Lennon's Killer Denied Parole

[Jamie B]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=159913644&ft=1&f=

The former security guard from Hawaii said that his motivation was instant notoriety but that he later realized he made a horrible decision for selfish reasons.

"I felt that by killing John Lennon I would become somebody and instead of that I became a murderer and murderers are not somebodies," Chapman told the board two years ago.

He murdered John Lennon - why would this idiot believe that anyone will ever let him out on parole?

[BobR]

He murdered John Lennon - why would this idiot believe that anyone will ever let him out on parole?

That's a good question. In the end, all he did was murder another human being, something that happens every day. Some of the murderers go to jail, some don't. In the end, many of them get paroled, so why should this guy be any different just because he killed a person some people thought was important. Not only should he be eligible for parole, who he killed should not even come into play, in an ideal justice system. It should be decided on his behavior in jail, the liklehood of reoffending, and being able to become a productive member of society, among other conditions set by the individual parole board or state.

bob

[gunsmith]

He is safer in prison, somebody else looking for fame will wack him within days of him being released.
If that does ever happen I'll be sending the wacker a thank you card.

[vaskidmark]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=159913644&ft=1&f=

He murdered John Lennon - why would this idiot believe that anyone will ever let him out on parole?

Because he is truely sorry.  Sorry for/about what is not clear.  And repentance is nealy 99% of what parole boards want to hear.  The other 1% is where you plan to live (not their city is best) and what kind of job you are going to get (having something lined up in case you do make parole seems to impress them).

The best parole risks are those who murdered their spouse - it's rare they will kill that person again.  (Yes, I have heard a Board member say so. )

It used to be - long, long ago - that someone who "found" religion had a better chance than if they had not been "saved" - but now that we know where religion has been all along and that nobody is redeeming Green Stamps any more, it does not seem to make a bit of difference either way.  The same goes for "being in recovery" from drugs or booze - once Betty Ford went there it was all downhill for prison inmates.

On a personal note, I think Chapman would stand a better chance if he had also killed Yoko.  There are certain acts that just scream "civic duty".

stay safe.

[Monkeyleg]

On a personal note, I think Chapman would stand a better chance if he had also killed Yoko.

The noises Yoko made were enough to make most people resort to violence. At least Lennon could sing.

[makattak]

Honestly, I think any murderer deserves the death penalty.

Second preference, since we are "too enlightened" for that, they ought to serve life without parole.

So, I think he being denied parole is justice.

However, I find it interesting that because he shot someone that was "famous" he is apparently treated differently than if he shot some not famous.

Equal justice before the law. Unless, of course, you're famous. Some animals are more equal than others.

[HankB]

The problem isn't with Chapman being denied parole; the problem is with too many other murderers being granted parole.

[MrsSmith]

Yep. Willfully taking the life of another (without justification) deserves either death or life in prison. No parole. Whether you killed John Lennon or John Doe.

[Jamie B]

When any one of the Manson killers get out, then Chapman can begin to salivate.

Unfortunately for Chapman, this would require Hell to freeze over first.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

When any one of the Manson killers get out, then Chapman can begin to salivate.

Unfortunately for Chapman, this would require Hell to freeze over first.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,539378,00.html


feeling chilly?

http://laist.com/2012/06/13/manson_family_member_trying_again_f.php

http://investigation.discovery.com/investigation/history/crimes-century/charles-manson/where-now.html

[Jamie B]

Nope - she was not one of the Tate / LaBianca killers. All of them remain incarcerated.

Susan Adkins petitioned a release a couple of years ago, as she had brain cancer.

She died in prison.

I am not cold at all. 

[seeker_two]

Consider this....had Chapman not killed Lennon, then we may now be subjected to a Beatles reunion tour that would rival the geratric antics of the Rolling Stones & Boston......

....maybe he deserves a little mercy....release him into the custody of Ringo Starr....

[Jamie B]

Consider this....had Chapman not killed Lennon, then we may now be subjected to a Beatles reunion tour that would rival the geratric antics of the Rolling Stones & Boston......

....maybe he deserves a little mercy....release him into the custody of Ringo Starr....

I saw Boston with Kansas earlier this month. Kansas was great. Boston sucked badly.

The only original Boston member is Tom Scholtz - they butchered More Than A Feeling very badly.

Luckily, the tickets were only $30.

I had seen Boston years ago, right after their original album was released.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

I had seen Boston years decades ago, right after their original album was released.

ftfy old timer

[Lee]

Parole?  Imagine....that.

[Tallpine]

Consider Imagine this....had Chapman not killed Lennon, then we may now be subjected to a Beatles reunion tour that would rival the geratric antics of the Rolling Stones & Boston......

Fixed it for you 

[gunsmith]

The noises Yoko made were enough to make most people resort to violence. At least Lennon could sing.

Speaking of Lennon/Ono guess who briefly appeared on TV a few weeks ago...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzZ_Fix5K6I

[Bigjake]

How's the old joke go.... 3 feet to the left plus a high cap and Chapman would've been a national hero.  

[geronimotwo]

That's a good question. In the end, all he did was murder another human being, something that happens every day. Some of the murderers go to jail, some don't. In the end, many of them get paroled, so why should this guy be any different just because he killed a person some people thought was important. Not only should he be eligible for parole, who he killed should not even come into play, in an ideal justice system. It should be decided on his behavior in jail, the liklehood of reoffending, and being able to become a productive member of society, among other conditions set by the individual parole board or state.

bob

unfortunatly for him,  when you murder someone on the worlds stage, the whole world remembers.  i wonder if he chose lennon specifically for the noteriety?

[grislyatoms]

That's a good question. In the end, all he did was murder another human being, something that happens every day. Some of the murderers go to jail, some don't. In the end, many of them get paroled, so why should this guy be any different just because he killed a person some people thought was important. Not only should he be eligible for parole, who he killed should not even come into play, in an ideal justice system. It should be decided on his behavior in jail, the liklehood of reoffending, and being able to become a productive member of society, among other conditions set by the individual parole board or state.

bob

This

[grislyatoms]

The noises Yoko made were enough to make most people resort to violence. At least Lennon could sing.

Spot.On.

[seeker_two]

The noises Yoko made were enough to make most people resort to violence. At least Lennon could sing.

"Whine lyrically" would be more accurate....

[grislyatoms]

"Whine lyrically" would be more accurate....

Who is talking about her singing?

[seeker_two]

Who is talking about her singing?

I was talking about his....

[Ben]

That's a good question. In the end, all he did was murder another human being, something that happens every day. Some of the murderers go to jail, some don't. In the end, many of them get paroled, so why should this guy be any different just because he killed a person some people thought was important. Not only should he be eligible for parole, who he killed should not even come into play, in an ideal justice system. It should be decided on his behavior in jail, the liklehood of reoffending, and being able to become a productive member of society, among other conditions set by the individual parole board or state.

bob

I used to be of the "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" school. I may be getting soft in my old age, but with all the DNA evidence popping up over the last few years exonerating people, I've shifted my views a bit.

If someone convicted a heinous murder and there are numerous credible witnesses, or absolute concrete evidence, or the murderer confesses, it's off with his (or her) head. If it's circumstantial evidence and hokey witnesses, it should be "X" years to life (if the person isn't exonerated during the trial), in case someone lied or made a mistake. I know there are a lot of in-between areas, but I lean more and more towards the, "better a hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man be wrongly punished" school of thought.