Sunday, April 24, 2016
Leslie's Parole. Lynyrd Weighs-in.
I’ve watched the KABC video (on the thread below) 3 times. I also watched it (a 4th time) on Brian’s radio show this evening.
The entire KABC broadcast, can be summed-up with the following exchange:
Jillian (the interviewer) said:
“What Leslie did was take a life, and when she did that, she forfeited her own freedom. Period. The end. That‘s it.”
Attorney Rich Pfeiffer responded:
“That’s not the law in this country. She was sentenced to life, with the possibility of parole. You don’t want to follow the law. And if the law isn’t followed, and the government becomes lawless… what kind of country are we?”
That’s the cruxt of this situation.
Here’s my thoughts:
No murderer will ever truly “deserve” parole, based upon the gravity of their crime(s).
You can never pay back a life. That’s common sense.
As Vincent Bugliosi once explained… parole for murderers is ALWAYS based upon some degree of pardon.
From that standpoint, Leslie (and no murderer, for that matter) will ever truly “earn” or “deserve” parole.
The real question becomes:
Does Leslie “deserve” parole based upon her sentence?
The first thing we need to clarify, is WHAT EXACTLY does the phrase “with the possibility of parole” mean?
I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t tell you the answer to that key question, based upon law.
As a layperson however , it seems to me, that “the possibility of parole” means this:
If the prisoner is “good enough” for “long enough”, they will be released (i.e., “pardoned”) before their death.
But regardless of my opinion, here’s the point:
There HAS to be SOMETHING that differentiates “Life WITH the possibility of parole”, from “Life WITHOUT the possibility of parole”, other than empty rhetoric.
Think about this:
If we intend to keep Leslie incarcerated FOREVER (based upon the gravity of her crimes alone), REGARDLESS of her good behavior, and REGARDLESS of her achievements… then, haven’t we (for all intents and purposes) changed her sentence to “Life WITHOUT the possibility of parole”??
I mean, if we honestly believe that Leslie should NEVER be released, under ANY circumstances (like Jillian), then where is her “opportunity for parole”?
I understand, that by law, we can keep Leslie incarcerated forever. I fully understand that. BUT, is that REALLY in keeping with the INTENT of her sentence?
If you believe like many folks, that Leslie should NEVER be released under ANY circumstances, then quite frankly, I don’t believe you’re upholding the true intent of her sentence.
I’m not a Leslie supporter... FAR from it. I'd love to see her die in prison. But, sometimes in life, you have to live with your mistakes. The idiots in California, granted Leslie “the opportunity of parole”… and now, we’re stuck with upholding it.
This is my conscience:
Does Leslie deserve release based upon her crimes? Hell No!
Does Leslie deserve release based upon her sentence (and the “pardon” it implies)? Probably, yes.
It pains me to say that… but, it’s true.
The fact is, there’s absolutely nothing more that Leslie can possibly do (to earn her release), other than spend more time in jail.
Are we REALLY offering Leslie “the possibility of parole”? Really?
You’ll have to answer that question with your own conscience.