SERIAL Child Predator FREED After 27 Years

Handcuffed person in orange jumpsuit being escorted.

California’s parole board just granted freedom to a serial predator who terrorized eight children under age seven with such brutality that the prosecutor who convicted him—the same attorney who later took down the Golden State Killer—calls it the worst child sexual predator case she ever prosecuted.

Story Snapshot

David Allen Funston, 64, convicted of kidnapping and sexually assaulting eight children under age seven in Sacramento during 1995-1996, has been granted parole after 27 years
Victims and prosecutor Anne Marie Schubert express outrage, citing graphic violence, weapon threats, and psychological trauma inflicted on prepubescent children
Governor Gavin Newsom referred the case for full board review in January 2026, but the board affirmed the parole recommendation on February 18, 2026
Schubert is now requesting Sexually Violent Predator screening to prevent Funston’s release, arguing he demonstrates predatory intent and poses continued danger
The case highlights tensions between California’s elderly parole program and public safety concerns for violent sex offenders

The Crimes That Shocked Sacramento

Between 1995 and 1996, David Allen Funston stalked the Sacramento suburbs hunting for victims. He kidnapped and sexually assaulted eight children, all under age seven. The attacks involved graphic violence, threats with weapons, and deliberate psychological terrorism designed to traumatize young minds. Funston had already been convicted of sexually assaulting a woman in Colorado before he began targeting California’s children. In 1999, a jury convicted him on 16 counts of kidnapping and child molestation, earning him 20 years and 8 months plus three consecutive 25-years-to-life sentences.

When Age Trumps Atrocity

California’s elderly parole program became Funston’s ticket to freedom. The program grants parole eligibility to inmates over 50 who have served at least 20 continuous years, regardless of offense severity. Designed to address prison overcrowding and provide compassionate release for aging inmates, the program prioritizes demographics over danger. Funston first applied in May 2022 and was denied. Three years later, in September 2025, the Board of Parole Hearings reversed course and granted his release. The reasoning behind this shift remains undisclosed, as the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation refuses to comment on decision rationale.

Victims Speak Out Against Release

The eight victims, now adults, learned their childhood tormentor would walk free and reacted with horror. One victim, kidnapped at age four, stated bluntly that Funston “shouldn’t be breathing the same air that we’re breathing at all.” She expressed fear that he might seek revenge by hunting down his former victims. Another victim called the parole decision “a huge disservice to all Californians,” arguing that pedophilia “is an illness that doesn’t go away.” These aren’t abstract policy debates for these individuals—they’re confronting the reality that the monster from their nightmares may soon be their neighbor.

The Prosecutor’s Last Stand

Anne Marie Schubert prosecuted Funston in 1999 before gaining national prominence for using pioneering DNA evidence to convict the Golden State Killer. Her assessment of Funston carries weight earned through decades of prosecuting violent criminals. She describes this case as “the worst child sexual predator I’ve ever prosecuted, hands down.” Schubert has now sent a formal letter to the CDCR requesting Sexually Violent Predator screening for Funston. Her argument is straightforward: his pattern demonstrates predatory intent, multiple victims, use of force, threats of lethal violence, and sexual offenses against prepubescent children—textbook criteria for SVP commitment.

Newsom’s Halfhearted Intervention

Governor Gavin Newsom referred Funston’s parole grant to the full parole board for review in January 2026, suggesting gubernatorial concern about the initial decision. However, on February 18, 2026, the full board affirmed the parole recommendation, and Newsom has yet to exercise his override authority. The governor retains the power to reverse the parole board’s decision but has remained silent on his intentions. This passivity speaks volumes about California’s political priorities when criminal justice reform collides with child safety. Funston remains incarcerated at the California Institution for Men in Chino, but no release date has been announced, with authorities citing security reasons for the secrecy.

The Policy Failure Behind the Headlines

California’s elderly parole program reflects a broader policy shift toward rehabilitation and compassionate release. These objectives make sense for many offenders who age out of criminal behavior or pose minimal public safety risk. However, applying this framework to serial child predators reveals a catastrophic failure to distinguish between offense categories. Sexual offenders, particularly those who target prepubescent children with violence and psychological manipulation, demonstrate patterns that don’t simply disappear with age. Victims correctly note that pedophilia is a persistent pathology, not a youthful indiscretion that time erases. California’s parole board either ignored this reality or deemed it irrelevant.

Where Justice Goes to Die

The Sexually Violent Predator Act offers a final safeguard—civil commitment for offenders deemed likely to reoffend. Schubert is attempting to invoke this mechanism, but whether it succeeds depends on bureaucratic processes that move at glacial speed while Funston’s release approaches. The CDCR’s refusal to disclose decision rationale or release timelines eliminates public accountability and prevents meaningful oversight of the parole board’s judgment. Eight victims who suffered unimaginable trauma as children must now live with the knowledge that California’s justice system values administrative convenience over their safety. This isn’t compassionate criminal justice reform. It’s institutional betrayal disguised as progressive policy, and it sets a precedent that no community should tolerate.