|
Post by magellen on Aug 28, 2021 18:35:35 GMT
I thought that he had died years ago. It’s a shame that he is in the news again. Now he will be back in the public limelight.
|
|
|
Post by librarylady on Aug 28, 2021 19:00:59 GMT
I have not read all the posts, but in today's newspaper I read that: *This was an opinion by a 2 person board. *It now goes to the real Parole Board who must approve it. After the real Parole Board approves it, then the Governor must approve it.
So.....He has a lot of steps ahead before he is officially granted parole.
|
|
|
Post by myboysnme on Aug 28, 2021 22:34:26 GMT
Robert Kennedy stopped at our Catholic school on a campaign stop and I saw him, even though I was young, just months before he was murdered. I do not think 77 is old enough for release. My mom is a spry 86 and could kill someone easily if she was inclined to. So his age is not a factor for me. I think if Charles Manson died in prison, Sirhan can too.
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Aug 28, 2021 23:25:20 GMT
I am against his getting parole for three reasons-he assassinated Robert Kennedy in cold blood. He was filmed doing it. I watched on TV as a child as it happened. He should rot in prison for the rest of his life.
Most of Robert Kennedy's children (6 out of 9) are against his being released from prison.
Also his first sentence was for death. That didn't happen because of the law being changed. The very least he can do is spend the rest of his life in prison. Getting out now and going free is unthinkable to me. I don't care how old he is or how many years he has served.
|
|
pinklady
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,529
Nov 14, 2016 23:47:03 GMT
|
Post by pinklady on Sept 1, 2021 0:03:02 GMT
I’m guessing parole will be denied by Gov Newsom
|
|
|
Post by smasonnc on Sept 1, 2021 3:49:06 GMT
He changed history. He robbed a family of a father/son/brother and our nation of a compassionate leader, all with impunity and with full knowledge of the consequences. Are they just tired of feeding him, or what? Given what Gavin Newsome says, I doubt he’ll see daylight outside of prison.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Sept 1, 2021 12:22:21 GMT
I mean, either we have a parole system or we don't. People kill people all the time and do way less time. This was horrific and absolutely changed the path our nation was on.
I will say that after 50 years, leaving prison may be harder for him than staying in. The amount of change he will have to get used to; the lack of structure; having few, if any, relationships; maybe living in a half-way house with guys half his age who are ready to take advantage of him or in assisted living with people who hate him for what he did.
I don't have a strong opinion as to whether parole should be granted. I just don't think it will be sunshine and roses
|
|
|
Post by Bridget in MD on Sept 1, 2021 12:39:35 GMT
this is what I had seen earlier, so it doesnt sound like they are really for his parole, IMO. I also kind of feel like he's right up there with Charles Manson. If they wouldn't parole Manson, why would they grant it to him? they are both disgusting (and both were before my time).
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Sept 1, 2021 16:32:25 GMT
If we legally don’t give special import to a murder victim - like we do in the prosecution of the capital crime of killing a cop, fire fighter, minor, kidnap victim, etc. - then we also shouldn’t give special import to the victim at the other end of the process when considering parole for the killer. In other words, RFK’s job and his leadership potential are not any more disqualifying during parole considerations than the job or potential of any other murder victim.
I’m no fan of Sirhan and no fan of Leslie Van Houten, who I mentioned upthread. And I am old enough to be a fan of RFK. I just think the system should be consistent with parole considerations, and when they DO make a decision, governors shouldn’t overrule it because they’re giving in to pressure from a sentimental/angry/Nancy Grace/Web Sleuths (pick one) electorate. (In this case, the governor himself is communicating personal sentimentality.)
I’m sure plenty of despicable killers have been paroled and few people knew or rallied. Result: inconsistent justice based on victim fame, perpetrator notoriety or public opinion. That’s not the kind of system I want.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Sept 1, 2021 16:40:13 GMT
If we legally don’t give special import to a murder victim - like we do in the prosecution of the capital crime of killing a cop, fire fighter, minor, kidnap victim, etc. - then we also shouldn’t give special import to the victim at the other end of the process when considering parole for the killer. In other words, RFK’s job and his leadership potential are not any more disqualifying during parole considerations than the job or potential of any other murder victim. I’m no fan of Sirhan and no fan of Leslie Van Houten, who I mentioned upthread. And I am old enough to be a fan of RFK. I just think the system should be consistent with parole considerations, and when they DO make a decision, governors shouldn’t overrule it because they’re giving in to pressure from a sentimental/angry/Nancy Grace/Web Sleuths (pick one) electorate. (In this case, the governor himself is communicating personal sentimentality.) I’m sure plenty of despicable killers have been paroled and few people knew or rallied. Result: inconsistent justice based on victim fame, perpetrator notoriety or public opinion. That’s not the kind of system I want. I agree with this, although he might very well have assassinated the man who could have beaten Nixon. Sigh. It’s right to be consistent. I detest him, and cannot wish him well, but rules and laws should be applied evenly and fairly.
|
|