When and Why: California’s ‘Compassionate Release’ Program Simply Doesn’t Work

The term “second chance” is usually good – except when it comes to some criminals.

On one hand, you do have those that have learned their lessons from whatever action they’ve taken, and actually take the opportunity to make themselves a better person from it. I’ve seen some criminals completely turn their lives around and become the people they were meant to be.

But then you have those that take advantage of the opportunity to turn their lives around and slip back into their criminal lifestyle, not hesitating to hurt someone just for the sake of taking the easy way out. And, of course, landing back in jail as a result.

A recent article over at Law Enforcement Today reminded me that not only are there people who take the wrong kind of advantage of this “second chance,” but how a state can provide a too open door for someone to slip back into the wrong lifestyle without some form of rehabilitation.

Take this case in California. The state has this “compassionate release” program:

“Compassionate release allows a court to recall the sentence of someone who has a fatal illness or who is medically incapacitated or functionally impaired, and resentence them so that they can spend the rest of their life in the community.”

But 61-year old Markham David Bond abused the program to his advantage. Last week, he was found guilty by a Los Angeles federal jury on a count of interference with commerce by robbery, as well as one count of using a firearm during a crime of violence and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition.

This violent criminal had gotten a reprieve through the “compassionate release” program, after he was previously found guilty of robbing a Brinks courier at gunpoint near the Los Angeles International Airport back in August 2023.

U.S. Attorney Martin Estrada summed up the situation just about right. “After being given a second chance in life, this defendant sadly chose a path of violent crime. Through our strong partnerships with federal and local law enforcement, we will continue to use our resources to protect our community by holding accountable violent offenders who use guns.”

This case brings up an interesting question. How was Bond able to get his release in the first place when he clearly wasn’t given enough time in rehabilitation?

The court apparently erred in its decision, and even though they put Bond on what they called a “supervised release,” he was still able to return to his criminal career.

It just goes to show how flawed California’s law system has become over the years.

Local governments and District Attorneys often feel like they have some sort of grasp on the law, as if they’ll magically make crime go away by being nice to criminals. Some slash police budgets down to staggering new lows, like Oakland recently did; and others believe eliminating police and replacing them with unarmed citizens in certain areas would work to great effect. Newsflash: it didn’t.

So when did California hold criminals in a higher regard than police? Or citizens? The whole “defund the police” program, which disrupted lives and cost our hard-working men and women in blue millions of dollars, didn’t help anyone but hardened criminals. But do these people really believe that goodwill is the answer for fighting back against the criminal element?

The bottom line is we’ve had a system in place that has worked for many years. A criminal gets caught for their actions, serves their time in jail, and either learns their lesson or they don’t. I always lean towards the former, but the key here is to make sure that proper balance is given so that they realize the consequences of their actions.

California’s “compassionate release” program is meant to work on a different level, for those who are truly trying to appreciate what little time they have left. But somehow, Bond was able to take advantage of that, and we’re left wondering just who the state is siding with. Too often, they’re blaming society for the actions criminals choose to take.

Perhaps the state and its local governments should take this time to evaluate what works better. To make sure that the criminals are serving time for their actions and not slipping through loopholes. Oh, and providing the police the respect they deserve – along with the funds to do their job.

Let’s put compassion back where it counts for the new year, shall we? With our citizens who deserve protection from criminals, and with the police who put their lives on the line every day to stop crime.