Pistorius Out On Parole After Less Than a Year Behind Bars...

[Flying Pig]

I'm not particularly sure what good making Pistorius stay in prison would do. We put people in prison to physically stop them from reoffending, to give them a punishment that makes them think twice about reoffending in the future, to scare others into deciding not to commit the same crime, and to put them in an environment where they can learn skills and attitudes that will encourage them to be law-abiding when they get out. None of those apply here. Unless you want to throw out the verdict of the court (which is neither here nor there: whatever you think of it, you cannot expect the South African legal system to proceed on the assumption that its own sentence was undeserved!), none of those apply here: nobody (by definition) is contemplating accidentally killing their girlfriend by mistaking them for a robber, and Pistorius is if anything less likely than your average man on the street to commit such a crime again.

So, why put him in prison? We use prison as a kind of metaphor - lots of people in prison means we're being 'tough on crime', and that's a Good Thing. When they're in prison, they're supposed to Suffer, because bad people suffering is a good thing. Whether it is actually achieving anything for society, like (say) reducing the number of people committing crimes, is hardly ever mentioned.

 

[warpus]

A prison should be mainly for rehabilitation and to keep violent offenders away from the rest of society, but.. I'd rather he stay in jail rather than be under house arrest. That seems like a bit of a copout

 

[BvBPL]

Not making any comments about the reprehensible criminal justice system which you now even claim to play some sort of a role is hardly rationalized by remaining completely silent as a supposed "demonstration" of "respect" for those very institutions.

The District of Columbia, and NYC if I recall correctly, have a nice way to handle bail.

Parties offered bail in DC cannot have their bail be higher than they can afford. I believe this does not apply to people accused of violent crimes nor does it apply to people who have previously jumped bail.

From the accounts I have read, the DC program has been a smashing success.

I support denying them the right to vote because it keeps Tim Allen from voting.

If we could amend restoration laws such that they do not apply to Tim Allen then I would be wholly in favor of them.

If this is what complete silence looks like to you then please make an appointment with an optometrist.

(Omitted are one informational post, posts about Robert McCulloch, and posts from this thread. I also only went back one month.)

Specifically to your statement, the cautious nature in which I post on this subject is completely justified by my professional responsibilities.

Plus, I don't think that many people here would be that interested in talking about how Riker's is limited physical contact between prisoners and visitors, how Massachusetts has enacted an anti-shackling law for pregnant women and women in labor, or how the Maryland DOC has seen a 35% increase in funding at the same time as a 10% decrease in prison population. Those sort of specific topics rarely catch on here, so it seems to a disservice to this community to bring them up when I have other outlets.

 

[Cheetah]

A prison should be mainly for rehabilitation and to keep violent offenders away from the rest of society, but.. I'd rather he stay in jail rather than be under house arrest. That seems like a bit of a copout

Why? Because of the luxury? Because of the possibility of going to the store? I don't know much about South African prisons, but I find it hard to imagine that holding him up there would help with rehabilitation in any way. And he doesn't seem to be at risk of reoffending.

I'm asking in the more abstract case, as it cuts directly into the question of how comfortable prison should be. Norway's prisons are rather luxurious compared to anywhere else in the world afaik, and I'm not always convinced that it is for the best.

But a comfortable prison is good for rehabilitation, and trying to decide on a "just right" level of comfort is tricky.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So, why put him in prison? We use prison as a kind of metaphor - lots of people in prison means we're being 'tough on crime', and that's a Good Thing. When they're in prison, they're supposed to Suffer, because bad people suffering is a good thing. Whether it is actually achieving anything for society, like (say) reducing the number of people committing crimes, is hardly ever mentioned.

Cheetah, this quote addresses what you just said, and the boldest part is critical.

Because bad people suffering are...people. If it is demonstrably necessary for rehabilitation, then there is a result to consider. But if we are using it as some sort of demonstration of "tough on crime" or in support of some unproven "common sense" theory that it somehow accomplishes something then we need to step back and be mindful that no one can make people suffer, even bad people, without some consequence to themselves.

 

[warpus]

Why? Because of the luxury?

In some cases it makes sense, but in this case.. keep him in jail or release him. I don't understand this need to have something in between.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

In some cases it makes sense, but in this case.. keep him in jail or release him. I don't understand this need to have something in between.

Honest truth from experience...prison, and everything I did therein, made me a less orderly citizen. That isn't true of everyone, by any means. Some guys got their GED in prison when it is unlikely they ever would have otherwise, and some learned the basics of having a job when they had never had one and such. But it was the truth for me, mostly because until I went to prison I had never actually met a criminal, other than myself (I don't consider the basic dope user, or even the small time peddler, a genuine criminal).

On the other hand, I spent two months in a halfway house and two months on home confinement, and then three years under supervision, and all of that made me a more orderly citizen. It made more orderly citizens out of everyone who was participating, as far as I could tell. Now, being orderly citizens may or may not be a universally good thing, and for those who consider it a good thing the results may be disappointingly impermanent in some, or even many, cases...but in terms of the stated goal of rehabilitation it certainly worked better than incarceration.

