July 5th 2024.
A new federal lawsuit has been filed this week against the Colorado Department of Corrections, alleging that they have been denying sex offender treatment to inmates serving indeterminate prison sentences. Despite promising these inmates that completing the program would make them eligible for parole, the department has failed to provide the necessary treatment, keeping hundreds of prisoners from being considered for release. The cost of keeping these inmates "warehoused" is estimated to be in the tens of millions of dollars.
The lawsuit, which is seeking class-action status, was brought by nine inmates serving indeterminate sentences for sex offenses. Their sentences range from 2-years-to-life to 20-years-to-life, and they argue that the Department of Corrections is providing treatment to higher-risk sex offenders with finite sentences, even if they are not yet eligible for parole. This means that the department is prioritizing individuals with fixed release dates over those with indeterminate sentences.
According to the inmates' attorneys, this prioritization has left behind those who pose lower risks of recidivism, serving indeterminate sentences for less serious crimes. They argue that this deprivation of treatment essentially results in a lifetime prison sentence for all sex offenders in Colorado with indeterminate sentences. Some of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit became eligible for parole within a year or two of entering prison, while others have had to wait up to 10 years. However, without treatment, none of them have qualified for release.
The Department of Corrections has stated that they have been unable to hire enough employees to staff the treatment program for years. However, the lawsuit claims that there are other ways the agency could provide timely treatment, such as through telehealth services. The treatment program is required to have 41 therapists, but currently has 26 vacancies. It is primarily offered at two facilities: the Fremont Correctional Facility and the Territorial Correctional Facility. However, the department will not transfer inmates to these facilities for treatment before their parole eligibility date.
Once the inmates are transferred, the department does not provide treatment until a spot becomes available. The lawsuit alleges that inmates with finite sentences are given priority over those with indeterminate sentences. In other words, the severity of the inmate's crime, their risk of reoffending, and their behavior while incarcerated are not taken into consideration when prioritizing treatment. The plaintiffs' attorneys argue that this is arbitrary and capricious on the part of the Department of Corrections.
The Department of Corrections has yet to comment on the lawsuit, and the plaintiffs' attorneys were not available for comment at the time the article was written. The lawsuit names Moses Stancil, the department's executive director, Amanda Retting, administrator of the Sex Offender Treatment and Monitoring Program, and Kimberly Kline, the department's chief of behavioral health and chair of the state's Sex Offender Management Board as defendants.
The sex offender treatment is mandated for inmates serving indeterminate sentences under the state's Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act of 1998. This act states that sex offenders must undergo treatment as part of their sentence and will not be released on parole until they have successfully completed the program. However, the lawsuit alleges that the Department of Corrections is not fulfilling this requirement due to their failure to provide timely treatment.
This issue raises concerns about the treatment of sex offenders in the prison system and the impact it has on their ability to be released back into society. With hundreds of inmates being denied the opportunity for parole due to lack of treatment, it is evident that changes need to be made. The plaintiffs' attorneys argue that the Department of Corrections' refusal to provide treatment to offenders serving indeterminate sentences is arbitrary and capricious, and ultimately, a violation of their rights.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]
