You play parole commissioner.
A while back I got some good response and thought provoking answers out of y’all when I asked whether you would turn your spouse over to the authorities if they had been accused of a heinous crime. Let’s try again.
The Daily News ran an article Sunday about a convicted murderer up for parole.
In 1988, a Marine staff sergeant shot his Marine sergeant wife with a shotgun.
Some people would say he served his time. Others, including the prosecutors in the case, say the guy should be locked up forever.
Sheriff Ed Brown rode the fence, saying that the man had done 20 years – which was considered enough back when he was convicted of life in prison. But Brown also said he would be OK if the man had gotten the death penalty.
I’m not going to make it easy on you with a “should he be paroled or not” question.
I spoke to a contact in the criminal justice system and he put it like this: if you had to let someone out of prison and you had a guy that killed his wife and a guy that killed a store clerk while holding up the store, who would you set loose?
So I ask y’all the same question. Let’s say you are a case worker at the parole commission and your boss says “we have to send one guy home.” You have two convicts with similar backgrounds, both convicted of first-degree murder, both up for parole.
Which would you pick to recommend to the board? The wife-killer or the clerk-killer?
———————————————————————————-
Just a point of explanation: In North Carolina, three governor appointees decide who is paroled and who is not.
When an inmate becomes eligible for parole, all available information on the inmate’s case is reviewed separately by the three Parole Board members to determine if the offender should be denied or considered for the possibility of parole. In N.C. there is no appearance by a prisoner before the board to plead for release. The board members do not even hold an official meeting. They review the cases separately and a 2 to 1 vote rules. It is nothing like that very dramatic scene in “Backdraft” with Robert De Niro and Donald Sutherland.
Some of the factors considered by the Parole Board include the nature and circumstances of the crime; previous criminal record; prison conduct; prison program participation; and input from court officials, victims and other interested parties.
Posted in HOME PAGE, Tough questions | 13 Comments »
First I would not want to let either one out, but with that being said, I would have to let th clerk-killer out instead of the wife-killer. IMO the clerk-killing was a random killing that probably happen during a robbery and the wife-killing was a cold, hateful killing. IMO this man killed his wife so that he would not have to pay child support and he sat there and waited for her to arrive back at the home so that he could kill her so IMO he should never be set free.
Comment by LTH — July 28, 2008 @ 2:58 am
Im dont think Lindell meant this particular wife-killer. And what LTH said scares me because why would want someone loose that did a “random killing”? I vote for setting a wife-killer free before sending a “random killer” back out to do it again.
Comment by Izzy — July 28, 2008 @ 3:43 am
Personally, neither one of them should get out. Life in prison is just that…you spend the rest of your days behind bars. However, being that one has to be let out, I would have to say the man that shot his wife-I won’t say Marine as he doesn’t deserve that title. The store clerk killing was a random act and I wouldn’t want someone who randomly killed someone back on the streets. I also don’t want a wife killer on the streets. I am not excusing what he did but his target wasn’t random. But if it were up to me, neither one would get out.
Comment by AnnDaniel — July 28, 2008 @ 6:21 am
well that just me finally got his “hard” questions here. Boy what a call to have to make. I’m a wife, so hate to agree, but the wife killer may not kill again while the random killer may be more likely to. Do wish we had more details to go on though.
Comment by titfortat — July 28, 2008 @ 7:05 am
Apparently, the Parole Board did not hear or understand the Judge’s sentence – life in prison. Am I missing something here?
Go back and read/google Mr. Entwistle’s sentencing. The victim’s family asked for consecutive life sentences. The Judge stated that while understanding their viewpoint, a firm statement must be made that a life sentence means just that – you’re in prison for life.
Comment by Hello — July 28, 2008 @ 7:12 am
The Parole Commission has to go by the laws that where in effect at that time. Over the years, the sentencing structure has changed several times. There has been “fair sentencing”, “structured sentencing” and who knows how many other types of sentencing.
