Anonymous wrote:It is interesting to see how the generational tide has most recently turned.
I remember back in ‘89-early 90’s when the murders occurred (and afterward) many people shunned the brothers and thought they were lying about being abused.
They even accused them of using the “abuse excuse.”
People thought they should spend the rest of their lives behind bars and that was that.
Period.
However now a younger generation, many who were not even born when these crimes were actually committed are proponents for these brothers to walk free.
If it wasn’t for the Netflix drama, etc. along w/current social media trends no one would care about these guys.
And now some are even calling them hot…..??!
No one thought this when they were younger!!!!?
At the end of the day they murdered their parents. So, no, most of us alive at that time didn’t think they were hot or eligible in any way, shape, or form. So glad a younger generation can look past murder because they have been introduced to Milli Vanilli since they love all things from the 90s.
At the end of the day they were sexually abused by dad who was enabled by mom. They were 21 and 18 when they committed their crime. They have served 35 years with good behavior and have paid their debt to society. Many people who understand the justice system and child abuse have been working to help them way before This Netflix show.
I don’t know any young people who think they are hot - they are now in advanced middle age. My teen says her peers are simply more aware of sexual abuse (Gen Z loves true crime) and just think the sentence was too long given the childhood abuse.
While true. You still don’t get to blow your mom’s face off in a rage.
It wasn't in a rage. They did it to make it look like a mob hit. These murders were carefully planned and executed.
Pent up rage. Not a crime of passion. Which is why they threw the book at them. Actual self defense people could understand.
They were so abused and traumatized by their ordeal that they were able to plan the murders and then go have fun afterwards.
Anonymous wrote:It is interesting to see how the generational tide has most recently turned.
I remember back in ‘89-early 90’s when the murders occurred (and afterward) many people shunned the brothers and thought they were lying about being abused.
They even accused them of using the “abuse excuse.”
People thought they should spend the rest of their lives behind bars and that was that.
Period.
However now a younger generation, many who were not even born when these crimes were actually committed are proponents for these brothers to walk free.
If it wasn’t for the Netflix drama, etc. along w/current social media trends no one would care about these guys.
And now some are even calling them hot…..??!
No one thought this when they were younger!!!!?
At the end of the day they murdered their parents. So, no, most of us alive at that time didn’t think they were hot or eligible in any way, shape, or form. So glad a younger generation can look past murder because they have been introduced to Milli Vanilli since they love all things from the 90s.
At the end of the day they were sexually abused by dad who was enabled by mom. They were 21 and 18 when they committed their crime. They have served 35 years with good behavior and have paid their debt to society. Many people who understand the justice system and child abuse have been working to help them way before This Netflix show.
I don’t know any young people who think they are hot - they are now in advanced middle age. My teen says her peers are simply more aware of sexual abuse (Gen Z loves true crime) and just think the sentence was too long given the childhood abuse.
While true. You still don’t get to blow your mom’s face off in a rage.
No one said they do. Many of us just think 35 years with good behavior is enough punishment given the childhood abuse. They are rehabilitated and it is a waste of tax payers money keeping them locked up now.
People here are just expressing opinions. The State of California is the one keeping them locked up. And California loves a good sob story, they just don’t think much of the Menendez brothers.
I doubt you are able to speak for the majority of Californians.
The Ca DA office was divided as are many on this thread, and many people have been lobbying for their release.
No one likes wasting money, and keeping the brothers locked up after 35 years of good behavior for a crime when they committed on the cusp of adulthood is a waste of money. They have shown remorse and been rehabilitated.
Anonymous wrote:It is interesting to see how the generational tide has most recently turned.
I remember back in ‘89-early 90’s when the murders occurred (and afterward) many people shunned the brothers and thought they were lying about being abused.
They even accused them of using the “abuse excuse.”
People thought they should spend the rest of their lives behind bars and that was that.
Period.
However now a younger generation, many who were not even born when these crimes were actually committed are proponents for these brothers to walk free.
If it wasn’t for the Netflix drama, etc. along w/current social media trends no one would care about these guys.
And now some are even calling them hot…..??!
No one thought this when they were younger!!!!?
At the end of the day they murdered their parents. So, no, most of us alive at that time didn’t think they were hot or eligible in any way, shape, or form. So glad a younger generation can look past murder because they have been introduced to Milli Vanilli since they love all things from the 90s.
At the end of the day they were sexually abused by dad who was enabled by mom. They were 21 and 18 when they committed their crime. They have served 35 years with good behavior and have paid their debt to society. Many people who understand the justice system and child abuse have been working to help them way before This Netflix show.
I don’t know any young people who think they are hot - they are now in advanced middle age. My teen says her peers are simply more aware of sexual abuse (Gen Z loves true crime) and just think the sentence was too long given the childhood abuse.
While true. You still don’t get to blow your mom’s face off in a rage.
No one said they do. Many of us just think 35 years with good behavior is enough punishment given the childhood abuse. They are rehabilitated and it is a waste of tax payers money keeping them locked up now.
People here are just expressing opinions. The State of California is the one keeping them locked up. And California loves a good sob story, they just don’t think much of the Menendez brothers.
I doubt you are able to speak for the majority of Californians.
The Ca DA office was divided as are many on this thread, and many people have been lobbying for their release.
No one likes wasting money, and keeping the brothers locked up after 35 years of good behavior for a crime when they committed on the cusp of adulthood is a waste of money. They have shown remorse and been rehabilitated.
Californians don’t get a vote in this process. So it doesn’t even matter what they all think any more than the people here do. And I have lived half my life in California. This is a discussion nothing more. We aren’t influencing anyone.
Anonymous wrote:As a person who was horribly abused, in a big fancy house, by parents who were extremely well respected and appeared very normal to everyone outside of the family—I don’t doubt abuse for one second with murder of parents.
Occum’s razor — they were pushed to the edge by abuse? Or so spoiled they shot their parents multiple times at close range with a shotgun? I’m not saying they aren’t sociopaths; I’m saying even if they are it is highly unlikely they’d kill because they are spoiled.
They didn’t seem particularly remorseful. Spending money and having a good old time on their ill gotten gains.
What does that have to do with anything? They should feel remorse for having killed the people who made their life hell?
And they spent a bunch of money? So what, everyone in Beverly Hills spends a bunch of money.
It’s not ok to kill people and spend their money. Even Gypsy Rose Blanchard got 10 years and she didn’t even murder her mom herself. Not sure what kind of lenience people think the Menendez brothers would get for their crime. You can’t just kill people who did you wrong.
They’ve already served 30 years. Don’t act like a punishment has not already been handed out.
They killed their parents. They are not judge and jury.
30 years is not enough.
What an ignorant viewpoint - thank god most of society has moved on from such contextless compassionless blanket judgements ..,
Maybe fast easy Deaths are not enough for fathers who sexually, psychologically and emotionally abuse their sons and mothers who hide/ enable the abuse. Life time sentences in maximum security jails would have been better for them.
