Newsom Under Fire As Serial Child Molester Granted Parole

California is once again at the center of a public safety firestorm. This time, the controversy surrounds the impending release of a serial child molester and Governor Gavin Newsom’s insistence that his hands are tied.

David Funston, now 64, was convicted in 1999 of 16 counts of kidnapping and child molestation for crimes committed against young children in the mid-1990s. A judge once described him as “the monster parents fear the most.” He was sentenced to three consecutive life terms, a punishment that signaled he would likely die behind bars.

Now, under California’s expanded elderly parole program, he is set to walk free.

California’s elderly parole program allows certain inmates to seek parole once they reach age 50 and have served at least 20 years. Prior to 2021, the threshold was age 60 and 25 years served. Critics argue the expansion dramatically widened the pool of violent offenders eligible for early release.

Governor Gavin Newsom’s office insists the parole board is an “independent” body under state law and dismissed criticism tying him to the decision as political misinformation. According to his office, Newsom personally disagreed with the outcome and requested a re-review, but has no authority to reverse the board’s ruling.

That explanation hasn’t satisfied many Californians.

Former Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert, who prosecuted Funston and helped identify the Golden State Killer, called the governor’s defense a “joke.” She pointed out that Newsom signed the law that expanded eligibility under the elderly parole program and appointed members to the board that approved Funston’s release.

Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper echoed the outrage, arguing that releasing a predator who kidnapped and abused children as young as three is indefensible.

The backlash is not occurring in a vacuum. California voters passed Proposition 47 in 2014, which reclassified certain felonies as misdemeanors. Proposition 57, passed in 2016, expanded parole eligibility for some inmates and increased credits for good behavior.

Critics say these measures, combined with the elderly parole program, have steadily weakened accountability.

The numbers are sobering:

• California has over 100,000 registered sex offenders statewide, according to state justice data.

• Violent crime in California rose sharply in 2022, with homicide rates increasing by more than 6% compared to the prior year.

• Since the expansion of early release programs, thousands of inmates have been deemed eligible for parole reconsideration.

Law enforcement officials argue that policies designed to reduce prison populations are colliding with the fundamental duty to protect families.

Sacramento already has a significant population of registered sex offenders living in the community. Adding another convicted serial child molester to that list is not viewed as a technical policy debate it is seen as a direct threat to public safety.

At the heart of the controversy is a simple question: who is responsible?

Governor Gavin Newsom says the parole board operates independently. But governors appoint board members. Governors sign legislation. Governors shape policy priorities. To many critics, claiming powerlessness after expanding the elderly parole program rings hollow.

This case underscores a broader tension in California politics. Progressive criminal justice reforms have been championed as humane and forward-thinking. Yet when those reforms lead to the release of violent offenders, public trust erodes.

Victims, meanwhile, are left to relive trauma each time parole hearings reopen wounds they believed had been sealed by life sentences.

The elderly parole program was marketed as a way to address aging inmates who no longer pose a threat. But in cases involving violent predators, many Californians are asking whether age alone should outweigh the severity of the crime.

As the debate intensifies, one thing is certain: parents across the state are watching closely.

If you believe public safety should come first, share this article or subscribe to our newsletter for more updates.