The 120-day period after a prisoner has been granted parole gives the full board a chance to review how the hearing panel that conducted the hearing came to their decision. It also gives the legal arm of the Parole Board the opportunity to check for errors of fact or law. If new information is submitted regarding the prisoner after the initial hearing the chief council can refer the case for an en banc review by the full Hearing Board.
I sent new information to the BPH but I do not know in what stage of the process the information was handed over to them. It was rather late in the game before I was directed to the proper place to submit the information so it's possible that the legal department had already done its job.
As was stated in the last post, the allegations I submitted were included in the package to the Governor for his review. The Governor had 30 days to make his decision.
On January 27, 2023 the Governor issued his decision and he decided to refer the case for an en banc review by the full Hearing Board.
So, what does this mean? An en banc review is conducted by the full Hearing Board at one of their monthly executive meetings. As near as I can tell, that review will not necessarily take place at the next monthly meeting but at the next meeting where the schedule allows.
The en banc review can have three different outcomes, 1) affirm the original panel's decision, 2) modify that decision or 3) or order a rescission hearing to decide whether the parole grant should be rescinded.
The information I sent cannot be part of the official record until the prisoner has had a chance hear the allegations and be given a chance to explain the differences between what he has told the Hearing Panel in the past and what I contend is the true story. My hope is that the en banc review will result in an order to hold a rescission hearing so that my allegations can become part of the official record.
If the full Board decides to have a rescission hearing it will not take place for four to six months from the date of the order.
Thank you, this is important work and why I love this blog.
Thank you! It looks like we are in this for the long haul. It's likely to be months before learning whether or not Green/Beard will be paroled or if the parole will be rescinded.
Posts like this never get the pub they should. Good job sitting his butt back down. I deep-dived that rotten man. He belongs where he is.
First time commenter...
I think it's FAR more likely this guy lied to the family about his parents both being cops. He's a teenager who probably isnt being taken very seriously and he's trying to look like a big rebel to the others. I generally enjoy this website but I think you took Squeaky's word on this (rather than basic logic) and that is not the sign of a great researcher. But yeah, he's still a scumbag who belongs in jail, I just think the letter-writing to the parole board was not well thought out.
If you read the first two posts leading up to this post I think you would have realized that I did do my research. While Green's mother and birth father were not cops his step father, grandfather and uncle were in law enforcement. Green's step father was the chief of police for the town of Folsom CA for a time. Green's mother led a youth group that involved law enforcement.
In particular read the letter I sent to the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) with all of my documentation. It is in this post-
Click on "letter and attachments" in the post to read exactly what I sent BPH.
BPH investigations found my information and documentation compelling enough to send on to the governor. BPH does not make their decisions willy-nilly, they demand proof. If they didn't, they would be up to their eyeballs in en banc reviews from people making unfounded claims.
Thanks for the reply. Sorry if I misspoke. I hadn't read that stuff, I was going off of seeing some of the comments about his lies to the parole board.
Post a Comment