So abusers, rapists, and murderers should be sentenced leniently if they were abused as children?
If you call 30 years lenient - it obviously should be taken into account yes. And relevant therapies required while
In jail.
.
But no they should not get off Scott free. The M brothers have already served 30 years.
I don't believe in capital punishment but have no words for someone who thinks like you that 30 years is enough for murder. Can't imagine what you think is suitable for child molesters, rapists, and serial killers.
Americans have become numb to these incredibly long prison sentences and act like it is not enough. Try to imagine losing even ONE year of your own life sitting in prison. It is an enormous life changing punishment. 35 years is pretty much impossible to comprehend.
Plus one.
Especially when the perps were sexually and psychologically abused by their father their entire childhood and afraid that he was going to kill them after threats that they were going to expose his abuse. These are mitigating circumstances.
Since PP brought up the death penalty -
I don’t believe in the death penalty because not only is it immoral and extremely expensive to keep inmates on death row for decades until they exhaust appeal options, it does not deter violent crime.
I don't believe in capital punishment either. I DO believe in life sentences for violent, heinous crines like rape, murder, sexual abuse/torture, serial killings, etc. Many perpetrators of crimes were victims of abuse. That does not mean they are allowed to kill and/or torture others without a life changing punishment. Those who are murdered are gone forever and many of them at very young ages. Those who are molested, tortured, and/or raped are never the same afterwards. They are the innocents who have society's sympathy.
In most of the United States, a life sentence usually means a person in prison for 15 years with the chance for parole. Very rarely are life sentences imposed with no end.
The brothers have already served double the average length.
While I am glad you do not support the death penalty, I don’t think your mentality of lock them up forever and throw away the key is going to prevent cycles of abuse. Yes they did wrong and have served more than two average life sentences. It is time for mercy.
They killed two people so maybe they should get double the time. 15 years doesn’t seem like enough when a murderer snuffs out a life if someone who didn’t deserve it and had many years in front of them. How is that justice for a victim or their family? Your bleeding heart can’t spare a thought for the victims? Only the perpetrators?
Doesn’t the family support Lyle and Erik? To them, justice would be setting the brothers free.
Exactly. The vast majority of their family want them free.
Hope to God that the PP who keeps reiterating “they are murderers” (with no accounting for the horrific abuse by their father, long sentences already served and consistent good behavior) is NOT working in the judicial system or law enforcement.
This mentality perpetuates cycles of abuse and violence. Norway which has a very humane criminal judicial and incarceration system has low recidivism rates . (Recidivism is the tendency of a person to repeat a criminal offense after experiencing jail time and being trained to understand and stop criminal behaviors). Norway has a recidivism rate of 20% while the US has a rate of 76.6%.
There is So much evidence that humane justice and jail systems contribute to lower rates of societal violence and reoffending.
The brothers have served more than double average life sentences, exhibited good behavior in jail for 35 years, provided evidence to back up their allegations of long term sexual and psychological abuse at hands of father and shown remorse for their actions.
The punitive minded “lock em up forever and throw away the keys” Approach serves no one well.
Average life sentence for what crimes? Killing one person? Or two?
No End In Sight: America’s Enduring Reliance on Life Sentences By Ashley Nellis, Ph.D.
February 17, 2021
In the United States, more than 200,000 people are serving life sentences – one out of every seven in prison.
Before America’s era of mass incarceration took hold in the early 1970s, the number of individuals in prison was less than 200,000. Today, it’s 1.4 million; and more than 200,000 people are serving life sentences – one out of every seven in prison. More people are sentenced to life in prison in America than there were people in prison serving any sentence in 1970.
Nearly five times the number of people are now serving life sentences in the United States as were in 1984, a rate of growth that has outpaced even the sharp expansion of the overall prison population during this period.
The now commonplace use of life imprisonment contradicts research on effective public safety strategies, exacerbates already extreme racial injustices in the criminal justice system, and exemplifies the egregious consequences of mass incarceration
That hardly answer the question. I don’t care how many are serving life sentences I’d like to know what their crimes were. Can guarantee these aren’t good people. I’ll spare my sympathy for the victims.
You are making an emotional decision. Would you rather enjoy your desire for punishment, or would you rather have a system that actually reduces crime? There are a few classes of criminals that cannot be rehabilitated, serial killers for example, but they comprise a small number of offenders.
Being soft on crime doesn’t seem to be working out in many places. Spare us your bleeding heart for criminals. Talk about emotional!
It’s not emotional. It’s based on a multitude of research which clearly demonstrates that rehabilitative correctional systems result in dramatic reductions in overall crime rates and recidivism.
Oh. Is this why we have so many career criminals and repeat offenders?
DP
Complicated but US has mass incarceration system that is not focused on rehabilitation where possible and that is not working well. Obviously there are some people who are criminally insane or sociopaths and need to stay locked up.
In this case, keeping the M brothers locked up serves no one well. Even the warden at their current Donovan Center said he would trust them as his neighbors and to care for his children. They are not threats to society.
And how will we decide who is able to be rehabilitated or not?
35 years of consistently good behavior is a pretty good indication
Oh but I thought double the amount of time? So what is the right amount of time? Seems like you just want slaps on the wrists for heinous crimes.
You are being ridiculous - in what punitive parallel universe does 35 years of confinement (mostly in maximum security separated from each other)/ no chance to ever have families of their own/ no conjugal visits with their wives - represent a slap on the wrist?
No, you’re waffling. 15 years is average but 35 is too long. So, what is the right amount of time? And really with the cycle of abuse in the Menendez family line no kids of their own is a benefit to society and to the Menendez family.
Someone articulating a rational viewpoint to your draconian views is hardly waffling.
1. Yes 15 years is average for life sentences and they have served 35 years. They have served enough time .
2. Evidence about severely abusive childhoods were not allowed in the Second trial and should be considered for resentencing hearing.
3. They have shown themselves to have remorse and to exhibit excellent behavior for a very long time. They are not a threat to society.
4. It is expensive for taxpayers to keep them locked up.
Releasing them is the humane and rationale Course of action.
How much are you getting paid to advocate for them? You should also be their first stop if they get released. They can live with you, watch your kids, and readjust to life on the outside under your roof.
This is a very emotional response lacking clarity, compassion, and sound reasoning.
I am not paid to be a good person and thinking member of society.
Keeping the M brothers locked up is not rational, wise or justified.
Whatever. You know they would never touch you and yours but you’re not thinking about society at large and people other than yourself. Because you’re not just talking about the M brothers. You don’t want long sentences for anyone.
How would you know what I think?
If the M brothers represented a threat to society I would want them locked up. But they don’t.
You seem to be fine with throwing away tax payers money away to make yourself feel like you tough on crime.
Let’s see your guarantee that they don’t pose a threat. Pull that right out of your ass and show us.
The warden of their current jail is in the record that they are not a threat to society and that he would trust him to be a neighbor.
