The Shrine

<div style='font: 11pt "Fine Hand"; text-align: left; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="http://www.wral.com/news/2662960/detail ... il.html</a>

Life in Prison for stealing a TV. 33 years later....he still can't get a Parole hearing.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Man, you know who needs to be locked up is the racist-ass prosecutor who threw him in there all those years ago...</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>How is that even legal? Aren't there rules for judges to follow when sentencing?</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Dominion; text-align: left; '>yeah this is sounding a bit odd to me...I thought we were beyond biggotry like this</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "Fine Hand"; text-align: left; '>In 1970? In the South? Of course. If defendant is black, lock'em up.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>That's a fucking crime against humanity. North Carolina should be bombed off the map.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Far be it from me to interrupt the happy train here, but perhaps there's mitigating factors here? Like, oh, prison behavior? This article isn't a complete encyclopedia of the events here.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Dude, if I got life in prison for stealing a fucking TV set I wouldn't exactly be a model prisoner either.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>So you're saying that life sentense (let alone any jail time at all) is justified for stealing a 140 dollar Television set?</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>If you're going to start playing the "Put words in Tort's mouth" game I'm done.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="http://www.wral.com/news/2669296/detail.html">Ayup.</a>

Oh, wait. Yup, he's a model prisoner.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '><b>Link:</b> <a href="http://www.wral.com/news/2677390/detail.html">Do you people get my fucking point yet? If not, feel free to bash me.</a>

Or this.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I am not putting words in your mouth, I am replying to the fact that you are ACTUALLY defending this. He got life for theft of a 140 dollar TV. The fact that you believe this is fine disturbs me greatly.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt ; text-align: left; '>I agree, but I would like to leave the state first IF YOU DON'T MIND...thank you.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Reading comprehension is your friend. I'm done.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '>Heh, being black and living up North, coming down to the South, and THEN getting arrested.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '>I must say, I'd be highly pissed too, the arguement of whether or not he should be held or not is void as well, cause it shouldn't have been that long of a term to begin with.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Although if I'm reading this correctly, what he was legally charged with is not why his sentence is life. But that too is a problem.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Tort, no one's claiming the guy didn't commit a crime, or even that he didn't deserve to be punished - all we're saying is that stealing a TV and MAYBE hurting the owner shouldn't constitute life in prison</div>

<div style='font: bold 10pt ; text-align: left; '>What I love is they keep reffering to how long he spent in maximum. First of all, maximum security for a TV? Second, they make it sound like just being in Maximum MADE him dangerous, but wasn't it supposed to rehabilitate him? Stupid fucking people.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>Did you not understand the article? I'll try to spell it out very clearly now, just for you, so that you might more easily understand. The man received a LIFE SENTENSE for STEALING A TV WORTH 140 dollars.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>His behaviour in prison has nothing to do with him receiving life in a maximum security prison for a conviction of theft under $1000.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>That's what's confusing me. They say that one of the reasons his parole might be denied is because he's spent to much time in jail?? What the fuck?</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>And he's saying that the article could be a crock of shit, or at least only telling half the story.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", "Century Gothic"; text-align: left; '>That's the thing. If you're going to sentence somebody based on if he beat somebody or not, PUT A FUCKING ASSAULT CHARGE on him! Otherwise, he did not legally beat anybody.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I'm glad someone was able to get over their righteous indignation and figure out what I was saying.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Oh, I knew exactly what you were saying. I just don't see the point in trying to explain that to him.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>His arguments are completely irrelevent, he argued that the reason he spent so long in prison was because of bad behaviour, but as the article states, he was convicted of theft and receieved a life sentense for it, that is all that is relevent.</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>I knew exactly what you were saying. It's just I felt no reason to address your pointless argument. Rather, I chose to correct you based on the fact that you obviously missed the fact that he received life in prison for a conviction of theft of property valued at $140.</div>

<div style='font: bold 9pt ; text-align: left; '>It's called circular reasoning...like a circle...no breaks...circle...resembles a butt hole.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "Fine Hand"; text-align: left; '>Like the old man in Shawshank Redemption. He's now "Institutionalized".</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>The fact that I made my point without prefacing it with a bleeding-heart weepy diatribe about how unfair it is doesn't mean I missed the fact. Do you troll on purpose or does it just come naturally?</div>

<div style='font: 11pt arial; text-align: left; '>Indeed - but even an assault charge should never carry a life sentence</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>You're as dense as a post. The man got LIFE IN PRISON for THEFT of 140 bucks, it had NOTHING TO DO WITH BAD BEHAVIOUR IN PRISON as you used to justify the state locking him away for that long. Why do you continuously fail to understand this simple point?</div>

<div style='font: 12pt ; text-align: left; '>It makes no sense, he was unjustfully locked away for half his life, I think the governments afraid that he's going to take them to court and get 20 million dollars off of them, he should get at least that much.</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>I agree the sentence was overdone. Nobody is arguing that point. Let me repeat. I AGREE THE SENTENCE WAS TOO MUCH. Spell it with me! I A-G-R-E-E. (Or, in case that point is too literate for you, "Jail bad!")

That being said, you can't just overturn a sentence because it might be unfair. That's not how the legal system works.

And it's NOT the parole board's job to decide "Well, this guy's sentence was too long, let's just let him go!" It's a matter of the parole board looking at his behavior WHILE IN PRISON and determining whether or not they feel that he would be able to return to society rehabilitated and not a risk of a repeat crime. Does the parole board look at the amount of time he's been in there? Certainly. Up until two years ago, however, he was committing an average of two offenses a year, some of them more than just minor infractions. While it's not like the guy was a murderer who got locked up, he's still not had a great track record while in jail, and THAT is what the parole board considers.

Now that he's gone two years without incident, the parole board will have more of a basis for releasing him - he's not much of a risk to society anymore. That's not a guarantee that he will get out. The point is that they have to decide based on his incarcerated behavior whether or not to let him go. The original sentence is not their concern, given the fact that he was eligible for parole the whole time.

Now perhaps you'll actually READ WHAT I AM SAYING and drop it. I think he should be let go. I have never said otherwise. I agree a life sentence for a $140 TV is absurd. That has never been in question, unlike what you want to attribute to me. However, my point all along was that if it was only the TV, and he'd had a sterling prison track record, he'd have likely been gone LONG ago. Only RECENTLY has he been on good behavior, so only recently would the parole board have good cause to let him go. My original point was that there had to be something more here to keep him in jail, and THIS IS FACT. OVER SIXTY OFFENSES WHILE IN PRISON IS A FACT.

So stop judging me based on some sort of fallacy you're attributing to me or your blatant anti-American bias. Read what I've said and get over it.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Dominion; text-align: left; '>*applauds* Nicely done Tort</div>

<div style='font: 9pt ; text-align: left; '>Have you ever heard of the theory that prison turns people into even bigger monsters, especially marginal criminals who are punished too harshly/</div>

<div style='font: 11pt "Fine Hand"; text-align: left; '>They don't have much of a choice. Prison is where the strong and fierce survive.</div>