Listen to the article
California Law Loophole Allows Child Predator to Seek Early Release Despite 139-Year Sentence
An illegal immigrant from Mexico serving a 139-year prison sentence for repeatedly raping and impregnating his underage stepdaughter is eligible to seek early parole for a second time due to a loophole in California’s Elderly Release Program, despite having served only about 20% of his sentence.
Israel Ceja, 63, had his initial parole grant blocked Wednesday after California Governor Gavin Newsom convened an en banc parole board review following pressure from Yolo County District Attorney Jeffrey Reisig. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has scheduled a new hearing for Ceja.
“Nobody wants this,” Reisig told reporters. “The general public does not want this, and all they’re doing is victimizing, re-victimizing the victims and the communities. Nobody wants these guys coming back to their community.”
Ceja was convicted in 2000 for systematic sexual abuse of his stepdaughter, Roxanne Cruz, which began when she was just 11 years old in 1993. The case has highlighted significant concerns about California’s parole system, particularly after a two-commissioner panel initially granted Ceja early release in January without consulting the victim or notifying the district attorney’s office that prosecuted him.
The controversial Elderly Release Program was established in 2014, originally setting eligibility at age 65 with 25 years served. However, Governor Newsom signed legislation in 2020 that lowered the eligibility age to 50 years with 20 years served. While certain categories of offenders are excluded from the program—those serving life without parole, facing death sentences, or classified as three-strike offenders—violent criminals, including those convicted of sex crimes against children, remain eligible.
This case follows another high-profile release earlier this year when David Allen Funston, who kidnapped and molested at least eight children in the Sacramento area during the 1990s, was granted parole under the same program.
The growing controversy has prompted bipartisan legislative action. Republican state Senator Roger Niello introduced a measure to exclude those convicted of rape, sodomy, and lewd acts from elderly parole eligibility, but it was defeated in the Senate Public Safety Committee this week. Democratic Assembly member Stephanie Nguyen’s Assembly Bill 2727, which would raise the eligibility age for convicted sex offenders from 50 to 65 and require psychological evaluations, has passed initial committee review but was stripped of provisions that would have permanently banned violent sex offenders from seeking early release.
District Attorney Reisig has called on Governor Newsom to issue an executive order banning child molesters from the program, citing Newsom’s previous moratorium on the death penalty as precedent. “He could issue a moratorium on any elderly parole releases of child rapists with the stroke of a pen,” Reisig said. “Step up, protect children. Stop allowing child rapists to get out early.”
Newsom’s office responded that the governor only has authority to reverse parole grants in murder cases, though he can refer decisions back to the Board of Parole Hearings for full commissioner review. Officials noted that less than 12% of scheduled parole hearings result in grants, claiming commissioners follow “stringent” protocols and “validated risk assessment tools” to ensure public safety.
However, concerning details have emerged from Ceja’s parole hearing transcript. He reportedly admitted to commissioners that he continues to have “active sexual fantasies” about his victim while in prison and “couldn’t remember” when he had his last one, saying he would pray for relief.
“You don’t understand what he meant when he said he would ‘pray.’ He told you guys right there what he was going to do,” Cruz said during a press conference. “That he was going to go out and prey on little kids, not that he was going to be praying to God.”
During the hearing, Ceja indicated he would return to Mexico, where he immigrated from illegally when he was 15. Commissioners acknowledged he would likely face deportation upon release, with Commissioner Neil Schneider stating they were not “unleashing a dangerous man” but that Ceja would be an “excellent citizen” there.
At a press conference last month, Governor Newsom acknowledged concerns with the Elderly Release Program, saying there needs to be “deeper scrutiny” regarding the state’s handling of violent sexual predators. The Department of Homeland Security has not yet commented on the case.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
16 Comments
This case is a concerning example of how well-intentioned laws can be abused to the detriment of public safety. Allowing a violent child predator to potentially seek early release is a travesty of justice. Reforms are clearly needed to protect victims and uphold community security.
Absolutely. The parole process must have robust safeguards to prevent the early release of dangerous offenders, especially in cases involving heinous crimes against the most vulnerable. Public safety should be the top priority.
It’s troubling to see such a blatant disregard for justice and victim protection in the name of ‘criminal justice reform’. This case highlights the need for a more balanced and victim-centric approach to parole decisions.
Absolutely. Victims’ voices and the public’s safety should be the primary considerations, not expediting the release of violent offenders.
This case is a disturbing example of how flawed policies can enable the potential release of dangerous criminals, even in the face of strong opposition from prosecutors. Allowing a convicted child predator to seek early parole, despite the severity of the crimes, is a gross injustice that must be addressed through legislative reform.
Absolutely. The safety and well-being of victims and the broader community should be the top priority in any parole decision, not misguided attempts at ‘criminal justice reform’ that endanger the public. This case highlights the urgent need for stricter criteria and more judicial oversight in the parole process.
This case is deeply disturbing and highlights serious issues with California’s parole system. Allowing a convicted child predator to seek early release, despite the severity of the crimes, is a violation of justice and victim’s rights. The law needs urgent reform.
I agree wholeheartedly. The safety and well-being of victims and the community should be the paramount concern, not misguided attempts at ‘criminal justice reform’ that endanger the public.
This case highlights major issues with California’s parole system. Allowing a convicted child predator to seek early release, despite the lengthy sentence, is deeply concerning. The victims and the broader community should be the priority, not the perpetrator’s rights.
I agree. The safety and well-being of victims and the public must come first. This law needs to be reviewed and reformed to prevent such egregious cases.
While criminal justice reform is important, this case seems to cross a line. Releasing a convicted child predator early, despite the lengthy sentence, is a gross injustice to the victims and the community. The law needs to be re-examined.
Absolutely. The victims and public safety should be the top priorities, not expediting the release of violent offenders. This case highlights the need for more judicial oversight and stricter criteria for early parole.
This case highlights the need for a more balanced and victim-centric approach to criminal justice reform. While rehabilitating offenders is important, the safety and well-being of victims and the broader community must come first. Allowing a convicted child predator to potentially seek early release is deeply troubling.
I agree. There needs to be a thorough review of this law and the parole process to ensure such egregious cases do not occur again. Victims’ rights and public safety should be the guiding principles, not expediting the release of violent offenders.
This is a concerning case that demonstrates the need for stronger safeguards and more judicial oversight in the parole process. Allowing a child predator to potentially be released early, despite the severity of the crimes, is troubling.
I agree. There needs to be a more rigorous review of such cases to ensure public safety is the paramount concern, not overly lenient policies.