F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting

[cbelt3]

The greatest tragedy in this whole thing is that this bastard SHOULD have been sitting in jail in Massachusetts. But the erstwhile candidate for president and governor commuted his 20 years to life sentence because he was "changed". Talk about your travesty of justice.

[AlphaDog]

cbelt3 wrote:
The greatest tragedy in this whole thing is that this bastard SHOULD have been sitting in jail in Massachusetts Arkansas. But the erstwhile candidate for president and governor commuted his 20 years to life sentence because he was "changed". Talk about your travesty of justice.

Made a little correction there for you.

You're right, though. I've heard conflicting information about the first Arkansas sentence, but it was somewhere in the range of 100 years (gave or take a few), because the original sentencing judge had stipulated the sentences for the crimes for which he was convicted were to run consecutively instead of concurrently. The saddest part is that there might not have been as many screw ups within the legal system as meets the eye. Washington law prohibited this guy from being held without bail on the most recent charges here. He probably would have been taken back into custody following another hearing about admissibility of the Arkansas convictions in sentencing him in Washington under the habitual offenders law. I'm not saying all the times he slipped out of someone's grasp were errors, but the occasion that appears to be the most recent - and blatant - mistake by the justice system really was not. Whether the law should be modified is another discussion.

[Carnos Jax]

ztirffritz wrote: ...Arkansas is already saying that he had violated his parole and should have been hauled in. Covering butts. He should have NEVER been released, at least no until his 35 year sentence was completed.

Wags wrote: ...especially when election time rolls around again and Huckabee gets to explain why he commuted this maniac's sentence, and why he was out on bail...

I think it's too early to start the Monday morning quarterbacking. Parole exists for a good reason. Plus, if someone gives the appearance that they've changed and is no longer a threat to society, then so be it. Trying to say in hindsight it was a bad decision to parole this individual condemns all parolees (unless the parole board made visible mistakes). I would bet that the vast majority of parolees don't end up in this manner.

[RAMd®d]

I would bet that the vast majority of parolees don't end up in this manner.

True.

I don't have anything against parole, strictly speaking. I do have a problem with the large number of parolees who *do* commit crimes, especially violent crimes, once paroled.

My feeling is that one factor that contributes towards the decision of paroling a convict is prison overcrowding. I have no documentation to support this, but there it is.

Too many convicts are paroled that had/have no business being released to the general public.

[vicrock]

Carnos Jax wrote:


I think it's too early to start the Monday morning quarterbacking. Parole exists for a good reason. Plus, if someone gives the appearance that they've changed and is no longer a threat to society, then so be it. Trying to say in hindsight it was a bad decision to parole this individual condemns all parolees (unless the parole board made visible mistakes). I would bet that the vast majority of parolees don't end up in this manner.

But then, I ask, why didn't he land his butt back in prison after the first offense after he was let out? Seems like if you cut a deal to get your parole WAY early, any conviction - in any state should be grounds for going back under the original sentence as well as anything tacked on for the subsequent offense.

[decocritter]

The Parole System has huge problems, as well as the huge Prison Population problem.


Too many criminals that cost too much money to deal with.

[Racer X]

but that would make sense vicrock.