Why bother with the other 100 years?
Forth Campbell soldier, Jesse Spielman, who was found guilty of rape and murder of Iraqis, was sentenced to 110 years, but will be eligible for parole in 10! My question is: why does the law even bother with giving him the other 100 years -- other than making it appear as if we are TOUGH on crime?
Labels: Civil War, Crime, Middle East, Military, Terror
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 3:46 PM
2 Comments:
Eligibility for parole does not mean parole. The possibility of parole gives the incarcerated person an incentive to behave and to take advantage of educational and rehabilitation opportunities while incarcerated. Also, when released on parole, the person is subject to certain rules of behavior as well as reporting requirements which help prevent recidivism. The parole sstem is far from perfect, but, in my opinion, is better than flat sentences with no possibility of parole.
I understand but why 110 years. So we say 100 years when we REALLY mean maybe 10? 20 years and then maybe we mean 10 years seems less fraudulent to me and breeds BETTER respect for law than 110 when maybe 10 will be OK, don't you think?
Post a Comment
<< Home