Hence we don’t need to rely on opinions pulled out of anyone’s posterior .
The warden? They have every motive to be on good behavior since they claim innocence. My BIL who brutally knifed my sister to death in front of his children hopes to get out of his LWOP and has been a model prisoner. He was a Jew and has converted to Christianity. He teaches inmates financial literacy. We have no doubt he would be a danger to society but I'm sure all the staff at the prison think he's a great guy.
And if your sister had killed him to escape would you want a life sentence for her? The M brothers were victims of years of abuse. They were afraid that there father was going to kill them. Society is starting to recognize that men and boys can be victims of DV and sex abuse, but we still treat victims terribly. What happened to your sister might not have happened if society took the danger of her abuser seriously. That’s the root of the problem. Your BIL was an abuser. José and Kitty were abusers. Your sister was a victim. The M brothers were victims.
Are you saying murder is the only way to get out of a bad marriage? Huh. Victims often turn around to victimize others. See Jose Menendez.
The fact that you try to equate a bad marriage with an abusive marriage tells me how deeply hostile you are to victims of DV.
Did you not know Jose was abused by his mother? I think I understand now that your ignorance of this case is driving your thought process.
Keep moving the goalposts. You have no argument other than wishing to inflict punishment. We know that “tough on crime” is bs. What works, both in terms of prevention and greatly reduced recidivism are rehabilitative models as exemplified by the Nordics.
DP - there is tons of research to back this up. A couple of US states (Oregon and ND) are even adapting their justice systems to learn from the Nordic model. They would not take such drastic steps without a lot of evidence.
The Benefits of Rehabilitative Incarceration
Our research on Norway’s criminal justice system serves as a proof of concept that time spent in prison with a focus on rehabilitation can result in positive outcomes. The Norwegian prison system increases job training, raises employment, and reduces crime, mostly due to changes for individuals who were not employed prior to imprisonment. While there are no discernible spillovers to children, there are large spillovers for both criminal networks and brothers that provide additional benefits in terms of crime reduction.
Research indicates that the Nordic justice system, particularly in countries like Norway, is associated with significantly lower crime rates due to its strong emphasis on rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders, leading to lower recidivism rates compared to other systems that focus more heavily on punishment; this is often cited as evidence that their approach results in less crime overall
The Effects of Culture and Punishment Philosophies on Recidivism: Comparing Prison Systems in the United States and Recidivism: Comparing Prison Systems in the United States and Scandinavia Scandinavia Alexis Riep
Eastern Kentucky University, alexis_riep@mymail.eku.edu
Norway’s prison system may be different, but it’s clearly effective in terms of crime reduction, economic impact, and rehabilitation. The amenities of Norway’s prisons, like flat screen televisions and yoga classes, get the headlines, but the real key to the strategy is in the underlying philosophy. Prisoners in Norway lose their liberty, but they don’t lose their humanity and dignity.
The approach has clearly paid dividends, as Norway has the lowest recidivism rate and one of the lowest crime rates in the world. The country pays a significant amount each year to support each incarcerated individual, but it also has one of the smallest prison populations, ranking fourth-lowest with only 54 people per 100,000 in prison.
While Norway provides a roadmap to lower crime for other countries, it’s unclear whether the strategy could be effective elsewhere. Norway’s nationwide support for rehabilitation in prisons is unique and runs counter to the sentiment in many countries that prison is for punishment only.
It is encouraging that states like Oregon and North Dakota have sought to learn from the Norwegian system, but there is much work to be done in the United States and other western countries before they see benefits similar to those in Norway’s prison system.
Nordic example? Sweden says hold my beer. It is now known as Europe’s gun crime capital. Thanks, but no thanks. They can’t even deal with young criminals in youth homes. Seems like the Nordic example is old news and not relevant to today’s crime wave in Nordic countries.
In theory, the youth homes aim to rehabilitate young offenders to prevent them from becoming adult criminals. But according to a report released weeks ago by the Swedish National Audit Office which supervises government, nine out of ten gang-affiliated youngsters at youth homes go on to relapse into crime, and almost eight out of ten eventually end up in prison.
The research compares to Norway not Sweden. Clearly you read none of the linked research so cannot be expected to learn from their fine example. Let’s see how Oregon and North Dakota fair with recidivism and reducing violent crimes since they are choosing to introduce more rehabilitative justice programs:
Don’t use the word Nordic if you only want to talk about Norway. Read what you actually post.
The research repeatedly identified Norway as the shining North Star for rehabilitative justice systems.
It was a red herring to throw in gang violence in Sweden.
I guess you don’t know that Nordic doesn’t just mean Norway. Also curious you want to totally discount how this is going in Sweden. Norway and the US are apples and oranges.
Oh please - yeah I realize it is the four Scandinavian countries, Iceland and Greenland but the research cited is specifically about Norway.
No one expects US to import the Norwegian model .., obviously there are major differences (The US not Norway is an outlier among wealthy countries with its mass incarceration model). But there are lessons to be learned from Norway and glad that at least two states are taking note and making reforms towards more rehabilitative mind sets.
Also the Swedish example of placing violent youth in youth homes rather than jails/ youth detention centers leading to worse gang violence does not apply here. The M brothers were not part of gangs. They killed their abusers and have paid their debt to society.
Who do you think makes up the US prison population? You really think it’s a bunch of people just like Erik and Lyle? Please.
No where was that said or implied. It was part of point that obviously Norway and US models are very different - but US model is different to all other justice models in Western democratic world / but that does not mean we can’t learn from places who are balancing justice, punishment and rehabilitation better then us.
The US mass incarceration system incarcerates more people than any other country in the world. The US spends about $182 billion every year to lock up nearly 1% of its adult population.
Black and Latino people are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system, even though they make up less than one third of the national population.
“The social, moral, and fiscal costs associated with the large-scale, decades-long investment in mass imprisonment cannot be justified by any evidence of its effectiveness. Misguided changes in sentencing law and policy –not crime– account for the majority of the increase in correctional supervision.”
So you agree its apples/oranges to compare the US to Norway and expect the same results.
So comprehension is clearly not your forte?
Common sense and rational thought aren’t yours. But that’s ok because none of your fantasies have a chance in hell.
Nice try - your dogma of “lock ‘em up and throw away the key” mentality is not supported by science or ethics. It is also wasting a lot of tax payer money and does not reduce crime or repeat offenses.
The US overpays for a punitive justice system that is not working for inmates or society.
But carry on defending an approach that is not working and costs a fortune -
“ The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results” – Albert Einstein
Your kind of thinking is why violent repeat offenders are on tbe streets to rape and kill innocent victims. Undoubtedly, you are a proponent of low bail, no bail, and lenient sentencing with no concern for innocent victims.
Don’t let facts or evidence get in the way of your rigid black and white thinking …
Sure... We could ask innocent victims about their experiences, but many of them are dead or suffering from extreme mental health issues related to trauma thanks to your "flexibie thinking"...We get who matters most to you, and it's not the innocent victims.
The people murdered by the M brothers were the opposite of innocent victims - they were the people who were supposed to protect the brothers who sexual psychologically and emotionally abused them. The mother enabled the abuse.
No one thinks they should have got off scot free but they served 35 years with good behavior.
Professionals who have managed them in jail state they are not a threat to society.
I have no problem with keeping Unrepentant pedophiles or rapists locked up but not victims of childhood abuse who were not even adults themselves at the time of the crimes.
They were 18 and 21 at the time so instead of killing their parents they could have rented a home very cheaply. Sorry, but they need to stay right where they are. These two are evil, the one wanted to kill their shrink.
I would let them out and I am pretty tough on crime. Their age at the time rings different to me then if they were 40 committing this. I’d also think the fact that their own family has forgiven them should be considered. I don’t think they seem a danger to society.
I was happy ➕ relieved to hear that Erik was denied parole today after what was a LOOONG hearing.
I always believed that him and Lyle could have extracted themselves from their family given their ages at the time.
I am the same age as they are now and I remember when they committed this crime.
Even if they were being abused by their father, they were both old enough where they could have left their parents.
They weren’t in danger of being killed as they claim now.
Self-defense does not apply to their situation at all.
They claim they murdered their parents out of fear of being killed and that they were defending their lives - but that is ridiculous at best.
Plus they haven’t been “model” prisoners.
Erik ran a tax scam w/a gang while in prison, plus he smuggled in cell phones along w/a bunch of other infractions.
Guess we will hear what Lyle did later on today.
It makes me sick that Kim Kardashian publicly supported the brother’s release after they lied & scammed people.
I still remember how arrogant and cocky these two guys were acting right after they killed their parents in ‘89……they acted like spoiled little rich kids spending all their inheritance so soon after their parents were buried! 😠
Anonymous wrote:As a person who was horribly abused, in a big fancy house, by parents who were extremely well respected and appeared very normal to everyone outside of the family—I don’t doubt abuse for one second with murder of parents.
Occum’s razor — they were pushed to the edge by abuse? Or so spoiled they shot their parents multiple times at close range with a shotgun? I’m not saying they aren’t sociopaths; I’m saying even if they are it is highly unlikely they’d kill because they are spoiled.
They didn’t seem particularly remorseful. Spending money and having a good old time on their ill gotten gains.
What does that have to do with anything? They should feel remorse for having killed the people who made their life hell?
And they spent a bunch of money? So what, everyone in Beverly Hills spends a bunch of money.
It’s not ok to kill people and spend their money. Even Gypsy Rose Blanchard got 10 years and she didn’t even murder her mom herself. Not sure what kind of lenience people think the Menendez brothers would get for their crime. You can’t just kill people who did you wrong.
They’ve already served 30 years. Don’t act like a punishment has not already been handed out.
They killed their parents. They are not judge and jury.
30 years is not enough.
What an ignorant viewpoint - thank god most of society has moved on from such contextless compassionless blanket judgements ..,
Maybe fast easy Deaths are not enough for fathers who sexually, psychologically and emotionally abuse their sons and mothers who hide/ enable the abuse. Life time sentences in maximum security jails would have been better for them.
So abusers, rapists, and murderers should be sentenced leniently if they were abused as children?
If you call 30 years lenient - it obviously should be taken into account yes. And relevant therapies required while
In jail.
.
But no they should not get off Scott free. The M brothers have already served 30 years.
I don't believe in capital punishment but have no words for someone who thinks like you that 30 years is enough for murder. Can't imagine what you think is suitable for child molesters, rapists, and serial killers.
Americans have become numb to these incredibly long prison sentences and act like it is not enough. Try to imagine losing even ONE year of your own life sitting in prison. It is an enormous life changing punishment. 35 years is pretty much impossible to comprehend.
Plus one.
Especially when the perps were sexually and psychologically abused by their father their entire childhood and afraid that he was going to kill them after threats that they were going to expose his abuse. These are mitigating circumstances.
Since PP brought up the death penalty -
I don’t believe in the death penalty because not only is it immoral and extremely expensive to keep inmates on death row for decades until they exhaust appeal options, it does not deter violent crime.
I don't believe in capital punishment either. I DO believe in life sentences for violent, heinous crines like rape, murder, sexual abuse/torture, serial killings, etc. Many perpetrators of crimes were victims of abuse. That does not mean they are allowed to kill and/or torture others without a life changing punishment. Those who are murdered are gone forever and many of them at very young ages. Those who are molested, tortured, and/or raped are never the same afterwards. They are the innocents who have society's sympathy.
In most of the United States, a life sentence usually means a person in prison for 15 years with the chance for parole. Very rarely are life sentences imposed with no end.
The brothers have already served double the average length.
While I am glad you do not support the death penalty, I don’t think your mentality of lock them up forever and throw away the key is going to prevent cycles of abuse. Yes they did wrong and have served more than two average life sentences. It is time for mercy.
They killed two people so maybe they should get double the time. 15 years doesn’t seem like enough when a murderer snuffs out a life if someone who didn’t deserve it and had many years in front of them. How is that justice for a victim or their family? Your bleeding heart can’t spare a thought for the victims? Only the perpetrators?
Doesn’t the family support Lyle and Erik? To them, justice would be setting the brothers free.
Exactly. The vast majority of their family want them free.
Hope to God that the PP who keeps reiterating “they are murderers” (with no accounting for the horrific abuse by their father, long sentences already served and consistent good behavior) is NOT working in the judicial system or law enforcement.
This mentality perpetuates cycles of abuse and violence. Norway which has a very humane criminal judicial and incarceration system has low recidivism rates . (Recidivism is the tendency of a person to repeat a criminal offense after experiencing jail time and being trained to understand and stop criminal behaviors). Norway has a recidivism rate of 20% while the US has a rate of 76.6%.
There is So much evidence that humane justice and jail systems contribute to lower rates of societal violence and reoffending.
The brothers have served more than double average life sentences, exhibited good behavior in jail for 35 years, provided evidence to back up their allegations of long term sexual and psychological abuse at hands of father and shown remorse for their actions.
The punitive minded “lock em up forever and throw away the keys” Approach serves no one well.
Average life sentence for what crimes? Killing one person? Or two?
No End In Sight: America’s Enduring Reliance on Life Sentences By Ashley Nellis, Ph.D.
February 17, 2021
In the United States, more than 200,000 people are serving life sentences – one out of every seven in prison.
Before America’s era of mass incarceration took hold in the early 1970s, the number of individuals in prison was less than 200,000. Today, it’s 1.4 million; and more than 200,000 people are serving life sentences – one out of every seven in prison. More people are sentenced to life in prison in America than there were people in prison serving any sentence in 1970.
Nearly five times the number of people are now serving life sentences in the United States as were in 1984, a rate of growth that has outpaced even the sharp expansion of the overall prison population during this period.
The now commonplace use of life imprisonment contradicts research on effective public safety strategies, exacerbates already extreme racial injustices in the criminal justice system, and exemplifies the egregious consequences of mass incarceration
That hardly answer the question. I don’t care how many are serving life sentences I’d like to know what their crimes were. Can guarantee these aren’t good people. I’ll spare my sympathy for the victims.
You are making an emotional decision. Would you rather enjoy your desire for punishment, or would you rather have a system that actually reduces crime? There are a few classes of criminals that cannot be rehabilitated, serial killers for example, but they comprise a small number of offenders.
Being soft on crime doesn’t seem to be working out in many places. Spare us your bleeding heart for criminals. Talk about emotional!
It’s not emotional. It’s based on a multitude of research which clearly demonstrates that rehabilitative correctional systems result in dramatic reductions in overall crime rates and recidivism.
Oh. Is this why we have so many career criminals and repeat offenders?
DP
Complicated but US has mass incarceration system that is not focused on rehabilitation where possible and that is not working well. Obviously there are some people who are criminally insane or sociopaths and need to stay locked up.
In this case, keeping the M brothers locked up serves no one well. Even the warden at their current Donovan Center said he would trust them as his neighbors and to care for his children. They are not threats to society.
And how will we decide who is able to be rehabilitated or not?
35 years of consistently good behavior is a pretty good indication
Oh but I thought double the amount of time? So what is the right amount of time? Seems like you just want slaps on the wrists for heinous crimes.
You are being ridiculous - in what punitive parallel universe does 35 years of confinement (mostly in maximum security separated from each other)/ no chance to ever have families of their own/ no conjugal visits with their wives - represent a slap on the wrist?
No, you’re waffling. 15 years is average but 35 is too long. So, what is the right amount of time? And really with the cycle of abuse in the Menendez family line no kids of their own is a benefit to society and to the Menendez family.
Someone articulating a rational viewpoint to your draconian views is hardly waffling.
1. Yes 15 years is average for life sentences and they have served 35 years. They have served enough time .
2. Evidence about severely abusive childhoods were not allowed in the Second trial and should be considered for resentencing hearing.
3. They have shown themselves to have remorse and to exhibit excellent behavior for a very long time. They are not a threat to society.
4. It is expensive for taxpayers to keep them locked up.
Releasing them is the humane and rationale Course of action.
How much are you getting paid to advocate for them? You should also be their first stop if they get released. They can live with you, watch your kids, and readjust to life on the outside under your roof.
This is a very emotional response lacking clarity, compassion, and sound reasoning.
I am not paid to be a good person and thinking member of society.
Keeping the M brothers locked up is not rational, wise or justified.
Whatever. You know they would never touch you and yours but you’re not thinking about society at large and people other than yourself. Because you’re not just talking about the M brothers. You don’t want long sentences for anyone.
How would you know what I think?
If the M brothers represented a threat to society I would want them locked up. But they don’t.
You seem to be fine with throwing away tax payers money away to make yourself feel like you tough on crime.
Let’s see your guarantee that they don’t pose a threat. Pull that right out of your ass and show us.
The warden of their current jail is in the record that they are not a threat to society and that he would trust him to be a neighbor.
Hence we don’t need to rely on opinions pulled out of anyone’s posterior .
The warden? They have every motive to be on good behavior since they claim innocence. My BIL who brutally knifed my sister to death in front of his children hopes to get out of his LWOP and has been a model prisoner. He was a Jew and has converted to Christianity. He teaches inmates financial literacy. We have no doubt he would be a danger to society but I'm sure all the staff at the prison think he's a great guy.
And if your sister had killed him to escape would you want a life sentence for her? The M brothers were victims of years of abuse. They were afraid that there father was going to kill them. Society is starting to recognize that men and boys can be victims of DV and sex abuse, but we still treat victims terribly. What happened to your sister might not have happened if society took the danger of her abuser seriously. That’s the root of the problem. Your BIL was an abuser. José and Kitty were abusers. Your sister was a victim. The M brothers were victims.
Are you saying murder is the only way to get out of a bad marriage? Huh. Victims often turn around to victimize others. See Jose Menendez.
The fact that you try to equate a bad marriage with an abusive marriage tells me how deeply hostile you are to victims of DV.
Did you not know Jose was abused by his mother? I think I understand now that your ignorance of this case is driving your thought process.
Keep moving the goalposts. You have no argument other than wishing to inflict punishment. We know that “tough on crime” is bs. What works, both in terms of prevention and greatly reduced recidivism are rehabilitative models as exemplified by the Nordics.
DP - there is tons of research to back this up. A couple of US states (Oregon and ND) are even adapting their justice systems to learn from the Nordic model. They would not take such drastic steps without a lot of evidence.
The Benefits of Rehabilitative Incarceration
Our research on Norway’s criminal justice system serves as a proof of concept that time spent in prison with a focus on rehabilitation can result in positive outcomes. The Norwegian prison system increases job training, raises employment, and reduces crime, mostly due to changes for individuals who were not employed prior to imprisonment. While there are no discernible spillovers to children, there are large spillovers for both criminal networks and brothers that provide additional benefits in terms of crime reduction.
Research indicates that the Nordic justice system, particularly in countries like Norway, is associated with significantly lower crime rates due to its strong emphasis on rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders, leading to lower recidivism rates compared to other systems that focus more heavily on punishment; this is often cited as evidence that their approach results in less crime overall
The Effects of Culture and Punishment Philosophies on Recidivism: Comparing Prison Systems in the United States and Recidivism: Comparing Prison Systems in the United States and Scandinavia Scandinavia Alexis Riep
Eastern Kentucky University, alexis_riep@mymail.eku.edu
Norway’s prison system may be different, but it’s clearly effective in terms of crime reduction, economic impact, and rehabilitation. The amenities of Norway’s prisons, like flat screen televisions and yoga classes, get the headlines, but the real key to the strategy is in the underlying philosophy. Prisoners in Norway lose their liberty, but they don’t lose their humanity and dignity.
The approach has clearly paid dividends, as Norway has the lowest recidivism rate and one of the lowest crime rates in the world. The country pays a significant amount each year to support each incarcerated individual, but it also has one of the smallest prison populations, ranking fourth-lowest with only 54 people per 100,000 in prison.
While Norway provides a roadmap to lower crime for other countries, it’s unclear whether the strategy could be effective elsewhere. Norway’s nationwide support for rehabilitation in prisons is unique and runs counter to the sentiment in many countries that prison is for punishment only.
It is encouraging that states like Oregon and North Dakota have sought to learn from the Norwegian system, but there is much work to be done in the United States and other western countries before they see benefits similar to those in Norway’s prison system.
Nordic example? Sweden says hold my beer. It is now known as Europe’s gun crime capital. Thanks, but no thanks. They can’t even deal with young criminals in youth homes. Seems like the Nordic example is old news and not relevant to today’s crime wave in Nordic countries.
In theory, the youth homes aim to rehabilitate young offenders to prevent them from becoming adult criminals. But according to a report released weeks ago by the Swedish National Audit Office which supervises government, nine out of ten gang-affiliated youngsters at youth homes go on to relapse into crime, and almost eight out of ten eventually end up in prison.
The research compares to Norway not Sweden. Clearly you read none of the linked research so cannot be expected to learn from their fine example. Let’s see how Oregon and North Dakota fair with recidivism and reducing violent crimes since they are choosing to introduce more rehabilitative justice programs:
Don’t use the word Nordic if you only want to talk about Norway. Read what you actually post.
The research repeatedly identified Norway as the shining North Star for rehabilitative justice systems.
It was a red herring to throw in gang violence in Sweden.
I guess you don’t know that Nordic doesn’t just mean Norway. Also curious you want to totally discount how this is going in Sweden. Norway and the US are apples and oranges.
Oh please - yeah I realize it is the four Scandinavian countries, Iceland and Greenland but the research cited is specifically about Norway.
No one expects US to import the Norwegian model .., obviously there are major differences (The US not Norway is an outlier among wealthy countries with its mass incarceration model). But there are lessons to be learned from Norway and glad that at least two states are taking note and making reforms towards more rehabilitative mind sets.
Also the Swedish example of placing violent youth in youth homes rather than jails/ youth detention centers leading to worse gang violence does not apply here. The M brothers were not part of gangs. They killed their abusers and have paid their debt to society.
Who do you think makes up the US prison population? You really think it’s a bunch of people just like Erik and Lyle? Please.
No where was that said or implied. It was part of point that obviously Norway and US models are very different - but US model is different to all other justice models in Western democratic world / but that does not mean we can’t learn from places who are balancing justice, punishment and rehabilitation better then us.
The US mass incarceration system incarcerates more people than any other country in the world. The US spends about $182 billion every year to lock up nearly 1% of its adult population.
Black and Latino people are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system, even though they make up less than one third of the national population.
“The social, moral, and fiscal costs associated with the large-scale, decades-long investment in mass imprisonment cannot be justified by any evidence of its effectiveness. Misguided changes in sentencing law and policy –not crime– account for the majority of the increase in correctional supervision.”
So you agree its apples/oranges to compare the US to Norway and expect the same results.
So comprehension is clearly not your forte?
Common sense and rational thought aren’t yours. But that’s ok because none of your fantasies have a chance in hell.
Nice try - your dogma of “lock ‘em up and throw away the key” mentality is not supported by science or ethics. It is also wasting a lot of tax payer money and does not reduce crime or repeat offenses.
The US overpays for a punitive justice system that is not working for inmates or society.
But carry on defending an approach that is not working and costs a fortune -
“ The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results” – Albert Einstein
Your kind of thinking is why violent repeat offenders are on tbe streets to rape and kill innocent victims. Undoubtedly, you are a proponent of low bail, no bail, and lenient sentencing with no concern for innocent victims.
Don’t let facts or evidence get in the way of your rigid black and white thinking …
Sure... We could ask innocent victims about their experiences, but many of them are dead or suffering from extreme mental health issues related to trauma thanks to your "flexibie thinking"...We get who matters most to you, and it's not the innocent victims.
The people murdered by the M brothers were the opposite of innocent victims - they were the people who were supposed to protect the brothers who sexual psychologically and emotionally abused them. The mother enabled the abuse.
No one thinks they should have got off scot free but they served 35 years with good behavior.
Professionals who have managed them in jail state they are not a threat to society.
I have no problem with keeping Unrepentant pedophiles or rapists locked up but not victims of childhood abuse who were not even adults themselves at the time of the crimes.
They were 18 and 21 at the time so instead of killing their parents they could have rented a home very cheaply. Sorry, but they need to stay right where they are. These two are evil, the one wanted to kill their shrink.
Sorry but what good behavior are you referring to here??
Erik was not a good prisoner, he even admitted yesterday that he made a lot of mistakes the last over-three decades in jail!
He said at the time he thought that he was never going to get out so that he didn’t really think of consequences for his bad actions at the time.
He says now that he has a chance at freedom he is set on doing the right thing and following a good path to be a better man.
I say a little too late.
He asked people on the outs to lie for him in court as well as ran a tax scam with a gang of prisoners from prison.
Is that what constitutes “good behavior” in prison??
Anonymous wrote:As a person who was horribly abused, in a big fancy house, by parents who were extremely well respected and appeared very normal to everyone outside of the family—I don’t doubt abuse for one second with murder of parents.
Occum’s razor — they were pushed to the edge by abuse? Or so spoiled they shot their parents multiple times at close range with a shotgun? I’m not saying they aren’t sociopaths; I’m saying even if they are it is highly unlikely they’d kill because they are spoiled.
They didn’t seem particularly remorseful. Spending money and having a good old time on their ill gotten gains.
What does that have to do with anything? They should feel remorse for having killed the people who made their life hell?
And they spent a bunch of money? So what, everyone in Beverly Hills spends a bunch of money.
It’s not ok to kill people and spend their money. Even Gypsy Rose Blanchard got 10 years and she didn’t even murder her mom herself. Not sure what kind of lenience people think the Menendez brothers would get for their crime. You can’t just kill people who did you wrong.
They’ve already served 30 years. Don’t act like a punishment has not already been handed out.
They killed their parents. They are not judge and jury.
30 years is not enough.
What an ignorant viewpoint - thank god most of society has moved on from such contextless compassionless blanket judgements ..,
Maybe fast easy Deaths are not enough for fathers who sexually, psychologically and emotionally abuse their sons and mothers who hide/ enable the abuse. Life time sentences in maximum security jails would have been better for them.
So abusers, rapists, and murderers should be sentenced leniently if they were abused as children?
If you call 30 years lenient - it obviously should be taken into account yes. And relevant therapies required while
In jail.
.
But no they should not get off Scott free. The M brothers have already served 30 years.
I don't believe in capital punishment but have no words for someone who thinks like you that 30 years is enough for murder. Can't imagine what you think is suitable for child molesters, rapists, and serial killers.
Americans have become numb to these incredibly long prison sentences and act like it is not enough. Try to imagine losing even ONE year of your own life sitting in prison. It is an enormous life changing punishment. 35 years is pretty much impossible to comprehend.
Plus one.
Especially when the perps were sexually and psychologically abused by their father their entire childhood and afraid that he was going to kill them after threats that they were going to expose his abuse. These are mitigating circumstances.
Since PP brought up the death penalty -
I don’t believe in the death penalty because not only is it immoral and extremely expensive to keep inmates on death row for decades until they exhaust appeal options, it does not deter violent crime.
I don't believe in capital punishment either. I DO believe in life sentences for violent, heinous crines like rape, murder, sexual abuse/torture, serial killings, etc. Many perpetrators of crimes were victims of abuse. That does not mean they are allowed to kill and/or torture others without a life changing punishment. Those who are murdered are gone forever and many of them at very young ages. Those who are molested, tortured, and/or raped are never the same afterwards. They are the innocents who have society's sympathy.
