Truth in Sentencing

Make criminals serve the whole time

I once was called to jury duty in Las Vegas. I made it to the point where lawyers ask you direct questions. In that process, I was asked about plea bargains. I told the court that I didn’t like it.

I remember saying something to the effect that “If it’s rape, dammit, the charge should be rape, not a lesser charge like assault.”

That got me kicked out of the jury pool, which wasn’t my intent, but I’d be lying if I said I doddled around on the way out.

I’m similarly irked with wink-wink, nod-nod in sentencing.

If you’re sentenced to 20 years in jail, it ought to be a full 20 years, not a lesser number based on “good” behavior while incarcerated.

Now comes the state of California with a bill to change the plain meaning of “life without parole.” The California Legislature will discuss a bill to do just that. State Sen. Susan Rubio’s bill would open parole eligibility for some prisoners serving life sentences without parole for crimes they committed when they were 25 or younger. The wrongdoer would have had to have served at least 25 years of their sentence to be eligible for parole.

While it sounds compassionate-ish, it’s just another move in the game of sentencing that makes it sound more severe than it really is.

Look, if you want to change the law to make sentences shorter, do it. But don’t tell us it’s 20 years when the expectation is 12, or tell us it’s life behind bars without parole, when it really isn’t.

Can’t we have a little more respect for the victims and for

justice than that?

---

The Final Conversation

New details have been released about the final minutes before an Army helicopter collided with an American Airlines passenger jet in January near Washington, D.C., killing 67 people. Here is the final conversation between the helicopter pilot, and the helicopter instructor: