themselves as experienced gang members with histories of violence.” What do they expect, Steve Urkel lookalikes? Clearly most prison inmates tend to be “older and physically larger than their targets.” It is simply the demographic most prison inmates possess.
CalMatters defines these adults in adult jails (over the age of 21 in most cases) as “children in custody.” How absurd! These “children” can serve in the military at 18, can vote at 18, can purchase firearms at 21, but they’re referred to as “children” because they happened to have been tried and convicted as adults when they were in their late teens?
California already has protections in place for teenage inmates. In 2017, California passed a law that kids under age 16 were required to consult with a lawyer before waiving their Miranda rights. Three years later, the age was raised to 17 and younger. Finally, in 2022, California banned law enforcement from using defective tactics on kids under age 18 during a custodial interrogation, according to CalMatters.
California lawmakers left Perkins operations alone due to the Supreme Court decision in Illinois v. Perkins 496 U.S. 292 (1990). That case found that Perkins operations are not technically custodial interrogations.
California is attempting to sidestep the Supreme Court by passing a bill redefining Perkins operations as deception under California law. They are also, evidently, trying to redefine what a “youth” is. What California is attempting to do is use the EU definition of youth, which is defined as individuals between 13 to 30, a ridiculous age gap. They have not gone quite that far but give the liberals time.
The absurdity of redefining youth to meet standards outside the U.S. has caught the attention of the California State Sheriffs’ Association.
“The first concern is the limitation,” said Cory Salzillo, legislative director for the California State Sheriffs’ Association. “The second concern is this notion that it’s for ‘young people’ as the bill’s materials address, when—in fact—it is not limited to minors or persons under the age of 18.”
The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office has also come out in formal opposition to the legislation, saying it will limit their investigative tools. As expected, the vote passed mostly along party lines, with all but two crime-loving Democrats voting in favor of it while all Republicans voted no. As is typical for blue states, California does whatever it can to tie the hands of law enforcement while greasing the skids for criminals. It is not surprising.
Salzillo said that it is “exceedingly rare” for law enforcement to target youth under age 18 in a Perkins operation and noted that California law already protects minors (real minors, under the age of 18) from deception and psychological manipulation.
California’s oleaginous governor, Gavin Newsom, has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the bill. He has not indicated which way he will go, but Kalshi would likely put that as extremely likely in the betting pool.
California—another blue state where criminals go to offend without worrying about paying the penalty.
Comments