In most of the United States, a life sentence usually means a person in prison for 15 years with the chance for parole. Very rarely are life sentences imposed with no end.
The brothers have already served double the average length.
While I am glad you do not support the death penalty, I don’t think your mentality of lock them up forever and throw away the key is going to prevent cycles of abuse. Yes they did wrong and have served more than two average life sentences. It is time for mercy.
They killed two people so maybe they should get double the time. 15 years doesn’t seem like enough when a murderer snuffs out a life if someone who didn’t deserve it and had many years in front of them. How is that justice for a victim or their family? Your bleeding heart can’t spare a thought for the victims? Only the perpetrators?
Doesn’t the family support Lyle and Erik? To them, justice would be setting the brothers free.
Exactly. The vast majority of their family want them free.
Hope to God that the PP who keeps reiterating “they are murderers” (with no accounting for the horrific abuse by their father, long sentences already served and consistent good behavior) is NOT working in the judicial system or law enforcement.
This mentality perpetuates cycles of abuse and violence. Norway which has a very humane criminal judicial and incarceration system has low recidivism rates . (Recidivism is the tendency of a person to repeat a criminal offense after experiencing jail time and being trained to understand and stop criminal behaviors). Norway has a recidivism rate of 20% while the US has a rate of 76.6%.
There is So much evidence that humane justice and jail systems contribute to lower rates of societal violence and reoffending.
The brothers have served more than double average life sentences, exhibited good behavior in jail for 35 years, provided evidence to back up their allegations of long term sexual and psychological abuse at hands of father and shown remorse for their actions.
The punitive minded “lock em up forever and throw away the keys” Approach serves no one well.
Average life sentence for what crimes? Killing one person? Or two?
No End In Sight: America’s Enduring Reliance on Life Sentences By Ashley Nellis, Ph.D.
February 17, 2021
In the United States, more than 200,000 people are serving life sentences – one out of every seven in prison.
Before America’s era of mass incarceration took hold in the early 1970s, the number of individuals in prison was less than 200,000. Today, it’s 1.4 million; and more than 200,000 people are serving life sentences – one out of every seven in prison. More people are sentenced to life in prison in America than there were people in prison serving any sentence in 1970.
Nearly five times the number of people are now serving life sentences in the United States as were in 1984, a rate of growth that has outpaced even the sharp expansion of the overall prison population during this period.
The now commonplace use of life imprisonment contradicts research on effective public safety strategies, exacerbates already extreme racial injustices in the criminal justice system, and exemplifies the egregious consequences of mass incarceration
That hardly answer the question. I don’t care how many are serving life sentences I’d like to know what their crimes were. Can guarantee these aren’t good people. I’ll spare my sympathy for the victims.
You are making an emotional decision. Would you rather enjoy your desire for punishment, or would you rather have a system that actually reduces crime? There are a few classes of criminals that cannot be rehabilitated, serial killers for example, but they comprise a small number of offenders.
Being soft on crime doesn’t seem to be working out in many places. Spare us your bleeding heart for criminals. Talk about emotional!
It’s not emotional. It’s based on a multitude of research which clearly demonstrates that rehabilitative correctional systems result in dramatic reductions in overall crime rates and recidivism.
Oh. Is this why we have so many career criminals and repeat offenders?
DP
Complicated but US has mass incarceration system that is not focused on rehabilitation where possible and that is not working well. Obviously there are some people who are criminally insane or sociopaths and need to stay locked up.
In this case, keeping the M brothers locked up serves no one well. Even the warden at their current Donovan Center said he would trust them as his neighbors and to care for his children. They are not threats to society.
And how will we decide who is able to be rehabilitated or not?
35 years of consistently good behavior is a pretty good indication
Oh but I thought double the amount of time? So what is the right amount of time? Seems like you just want slaps on the wrists for heinous crimes.
You are being ridiculous - in what punitive parallel universe does 35 years of confinement (mostly in maximum security separated from each other)/ no chance to ever have families of their own/ no conjugal visits with their wives - represent a slap on the wrist?
No, you’re waffling. 15 years is average but 35 is too long. So, what is the right amount of time? And really with the cycle of abuse in the Menendez family line no kids of their own is a benefit to society and to the Menendez family.
Someone articulating a rational viewpoint to your draconian views is hardly waffling.
1. Yes 15 years is average for life sentences and they have served 35 years. They have served enough time .
2. Evidence about severely abusive childhoods were not allowed in the Second trial and should be considered for resentencing hearing.
3. They have shown themselves to have remorse and to exhibit excellent behavior for a very long time. They are not a threat to society.
4. It is expensive for taxpayers to keep them locked up.
Releasing them is the humane and rationale Course of action.
How much are you getting paid to advocate for them? You should also be their first stop if they get released. They can live with you, watch your kids, and readjust to life on the outside under your roof.
This is a very emotional response lacking clarity, compassion, and sound reasoning.
I am not paid to be a good person and thinking member of society.
Keeping the M brothers locked up is not rational, wise or justified.
Whatever. You know they would never touch you and yours but you’re not thinking about society at large and people other than yourself. Because you’re not just talking about the M brothers. You don’t want long sentences for anyone.
How would you know what I think?
If the M brothers represented a threat to society I would want them locked up. But they don’t.
You seem to be fine with throwing away tax payers money away to make yourself feel like you tough on crime.
Let’s see your guarantee that they don’t pose a threat. Pull that right out of your ass and show us.
The warden of their current jail is in the record that they are not a threat to society and that he would trust him to be a neighbor.
Hence we don’t need to rely on opinions pulled out of anyone’s posterior .
The warden? They have every motive to be on good behavior since they claim innocence. My BIL who brutally knifed my sister to death in front of his children hopes to get out of his LWOP and has been a model prisoner. He was a Jew and has converted to Christianity. He teaches inmates financial literacy. We have no doubt he would be a danger to society but I'm sure all the staff at the prison think he's a great guy.
And if your sister had killed him to escape would you want a life sentence for her? The M brothers were victims of years of abuse. They were afraid that there father was going to kill them. Society is starting to recognize that men and boys can be victims of DV and sex abuse, but we still treat victims terribly. What happened to your sister might not have happened if society took the danger of her abuser seriously. That’s the root of the problem. Your BIL was an abuser. José and Kitty were abusers. Your sister was a victim. The M brothers were victims.
Are you saying murder is the only way to get out of a bad marriage? Huh. Victims often turn around to victimize others. See Jose Menendez.
The fact that you try to equate a bad marriage with an abusive marriage tells me how deeply hostile you are to victims of DV.
Did you not know Jose was abused by his mother? I think I understand now that your ignorance of this case is driving your thought process.
