The article didn't say what he was on parole for. Now I am wondering if he really should have still been in prison.
I think the local newshawks will follow up on this. In the meantime, I scratch my head, rub my chin, and stare at the ceiling, wondering if you trust them to let them out on parole, why do you need parole officers?
Wherefore and whence, if you need parole officers, how can you trust them to be let out?
I say, if they deserve to have their sentence reduced, just let them out, BUT the next offense(s) result(s) in them being locked up not only for the latest offense, but double any and all sentences for previous offenses added to the prison time for the present crime.
Sooner or later (and sooner, in this scheme) repeaters/repeaters will be in the pokey (removed from society) for life.
No parole supervision needed.
Terry, 230RN
