The mother of a murdered police officer, along with other families of victims, has taken legal action against the California Parole Board regarding a new policy that might allow pardons and clemency for serial killers and others serving life sentences without the possibility of parole.
Recently, under Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom’s leadership, a new regulation was introduced, enabling the California Parole Hearing Board to propose commutations for offenders who have completed 25 consecutive years of their sentences. Offenders can then have their cases re-sentenced by the courts.
While certain convicts, like those on death row or required to register as sex offenders, are not included, the policy does affect individuals serving life sentences without the chance for parole, including those found guilty of first-degree murder under specific circumstances. Additionally, inmates who are not initially nominated for parole will be re-evaluated every three years as long as they meet certain criteria. This rule is set to be implemented in October.
Phyllis Loya, aged 78, lost her son, Officer Larry Lasater, who was killed in the line of duty in 2005. One of his killers is on death row, while the other received a life sentence without parole. Loya and other victims’ families are now involved with the Criminal Justice Law Foundation (CJLF) in a lawsuit against this new policy, arguing it’s both unauthorized and unjust towards victims.
Loya expressed her frustration with the legal system, feeling it prioritizes the rights of criminals over those of victims.
“It feels like they come quietly and steal our sense of justice,” Loya remarked, reflecting on the emotional toll this policy may take on families like hers.
She added, “I know people’s views on law enforcement vary, but how can anyone not be troubled by the suffering of innocent children or the elderly?”
Loya also criticized the governor’s office, which had previously labeled her concerns as mere “political rhetoric.”
“These aren’t just empty words; they’re about real lives shattered,” she said. “He has no idea what we’re going through.”
Attempts to contact Newsom’s office did not yield a response by the time of publication.
Loya is concerned this new policy could set a dangerous precedent, suggesting that the Parole Board could undermine regulations previously established by the Legislature, thereby harming victims’ families and society at large.
The lawsuit, filed on July 15, contends that the new regulation “creates a lengthy evaluation and hearing process for inmates who are not currently eligible for parole,” arguing that the board lacks the authority to dictate rules for those not eligible.
The Board has rebutted this claim, stating, “If Congress wanted to keep lifers out of our discussions, they would have made that clear.”
Following up with the board did not provide any updates before publication.
Yet the lawsuit emphasizes potential emotional harm for families impacted by these changes.
Loya reminisced about her son, who was thoughtful enough to chat with individuals he was arresting about their music preferences while driving them to jail. After he was killed, she promised to pursue justice for his murderer. Unfortunately, her health has since declined, preventing her from attending court in recent years.
This commitment, although admirable, came with severe personal costs; Loya has suffered four heart attacks in two decades, partly attributed to the stress of recurrent court dates. There were painful moments in court, like when a defense lawyer questioned the graphic details of her son’s death during an appeal hearing.
She described the experience, saying, “Each time we return, it’s like being submerged in waves, gasping for air as we hope for a calmer sea.” This ongoing trauma has been relentless.
Loya learned about the policy through a CJLF colleague, arguing that it reflects an ongoing lack of transparency from the government towards victims—a sentiment she also felt during Newsom’s 2019 announcement of a moratorium on the death penalty.
She is particularly wary of the risk posed by individuals covered by the policy. Reportedly, nearly 40% of California prisoners released in 2020 and 2021 were re-arrested within three years, according to a California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation report. As of 2023, over 5,000 individuals were serving life sentences without the possibility of parole, as highlighted by UCLA research.
Once the policy takes effect, 2,456 inmates will be immediately eligible, with projections suggesting 3,959 could qualify by 2035. This includes a troubling mix of offenders, from child murderers to serial killers.
California law has already provided special considerations for certain offender groups through acts introduced in previous years, such as the Youth Offenders Act and the Elderly Offender Act, both designed to offer parole opportunities to specific categories of offenders.
Scott Peterson, who was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife and son in 2002, stands among several notorious inmates currently serving life without parole, who may one day be eligible for this new policy.