Keep moving the goalposts. You have no argument other than wishing to inflict punishment. We know that “tough on crime” is bs. What works, both in terms of prevention and greatly reduced recidivism are rehabilitative models as exemplified by the Nordics.
DP - there is tons of research to back this up. A couple of US states (Oregon and ND) are even adapting their justice systems to learn from the Nordic model. They would not take such drastic steps without a lot of evidence.
The Benefits of Rehabilitative Incarceration
Our research on Norway’s criminal justice system serves as a proof of concept that time spent in prison with a focus on rehabilitation can result in positive outcomes. The Norwegian prison system increases job training, raises employment, and reduces crime, mostly due to changes for individuals who were not employed prior to imprisonment. While there are no discernible spillovers to children, there are large spillovers for both criminal networks and brothers that provide additional benefits in terms of crime reduction.
Research indicates that the Nordic justice system, particularly in countries like Norway, is associated with significantly lower crime rates due to its strong emphasis on rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders, leading to lower recidivism rates compared to other systems that focus more heavily on punishment; this is often cited as evidence that their approach results in less crime overall
The Effects of Culture and Punishment Philosophies on Recidivism: Comparing Prison Systems in the United States and Recidivism: Comparing Prison Systems in the United States and Scandinavia Scandinavia Alexis Riep
Eastern Kentucky University, alexis_riep@mymail.eku.edu
Norway’s prison system may be different, but it’s clearly effective in terms of crime reduction, economic impact, and rehabilitation. The amenities of Norway’s prisons, like flat screen televisions and yoga classes, get the headlines, but the real key to the strategy is in the underlying philosophy. Prisoners in Norway lose their liberty, but they don’t lose their humanity and dignity.
The approach has clearly paid dividends, as Norway has the lowest recidivism rate and one of the lowest crime rates in the world. The country pays a significant amount each year to support each incarcerated individual, but it also has one of the smallest prison populations, ranking fourth-lowest with only 54 people per 100,000 in prison.
While Norway provides a roadmap to lower crime for other countries, it’s unclear whether the strategy could be effective elsewhere. Norway’s nationwide support for rehabilitation in prisons is unique and runs counter to the sentiment in many countries that prison is for punishment only.
It is encouraging that states like Oregon and North Dakota have sought to learn from the Norwegian system, but there is much work to be done in the United States and other western countries before they see benefits similar to those in Norway’s prison system.
Nordic example? Sweden says hold my beer. It is now known as Europe’s gun crime capital. Thanks, but no thanks. They can’t even deal with young criminals in youth homes. Seems like the Nordic example is old news and not relevant to today’s crime wave in Nordic countries.
In theory, the youth homes aim to rehabilitate young offenders to prevent them from becoming adult criminals. But according to a report released weeks ago by the Swedish National Audit Office which supervises government, nine out of ten gang-affiliated youngsters at youth homes go on to relapse into crime, and almost eight out of ten eventually end up in prison.
The research compares to Norway not Sweden. Clearly you read none of the linked research so cannot be expected to learn from their fine example. Let’s see how Oregon and North Dakota fair with recidivism and reducing violent crimes since they are choosing to introduce more rehabilitative justice programs:
Don’t use the word Nordic if you only want to talk about Norway. Read what you actually post.
The research repeatedly identified Norway as the shining North Star for rehabilitative justice systems.
It was a red herring to throw in gang violence in Sweden.
I guess you don’t know that Nordic doesn’t just mean Norway. Also curious you want to totally discount how this is going in Sweden. Norway and the US are apples and oranges.
Oh please - yeah I realize it is the four Scandinavian countries, Iceland and Greenland but the research cited is specifically about Norway.
No one expects US to import the Norwegian model .., obviously there are major differences (The US not Norway is an outlier among wealthy countries with its mass incarceration model). But there are lessons to be learned from Norway and glad that at least two states are taking note and making reforms towards more rehabilitative mind sets.
Also the Swedish example of placing violent youth in youth homes rather than jails/ youth detention centers leading to worse gang violence does not apply here. The M brothers were not part of gangs. They killed their abusers and have paid their debt to society.
Who do you think makes up the US prison population? You really think it’s a bunch of people just like Erik and Lyle? Please.
No where was that said or implied. It was part of point that obviously Norway and US models are very different - but US model is different to all other justice models in Western democratic world / but that does not mean we can’t learn from places who are balancing justice, punishment and rehabilitation better then us.
The US mass incarceration system incarcerates more people than any other country in the world. The US spends about $182 billion every year to lock up nearly 1% of its adult population.
Black and Latino people are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system, even though they make up less than one third of the national population.
“The social, moral, and fiscal costs associated with the large-scale, decades-long investment in mass imprisonment cannot be justified by any evidence of its effectiveness. Misguided changes in sentencing law and policy –not crime– account for the majority of the increase in correctional supervision.”
So you agree its apples/oranges to compare the US to Norway and expect the same results.
So comprehension is clearly not your forte?
Common sense and rational thought aren’t yours. But that’s ok because none of your fantasies have a chance in hell.
Nice try - your dogma of “lock ‘em up and throw away the key” mentality is not supported by science or ethics. It is also wasting a lot of tax payer money and does not reduce crime or repeat offenses.
The US overpays for a punitive justice system that is not working for inmates or society.
But carry on defending an approach that is not working and costs a fortune -
“ The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results” – Albert Einstein
Your kind of thinking is why violent repeat offenders are on tbe streets to rape and kill innocent victims. Undoubtedly, you are a proponent of low bail, no bail, and lenient sentencing with no concern for innocent victims.
Don’t let facts or evidence get in the way of your rigid black and white thinking …
Sure... We could ask innocent victims about their experiences, but many of them are dead or suffering from extreme mental health issues related to trauma thanks to your "flexibie thinking"...We get who matters most to you, and it's not the innocent victims.
The people murdered by the M brothers were the opposite of innocent victims - they were the people who were supposed to protect the brothers who sexual psychologically and emotionally abused them. The mother enabled the abuse.
No one thinks they should have got off scot free but they served 35 years with good behavior.
Professionals who have managed them in jail state they are not a threat to society.
I have no problem with keeping Unrepentant pedophiles or rapists locked up but not victims of childhood abuse who were not even adults themselves at the time of the crimes.
They were 18 and 21 at the time so instead of killing their parents they could have rented a home very cheaply. Sorry, but they need to stay right where they are. These two are evil, the one wanted to kill their shrink.
Sorry but what good behavior are you referring to here??
Erik was not a good prisoner, he even admitted yesterday that he made a lot of mistakes the last over-three decades in jail!
He said at the time he thought that he was never going to get out so that he didn’t really think of consequences for his bad actions at the time.
He says now that he has a chance at freedom he is set on doing the right thing and following a good path to be a better man.
I say a little too late.
He asked people on the outs to lie for him in court as well as ran a tax scam with a gang of prisoners from prison.
Is that what constitutes “good behavior” in prison??
Most of us would be acting out if we had been sexually molested by our fathers.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}