Sid Landau Suffers Another Setback in Bid to End Sexually Violent Predator Status

Categories: Court, Crime-iny
Sexual predator Sid Landau tried for years through the courts to be freed from a state mental institution on grounds he had not committed a crime against children in three decades, but at every turn the Orange County District Attorney's office thwarted the 71-year-old. Now, a three-justice panel at the California Court of Appeals in Santa Ana has rejected Landau's latest bid for freedom.

Landau won a three-year prison sentence after being convicted in 1982 of molesting a 10-year-old Anaheim boy. In 1988, he pleaded guilty to molesting a 9-year-old boy and was sentenced to 17 years in the joint. He served eight years before being paroled in 1996, but he was back in and out of lockup through 1999 for parole violations. Prosecutors in 2000 got Landau declared a sexually violent predator (SVP), which sent him to Atascadero State Mental Hospital.

By that time, Landau had long served as Orange County's poster boy for Megan's Law, the name for laws around the country that provide details about sex offenders in the wake of the 1994 rape and murder of seven-year-old Megan Kanka in New Jersey. While Landau was out of custody, the Placentia Police Department released his name and address, and he was then hounded from residence to residence.

Landau sued in federal court, claiming Placentia cops violated his right to privacy. He lost. At two parole violation trials, juries deadlocked in favor of his release, voting 11-1 and 8-4 respectively. That prompted a third trial in March 2008 previewed by former Weekly contributor Alex Brant-Zawadzki:

Pedo File: Sid Landau

Landau was committed the following year to the Coalinga State Hospital for an indefinite period as a SVP. In 2010, a state psychologist concluded Landau could be safely returned to society under supervision because of his age and Landau petitioned for his release. Coalinga's director disagreed with the doctor's assessment, and a judge rejected Landau's request as frivolous.

Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help

Just a tiny correction- not much really.. but the second jury was deadlocked 8-4 to keep him in- not for release. The first jury was indeed 11-1 for release. And I do know that is it really hard to understand unless you sat in the jury box for 2.5 months as to why there were 11 on that first jury and 4 of us on the second. But, in a nutshell- if you commit a crime and you are sentenced and you serve your sentence- then you should be free to go. If you commit another crime, you get another trial and may just be returned to prison. To have the state simply decide which crimes this rule does not apply to seems really unfair. 

Yes, I know what he did was terrible. it he served his time for it. And if the state has a problem with the amount of time given and served- then they need tougher sentencing laws not "false" imprisonment. Can you imagine how this would work with all crime?  "oh, you robbed a liquor store? sold pot, tax fraud..whatever...served your time and are done...going home.... oh.. WAIT!!!.. we are pretty sure you will just do it again .. so we are not letting you out- we are just gonna keep you indefinitely". If you want out, get a petition ready they can just simply say , neeewwwp. maybe in a few years. 

Anyway, best of luck to him and boo to the state of California. 


Why does his family even suggest letting him live with them? Seems like it would be brain damaging just to be around him!!

Now Trending

Anaheim Concert Tickets

From the Vault