Hinckley getting out after 35 years.

Ranb

Penultimate Amazing
Ranb
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
11,325
Location
WA USA
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/27/politics/john-hinckley-jr-set-to-be-released/index.html

A federal judge on Wednesday granted John Hinckley Jr., the man who shot President Ronald Reagan in 1981, "full-time convalescent leave" from St. Elizabeth's Hospital. The order allows Hinckley, Jr. to live full-time in Williamsburg, Virginia, but still under certain restrictions.

James Brady, the White House press secretary who was hit in the shooting, died in 2014 due to injuries from the assassination attempt, though authorities announced earlier this year that they would not pursue additional charges.

"Contrary to the judge's decision, we believe John Hinckley is still a threat to others and we strongly oppose his release," the Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute said in a statement.
Click to expand...
Only took 35 years. I wonder how much his defense cost the taxpayers?

Ranb
 
Ranb said:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/27/politics/john-hinckley-jr-set-to-be-released/index.html


Only took 35 years. I wonder how much his defense cost the taxpayers?

Ranb
Click to expand...

Thirty-five years of incarceration seems to me to be plenty of time for the crime. The man was found to be insane, and from what I've read, I believe he is.

What is it that only took 35 years?

His defense was a plea of insanity, entered by the State after examination by doctors found him to be unsound of mind. I wouldn't think that was excessively costly.

The guy shot the prez and Brady to get the attention of an actress who'd had enough of his **** already. That's insane, isn't it?
 
Recently Jerry Brown nixed Van Houten's parole recommendation:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...-manson-ex-follower-leslie-van-houten-n615316

California Gov. Jerry Brown denied parole Friday for Leslie Van Houten, the youngest follower of murderous cult leader Charles Manson who is serving a life sentence for killing a wealthy grocer and his wife more than 40 years ago.

Brown overturned the recommendation of a parole board that found Van Houten was no-longer the violent young woman who committed a gruesome murder and was now fit for release. She has completed college degrees and been a model inmate.

. . .

"Both her role in these extraordinarily brutal crimes and her inability to explain her willing participation in such horrific violence cannot be overlooked and lead me to believe she remains an unacceptable risk to society if released," Brown wrote.

. . .

At 19, Van Houten was the youngest Manson follower to take part in the killings after she joined the cult in the 1960s.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't believe she is a threat anymore. She was at a young, impressionable age seduced by a cult. I suppose I can understand the perspective of those for whom what she did is simply unforgiveable and are not ready to forgive. She looks like a very old woman now and hardly the same person anymore.

As far as Chapman goes, I don't think I will ever be ready to forgive him. I would like him to die in prison. I can certainly understand why some people would feel the same way about Van Houten or Hinkley. Murder victims are gone forever. They don't get a second chance, so why should their killers? Especially if it was a heinous intentional act.
 
applecorped said:
I wonder if Mark David Chapman will ever be released.
Click to expand...

Puppycow said:
Recently Jerry Brown nixed Van Houten's parole recommendation:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...-manson-ex-follower-leslie-van-houten-n615316



Personally, I don't believe she is a threat anymore. She was at a young, impressionable age seduced by a cult. I suppose I can understand the perspective of those for whom what she did is simply unforgiveable and are not ready to forgive. She looks like a very old woman now and hardly the same person anymore.

As far as Chapman goes, I don't think I will ever be ready to forgive him. I would like him to die in prison. I can certainly understand why some people would feel the same way about Van Houten or Hinkley. Murder victims are gone forever. They don't get a second chance, so why should their killers? Especially if it was a heinous intentional act.
Click to expand...

Unlike Hinckley, Chapman and Van Houten were actually convicted. Hinckley is a very rare case of "not guilty by reason of insanity".
 
Ranb said:
Only took 35 years. I wonder how much his defense cost the taxpayers?
Click to expand...
That's a very stupid question. It costs what it costs to ensure that people's legal rights are protected.

I wonder how much it costs taxpayers every time some moron judge upholds or strengthens the ****** 2nd amendment? Surprise! It doesn't matter because stupid as it is, it's part of the Constitution and the government's primary purpose at the end of the day is to preserve the rights guaranteed therein.
 
Last edited:
cullennz said:
What about Manson?

Is he basically in prison till he dies?
Click to expand...

Probably. But all is not lost - he's been appearing for years on the astral plane, holding court with that crappy guitar and his homespun stories of prison life mixed with an occasional call to burn down the entire world. But, you know, that's our Charlie. :)
 
cullennz said:
What about Manson?

Is he basically in prison till he dies?
Click to expand...

Manson is technically eligible to be considered for parole, and has been for a long time. But every time it comes up for review, the parole board says no. Yes, I expect he will die in prison.
 
Puppycow said:
Manson is technically eligible to be considered for parole, and has been for a long time. But every time it comes up for review, the parole board says no. Yes, I expect he will die in prison.
Click to expand...

No one would dare release him. He'd be an instant celebrity villain, and the person who signed off his release would forever be known as the person who threw the pebble in the water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom