http://www…etail.html
Can you imagine what kind of unmitigated gall it takes to ask for clemency after serving two years for murdering someone?
The son of the victim is a friend of mine. I wish I could be at the hearing.
I think it’s absurd that you only get 11 years for killing someone.
But then I think if you drive drunk once your license should be suspended until you convince a state-approved psychologist that you’ll never do it again, and there should be a fine totaling 10% of your income that year, plus the usual reinstatement fees. And you should have to get “whiskey” plates (a couple of states do this part already) that allow the cops to pull you over at any time, for any reason or no reason at all, for a sobriety check.
And if you do it again, you should lose your license permanently, pay the same fine as above, and serve a jail sentence (to start after the end of the year, so that your fine doesn’t get reduced).
I’m not at all surprised at the request. In an ideal world people would accept responsibility for their actions, but unfortnately we’ll never live in that world.
Here in NH we have it even worse. our governor, John Lynch, in his quest to reduce expenses, got a law through the senate and house (both of his party, democratic), that mandates the early release of prisoners, including rapists and murderers. The law also limits the term that they can be returned to prison for violating their parole to 90 days. In short, rapists and murderers are being released from prison, and if they violate their parole and go after the original victims again they can only be returned to prison for 90 days, not for the remainder of their original sentence. It’s a true nightmare for the victims, their families, and th enew victims that will accumulate while the offender is out on parole.
The only good news is that firearms sales and concealed weapons permit requests have skyrocketed. When our government fails us that badly in its primary responsibility of protecting the preyed upon from the predators, then it becomes necessary to protect ourselves. I know this statement will ruffle some feathers, but there it is.
She should serve the entire sentence, which is pretty light considering the circumstances behind it. Based on the story my feeling is that there’s some behind the scenes politics and string pulling going on that has led to her even being considered for this.
Gambling money says that if released she will probably be 3 X over the legal limit after her post-release celebration party.
Here’s a compromise solution: kill half the lawyers.
Sure I can imagine. The sad part is whatever happens to her makes no difference to the person that is gone. I would have less consideration for someone guilty of intentional homicide, but according to the legal system it is her right. If we could get into the mind of the offender and know the lesson was learned and extra years in prison is only a taxpayer burden, I am not sure what I would feel unless I were in that situation.
I have a fundamental problem with people making these decisions who were not at the original trial or sentencing. All of that first hand information is lost or not considered. The “poor victim” standing before the judge/board is banking on the fact time has dulled the incense and outcry over their crime. The real victim has had their life STOLEN from them and their familes and cannot be present to argue their side of the case…
You’ll forever be disappointed if you expect criminals to act reasonably.
And how much difference is there between a “cop and a criminal”? point is anyone of us could somehow be on “the other side” by a bit of poor judgement.
How much difference? A cop is someone who puts his life on the line in pursuit of justice, a criminal is someone who puts his life on the line avoiding justice.
I think you missed oldschools point…think about the cop who is thrown under the bus for an honest error in judgment during a tense situation or the homeowner who shoots the intruder twice instead of only once and is tried for murder.
How about the cop who doesn’t realize he just drew his firearm and not his Tazer and kills a guy he has handcuffed on the ground. Don’t give the BS that that was done “to keep me safe”. What was the penalty for the cop who “forgot he drew his real gun” and killed someone? 2 years. The cop had the guy cuffed, he should have been able to tell which weapon he drew, or pay a much higher price for being “stupidily ignorant”.
Or how about the group of cops that got together after Katrina and did a bit of “clean up” on a bridge, were those killings also done “to keep me safe”?
Knowing the family personally, I know they want her to serve her the full term of her sentence. 11 years is a ridiculously light sentence for robbing someone’s family of a loved one, whether they do it with a gun, a baseball bat, or a car.
I don’t expect criminals to act reasonably. I expect the clemency board and the governor to act reasonably, and quickly deny this request.
The criminal is also a human being. I believe that each of us criminal or not have the power to renew life. If the criminal was in prisoned for years and he showed that he wanted a new life ahead. Why not give him a chance? For humanitarian reason. 
If you just look at statistics it would be hard to come to a conclusion that there is any humanity left here in the states. Take a look at where the U.S. is in regards to incarcaration rates (right next to China).
I really don’t know if “new life after prison” is even possible for many. But that does not mean keep them there forever.
Recently a young man got sentenced too a full year (plus a day) in prision for hacking into someone’s email, think of that, a entire year of your life gone for reading someone’s email.
When he gets early release from the coffin she put him in, she can havearly release.
CamaroBeau:
She is a repeat offender (for drunk driving). She killed a man while driving drunk. Then she fled the scene, and was chased by a witness to her home. She tried to outrun the witness, but failed as she ran into mailboxes and sign posts along the way, leaving a path of destruction for the witness to follow. Then she pleaded “not guilty” and took the case to trial.
Does that sound like the kind of person who wants “a new life ahead?” To me, she sounds like someone who wanted to avoid culpability at any cost, and she probably still does.
I hope she does find redemption, but she doesn’t need to be unleashed on the public to find redemption. Plenty of people have found redemption from inside a jail cell.
The primary function of our criminal statutes and of our judicial and penal system is not only to punish, but more importantly to protect innocent people in society from predators. Predators include, IMHO, those who’ve shown by their actions total disregard for the rights, safety, and/or lives of others.
Allowing people like the lady that is the subject of this thread to run around free is dereliction of the aforementioned charters. I get tired of reading about people being raped, murdered, killed in DUIs, robbed, and beaten by offenders with prior records, offenders that have been let out because of “compassion”, or “good behavior”, or because some shirnk declared them “no longer a danger to society”. And, now, in NH, they’re being let out due to budget cuts. At what point do we begin to focus our decisions on compassion for the victims and concern for the safety of our citizenry rather than compassion for the criminals?
How can a person not know the diference between a taser and a gun? If that is the case then that cop shouldn’t be carrying a gun let alone be out there “defending” the public. A taser is much lighter and has much less mass-density than a revolver or semi-auto weapon. If the cop fired the gun knowing it wasn’t a taser, that’s quite evil. If he fired the gun thinking it was a taser, that’s even worse!