Should Sirhan Sirhan be paroled?

[leonAzul]

Whoa, I had no idea there was a CT to this particular Kennedy shooting.

It's kind of sad, really. It's one thing for an attorney to argue such an elaborate scenario in an attempt to generate reasonable doubt as a defense. It's quite another to buy in to it for all these years with no substantial evidence.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Whoa, I had no idea there was a CT to this particular Kennedy shooting.

Yep, but you don't hear much about it anymore. I read a good book on it years ago, the name escapes me, but IIRC the author started out as a conspiracy believer, but ended as a skeptic, because the evidence for a conspiracy just didn't hold up under scrutiny.

See also: Amanda Knox, Lockerbie, 2004 election.

 

[Psi Baba]

"The article" isn't what's going to make the decision about his post-parole behavior and conditions. I suspect "the article" of biased journalism for exactly this reason; the journalist is either incompetent or deliberately misrepresenting the likely outcome of a successful parole hearing.

But that's just it--most posters seem to be responding based on the information given in that article. If you are aware of additional details not mentioned in the article, please share. I think some clarification is needed as to just what the hell is being discussed here. No one so far has said that it would not be a good idea to move him to mental institution. The only question was, "Should he be paroled?" So let's expand that to:
Should he be:
1) moved to a mental institution?
2) released free and clear?
3) kept in prison?
Do we even know exactly what it being considered?

 

[I Ratant]

The sumbitch disenfranchised a 100 million voters.

 

[roger]

I'm reminded of the Steve Martin routine with the phrase "I forgot armed robbery was illegal".

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I'm reminded of the Steve Martin routine with the phrase "I forgot armed robbery was illegal".

LOL! I remember that one.

 

[leonAzul]

Should he be:
1) moved to a mental institution?
2) released free and clear?
3) kept in prison?
Do we even know exactly what it being considered?

It's a parole board. I strongly suspect that a parole is what they are being asked to consider.

ETA
We can't really know what the board considers until they release a statement, and I doubt that will happen before the actual hearing.
Here are two reports with more detail.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...-sirhan-sirhan-faces-13th-parole-hearing.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/robert-kennedys-killer-sirhan-sirhan-brainwashed/story?id=13029050

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Nope

 

[Fnord]

"Convicted RFK Assassin Denied Parole"



May his last living vision be that of his cold, grey prison cell.​

 

[quixotecoyote]

"Convicted RFK Assassin Denied Parole"



May his last living vision be that of his cold, grey prison cell.​

Joy in suffering is unethical.

 

[Fnord]

Joy in suffering is unethical.

Agreed.

Joy in justice, however, is ethical. Nowhere have I said that he should suffer, only that he dies in prison.

I cheer the wisdom of the parole board, and hope that this same wisdom is passed along to every subsequent parole board that handles this case.

 

[JoelKatz]

It's kind of sad, really. It's one thing for an attorney to argue such an elaborate scenario in an attempt to generate reasonable doubt as a defense. It's quite another to buy in to it for all these years with no substantial evidence.

The lack of evidence is proof the CT is correct. If the CT was wrong, why would they bother to cover up all the evidence that proves the CT was correct?

 

[Darth Rotor]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41822218/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts

He remembers nothing of his crime. Psychiatrists say he's not faking his amnesia. Should he be paroled or is a life sentence a life sentence.

No, he should be executed. He's using up good people's air.

 

[quixotecoyote]

Agreed.

Joy in justice, however, is ethical. Nowhere have I said that he should suffer, only that he dies in prison.

I'm not up for this particular battle of obfuscated semantics right now. Maybe we'll have a thread later.

 

[John Jones]

Joy in suffering is unethical.

Schadenfreude. Great word.

That aside, is there some reason he should be paroled?

Is it some matter of mercy versus justice?

 

[geni]

That aside, is there some reason he should be paroled?

Is it some matter of mercy versus justice?

Keeping people locked up is expensive. 40 years meets many definitions of justice.

So that just leaves is it safe to release him. The parole board appears to have decided it isn't.

 

[John Jones]

Keeping people locked up is expensive. 40 years meets many definitions of justice.

So that just leaves is it safe to release him. The parole board appears to have decided it isn't.

I don't know about that. Robert Kennedy has been dead longer than 40 years. RFK's family and the US have been deprived of his life longer than 40 years.

Sirhan was sentenced to life in prison (IIRC). One very basic definition of justice says that he should serve every remaining day of his life in prison.

Whether he is safe to release is not a mitigating factor in my mind.

Sirhan basically forfeited his right to live uncaged among human beings for as long as he lives.

I haven't seen the parole board's deliberations, and I'm willing to admit being wrong. I've done so plenty of times before.

 

[geni]

I don't know about that. Robert Kennedy has been dead longer than 40 years. RFK's family and the US have been deprived of his life longer than 40 years.

So? Keeping the guy in prison any longer won't change that.

Sirhan was sentenced to life in prison (IIRC). One very basic definition of justice says that he should serve every remaining day of his life in prison.

It's not as common a definition as you might expect. While the US is having a love affair with life without possibility of parole in most of the rest of the world life tends to means a decade or so and then untill you are safe to let out. The UK does have whole life tarrifs but they apply to less than 50 people total.

Whether he is safe to release is not a mitigating factor in my mind.

It isn't. However it is generaly considered a bad idea to release a murderer who still presents a risk as to the public. It's a qualifying step.

Sirhan basically forfeited his right to live uncaged among human beings for as long as he lives.

Oh indeed which is why releases are done on licence. However just because he doesn't have the right to be released doesn't mean that he can't be released.

 

[novice skeptic]

Absolutely not.

 

[John Jones]

...It's not as common a definition as you might expect. While the US is having a love affair with life without possibility of parole in most of the rest of the world life tends to means a decade or so and then untill you are safe to let out. The UK does have whole life tarrifs but they apply to less than 50 people total.

Too bad for Sirhan that he didn't assassinate a politician in the UK or elsewhere in the world, innit?