Alligatorob
SF VIP
It's not...I'd hope not, but how's it different?
It's not...I'd hope not, but how's it different?
Strange thing... and I don't know the answer, but the LaBianca daughters spoke out against the release. Both Governors Brown and Newsom spoke out against her last FIVE parole requests. I really don't know what happened this time, but "she's old" somehow got her out of jail free.I would be interested to know how the parole board arrived at this decision. What if one of the victims were a relative of their’s. Wouould they be so forgiving? Have they spoken with the families or Roman Polanski?
I think that because her sentence was commuted to life, then they should have stuck by it. It’s this new world order we’re dealing with that’s upsetting everything.Strange thing... and I don't know the answer, but the LaBianca daughters spoke out against the release. Both Governors Brown and Newsom spoke out against her last FIVE parole requests. I really don't know what happened this time, but "she's old" somehow got her out of jail free.
Factors are based on Statutory and Case law. It is not simply a "Why not" decision.I would be interested to know how the parole board arrived at this decision.
This ended my confusion.I don't know why we are trying to figure out if she is a threat, she does not deserve freedom, and society does not deserve her presence, threat or not.
Here is a 2005 case I found online concerning such. It may help. Lengthy, but informative.Parole decisions are not made in a court of law.
I wonder if parole decisions can be appealed?
Justice can't be blind if the victims' families make the decisions. Too emotionally involved. Don't blame them, of course, but families should never have final input.I would be interested to know how the parole board arrived at this decision. What if one of the victims were a relative of their’s. Wouould they be so forgiving? Have they spoken with the families or Roman Polanski?
I agree with the last sentence. The family’s opinion should be taken into consideration, but not a determining factor. I spoke to John Walsh while he was in Florida and I didn’t get into a long discussion with him, but I asked him did he think all child killers should be executed. We had been discussing penalties at the time. His reply was unless they were proven mentally unable to understand their actions, then yes. He added that he would like to see child killing while committing a sexual act should be a Federal crime so as not to allow states that have no death penalty, thus would help to get around the absence of their laws.Justice can't be blind if the victims' families make the decisions. Too emotionally involved. Don't blame them, of course, but families should never have final input.