 

[JollyRoger]

Until the state wins its appeal and achieves a conviction on a tougher charge, I fail to see the problem here.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Pistorius release is a good day for wife-killers everywhere

Good news this week for any would-be wife beaters and girlfriend killers. Oscar Pistorius was released from jail after spending just 12 months behind bars for shooting four bullets through a toilet door into his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. The Paralympian will serve out the rest of his five-year sentence at his uncle’s decidedly unpenitential mansion in Pretoria.

This case has been dismaying from the start, when an athlete who was known for temper tantrums on the track if things didn’t go his way, failed to provide anything approaching a credible explanation for how he had mistaken Reeva for a burglar. What Pistorius calls “the devastating accident” looked remarkably like a frightened young woman locking herself in a loo to get away from her angry partner.

The paltry time Pistorius spent behind bars is an insult to victims of domestic violence and a shameful reflection on justice in South Africa where three women are killed by their partner every single day.

Pistorius’s parole conditions state that he “must undergo psychotherapy and is not allowed to own a gun”. What a crying shame those conditions were not imposed on the reckless, hotheaded athlete *before* he murdered Reeva Steenkamp.

After an apparent 3 AM argument with his girlfriend, she grabbed her cell phone and locked herself in the incredibly tiny toilet section of their bathroom. He then attacked the door with a cricket bat, and then shot through it 4 times knowing full well that his bullets had to have struck her.

She even screamed loud enough for the neighbors to hear before he murdered her in cold blood:

'Screams heard'

Prosecution witnesses - including one who lives on the nearby Silver Stream Estate - have testified to hearing a woman scream followed by gun shots, but the defence disputes their testimony, saying the only scream came from Mr Pistorius - after he had fired.

This is far worse than the OJ Simpson trial. It speaks volumes about our society that one celebrity murder was tracked by everybody in great detail, but the other case was largely ignored in the US.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Following a quick review by the supreme court of a Florida basement, the court's decision has been overturned. Film at eleven.

 

[JollyRoger]

Can we get this guy to date Nancy Grace?

 

[Evie]

Following a quick review by the supreme court of a Florida basement, the court's decision has been overturned. Film at eleven.

You're my hero for the next ten minutes or so.

 

[chijohnaok]

Following a quick review by the supreme court of a Florida basement, the court's decision has been overturned. Film at eleven.

I've lived in Florida for 15 years now and have yet to see my first basement here.

 

[warpus]

Honest truth from experience...prison, and everything I did therein, made me a less orderly citizen.

To be fair the jails in the U.S. are much different from those in other parts of the west.

 

[Zelig]

I'm not particularly sure what good making Pistorius stay in prison would do. We put people in prison to physically stop them from reoffending, to give them a punishment that makes them think twice about reoffending in the future, to scare others into deciding not to commit the same crime, and to put them in an environment where they can learn skills and attitudes that will encourage them to be law-abiding when they get out. None of those apply here. Unless you want to throw out the verdict of the court (which is neither here nor there: whatever you think of it, you cannot expect the South African legal system to proceed on the assumption that its own sentence was undeserved!), none of those apply here: nobody (by definition) is contemplating accidentally killing their girlfriend by mistaking them for a robber, and Pistorius is if anything less likely than your average man on the street to commit such a crime again.

So, why put him in prison? We use prison as a kind of metaphor - lots of people in prison means we're being 'tough on crime', and that's a Good Thing. When they're in prison, they're supposed to Suffer, because bad people suffering is a good thing. Whether it is actually achieving anything for society, like (say) reducing the number of people committing crimes, is hardly ever mentioned.

My views exactly, but they're not very popular.

 

[Silurian]

Well it looks like he will be going back to prison for another 15 years or so.

From BBC

Oscar Pistorius verdict changed to murder

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-34993002

 

[Yeekim]

I'm not particularly sure what good making Pistorius stay in prison would do. We put people in prison to /.../ scare others into deciding not to commit the same crime. None of those apply here.

Why doesn't this apply?

 

[Flying Pig]

The situation was so specific (and unpremeditated) that nobody (least of all Pistorius) is going to find themself in that situation again. Admittedly, it might deter somebody plotting to murder his wife, who independently thought up exactly that plan to get away with it, who will now be trying to find another cunning idea. However, it doesn't compare with (eg.) drunk driving, where many people regularly find themselves in a position where they have to apply willpower not to do it. How many people are going to find themselves suspecting that a burglar is in their bathroom and contemplating whether to shoot at the door?

 

[Yeekim]

I don't think we need to consider the specifics of the situation to quite such a detail.

Manslaughter happens frequently enough.

 

[Flying Pig]

The whole point of 'manslaughter' as a category, though, is that it involves consequences which were not obvious at the time - and, I would argue, that it is pretty nebulous. The deterrence argument is weaker for 'crimes' where people honestly believe that what they are doing is legal (had a robber been behind the door, the story would have been very different). It may lead people to be less likely to be reckless when faced with a possible home invasion, but given the other pressures on people in those situations, I doubt it. I think you'd have a hard time arguing that it would have any effect on people leaving their children in hot, locked cars, which is also manslaughter.