The are numerous other killers from Onslow County that will be eligible for parole in just a few short years. I beleive you can go to the NC Dept. of Correction website and search for individuals with certain types of crimes from a particular county.
As far as Lindell’s question, I would have to release the wife killer. His act was directed at a specific person. The random killer may be just that. He may kill randomly again. It would also be like asking which child molester you would set free. The one that molested his own children or the serial child molester. They should all rot in prison as far as I’m concerned.
Lindell should go back and look at those that have killed and been released within less than 20 years. There was a shooting in a trailer park on Piney Green road that a 4 year old was shot and killed while in her house by individuals outside. Another young man died at the same time. Killed by the same people. Two people were prosecuted, sentenced and now back in the county. Did they pay there debt to society?
Comment by nutant — July 28, 2008 @ 8:15 am
I would net let either one out murder is murder no matter how you look at it. If you kill some one you should fry!!!!
Comment by lost soul — July 28, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
Probably let Jones out on parole, SUPERVISED, with some sort of warning to the marriage-license people in all states!!!!! The random robber was careless of ANYONE’s live, but Jones was after the wife, and only the wife. He stayed at the scene, confessed, and took his medicine. Not that that exonerates him at all, but he might not be “across the board” dangerous to life and limb, whereas the robber could decide to rob and kill anyone, at any time , and for any reason , or for no reason. Very hard calls to make. Just as a thought, there are some “fringe” persons whose mental condition is such that they are very good institutional citizens, productive, cooperative, “normal appearing,” but who JUST CAN NOT COPE with the day-to-day life outside an institution. Those are the people who, for their own sake as much as the sake of society, should never be let out.
If ‘Life’ meant 20 years when Jones was sentenced, he has fairly served his time.
Comment by justice4all — July 28, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
Is anything written that states the “ PURPOSE “ of prison, is it to protect society or is it to punish the criminal?
Comment by girdyb — July 28, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
Actually there is no choice under the law. Both men have served their time as prescribed under the Law as set forth by those who have been legally elected by the voting populace. According to the Law, both men have served their debt to society and should receive parole. Judges interpret the Law, Legislatures write the Law. A Judge can only follow the Law as it is written.
NC Law says that an inmate with a a sentence of life without parole is up for consideration for parole after he/she has served twenty five years and reviewed every two years thereafter. A Judge is obligated by the Law to follow the Law, review the case as well as the behavior of the convicted and make recommendation after twenty five years…and continue to do so every two years. After recommendation has been made the members of the Parole Board review all of the documentation in the case and make their decision on whether the inmate has served his debt to society for the crimes he has been found guilty of committing.
Society votes for these individuals to represent their interests, which is a very good reason that we all have a moral obligation to vote for responsible and ethical representatives. Because they represent society as a whole, they choose if and when a person has paid their debt to society. The individual is released with a clean slate.
Too little information has been given on the man serving a sentence for killing his wife and the man who is serving a sentence for killing while in the commission of a felony to decide which should stay in the system and which should be free of the system. Under the Law either man has the right to be elgible for parole.
Comment by Gemstone — July 28, 2008 @ 9:40 pm
On the basic/black-white info here, the wife killer gets parole. Not that either one deserves it, but if I had to choose (love the either/or game), it’s the degenerate who killed a family member over the degenerate who killed a stranger. I don’t want drop-of-a-hat killers running around; wife=passion=somewhat/maybe controlled. That’s my theory and I’m stickin’ to it.
Comment by me — July 28, 2008 @ 10:53 pm
by me
This is great , killer = control, I would turn in a killer (family member) because I would be afraid I would be next. Hence the word a freaid. I guess you could also be to afraid to turn them in.
Comment by Anonymous — August 9, 2008 @ 9:00 am
I feel as if the man who shot his wife should be the one to get parole. I do not belive any one should kill anyone but who knows what was going on in their life. As the clerk killer, they did not even know that person they had no reason to kill them.
Comment by cheryl — August 31, 2008 @ 12:21 am