Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Clemency: It's on!
According to Liz Goodwin over at Yahoo News (Really? An actual non-Lindsey Lohan-related article at Yahoo News?), President Obama is finally going to replace his Pardon Attorney. This is a crucial step in attaining the fundamental movement in clemency the administration is seeking.
Significantly, Attorney General Eric Holder also made a statement yesterday, which confirmed that the administration is serious about this project:
The White House has indicated it wants to consider additional clemency applications, to restore a degree of justice, fairness, and proportionality for deserving individuals who do not pose a threat to public safety. The Justice Department is committed to recommending as many qualified applicants as possible for reduced sentences.
This is going to be an interesting summer!
Comments:
<< Home
It has to start somewhere, but a general overhaul of the sentencing process is what is needed. Too much here to discuss, but for starters, I've long thought that maximum sentences for non-violent and so-called "white collar" crime should be limited to some fixed percentage of the convict's life expectancy. A person should not have to die in prison just because he doesn't have time to live out his sentence.
In the cases of persons convicted of violent crimes, including murder, and who have been deemed terminally ill and no longer a threat to society or to specific individuals, and whose prognosis is death within 3 months, with the consent of the convict and his family they should be released to die outside of prison. Procedures should be developed to safeguard all interests, but should be weighted toward mercy.
I also believe that something must be done to shorten sentences generally, and to reduce the disparity of sentences among jurisdictions and even within jurisdictions for similar crimes.
Proactive remedial measures in sentencing will produce fairer results, in my opinion, than clemency on a case by case basis.
But in the interim, a more prevalent use of clemency is certainly appropriate, notwithstanding it is a close cousin to jury nullification, and will inevitably lead to disparate treatment.
In the cases of persons convicted of violent crimes, including murder, and who have been deemed terminally ill and no longer a threat to society or to specific individuals, and whose prognosis is death within 3 months, with the consent of the convict and his family they should be released to die outside of prison. Procedures should be developed to safeguard all interests, but should be weighted toward mercy.
I also believe that something must be done to shorten sentences generally, and to reduce the disparity of sentences among jurisdictions and even within jurisdictions for similar crimes.
Proactive remedial measures in sentencing will produce fairer results, in my opinion, than clemency on a case by case basis.
But in the interim, a more prevalent use of clemency is certainly appropriate, notwithstanding it is a close cousin to jury nullification, and will inevitably lead to disparate treatment.
# posted by 
: 10:39 PM
: 10:39 PM
The second paragraph above should have commenced:
"'In the cases of persons convicted of non violent crimes, as well as persons convicted of violent crimes…"
Post a Comment
"'In the cases of persons convicted of non violent crimes, as well as persons convicted of violent crimes…"
# posted by : 10:58 PM
: 10:58 PM << Home
