Life sentence parole.

political analyst

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40019975.html

Kathleen Chada, the mother of two boys killed by their father almost seven years ago, has said she fears new legislation which would extend the jail term a prisoner must serve before they can seek parole, is “just sitting on a desk some where.”

Her former husband Sanjeev Chada, was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2014 after driving his sons, Eoghan (10) and Ruairí (five), to Co Mayo before strangling them in late July 2013 and subsequently crashing his car.

Three weeks ago she was informed that he will be seeking parole and she has to make a submission to the parole board.

Under the Parole Bill the time a prisoner serving a life sentence must serve before they can appeal for parole would rise from seven years to 12 years.

“The new law is sitting there since last July. It feels like it’s just sitting on a desk some where.”

The Department of Justice said that the new legislation cannot be enacted until the Parole Board's members and chief executive and staff are appointed.

Why have successive governments failed to give judges the power to set minimum tariffs for life sentence prisoners?

I remember that there is a serious question as to whether the model of sentencing used in England would be consistent with our Constitution (RTÉ News, Saturday, 24 February 2018). How?

Why should the life of a member of a gangland or terrorist organisation who is murdered in a feud (e.g. Peter Butterly, who was killed in 2013) be regarded as equal to the lives of Kathleen Chada's sons or to the lives of other innocent people who have been murdered?

Mr. Karate

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40019975.html

Why have successive governments failed to give judges the power to set minimum tariffs for life sentence prisoners?

Previous Governments: You actually expect us to legislate? **** that ****. We got raises to vote ourselves.

A life sentence should be a life sentence. No parole. At least not before 20 or 30 years. There's got to be some real punishment in society for extreme acts.

This is getting ridiculous.

political analyst

Deleted User wrote: »

A life sentence should be a life sentence. No parole. At least not before 20 or 30 years. There's got to be some real punishment in society for extreme acts.

This is getting ridiculous.

Given that parole is release that has conditions attached, it is still a life sentence because breaching the conditions means return to prison.

political analyst

political analyst wrote: »

Given that parole is release that has conditions attached, it is still a life sentence because breaching the conditions means return to prison.

It's a release into society... with conditions. The 'punishment' of prison time is the removal of the person from society.

In any case, my point stands. Anyone who has done something nasty enough to warrant a life sentence shouldn't be returned to society, even under parole (which is a bit of a joke anyway), until they have served an adequate time in prison as punishment. 7 years is not adequate for such a crime. life sentence, my ass.

been a while since a mother killing her kids saw a life sentence hasnt it

political analyst

Deleted User wrote: »

It's a release into society... with conditions. The 'punishment' of prison time is the removal of the person from society.

In any case, my point stands. Anyone who has done something nasty enough to warrant a life sentence shouldn't be returned to society, even under parole (which is a bit of a joke anyway), until they have served an adequate time in prison as punishment. 7 years is not adequate for such a crime. life sentence, my ass.

I'm aware of a case in which a man who was on parole after being in prison for the murder of a woman was returned to prison for harassing another woman - some time after a photo of him was published in a tabloid.

donegal_man

Deleted User wrote: »

been a while since a mother killing her kids saw a life sentence hasnt it

True but irrelevant to the subject of how long someone who has received a life sentence should serve before being considered eligible for parole.
Personally I do believe judges should be able to impose a minimum tariff that must be served before being considered and seven years is too short a term for double murder.

political analyst

https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2019/1020/1084579-prisoners-ireland-life-sentences/

Opinion: one in every nine prisoners in Ireland is serving a life sentence and the number of lifers increased by 158% between 2001 and 2017

1 in 9 doesn't sound like a huge proportion of the number of prisoners in this country given that those prisoners who are serving fixed-term sentences are scheduled to be released eventually.

ohnonotgmail

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2019/1020/1084579-prisoners-ireland-life-sentences/



1 in 9 doesn't sound like a huge proportion of the number of prisoners in this country given that those prisoners who are serving fixed-term sentences are scheduled to be released eventually.

one of highest levels of prisoners serving life sentences in europe.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30915065.html

the average time served by life sentence prisoners is 18 years.

political analyst

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

one of highest levels of prisoners serving life sentences in europe.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30915065.html

the average time served by life sentence prisoners is 18 years.

What I don't understand is the failure to legislate to give judges the power to set life sentence tariffs.

Given that the public want murderers to be in prison for many years, how can there not be the political will to do it?

After all, successful cases have been taken against political involvement in parole decisions in Britain under the European Convention on Human rights.

suicide_circus

Why are we paroling people sentenced to LIFE in prison after 7 or even 12 years? Total slap in the face to victims.

ohnonotgmail

political analyst wrote: »

What I don't understand is the failure to legislate to give judges the power to set life sentence tariffs.

Given that the public want murderers to be in prison for many years, how can there not be the political will to do it?

After all, successful cases have been taken against political involvement in parole decisions in Britain under the European Convention on Human rights.

while i agree that they should increase the minimum term the reality is that nobody is getting out after 7 years.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

Given that parole is release that has conditions attached, it is still a life sentence because breaching the conditions means return to prison.

Ah great, so. They are allowed out of prison..But still really a life sentence..

I’ll sleep much better now knowing this..

CrabRevolution

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

one of highest levels of prisoners serving life sentences in europe.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30915065.html

the average time served by life sentence prisoners is 18 years.

That's not really correct though; the longest serving cases aren't included in the figure since they're still in jail. Similar with prisoners who die in jail e.g. Geoffrey Evans died after 34 years in prison so his figure won't be included in that average.

ohnonotgmail

CrabRevolution wrote: »

That's not really correct though; the longest serving cases aren't included in the figure since they're still in jail. Similar with prisoners who die in jail e.g. Geoffrey Evans died after 34 years in prison so his figure won't be included in that average.

the average time served by life sentence prisoners at time of release is 18 years. Better?

L1011

suicide_circus wrote: »

Why are we paroling people sentenced to LIFE in prison after 7 or even 12 years? Total slap in the face to victims.

Generally, we aren't, though; as the other figures given in this thread show.

Its just there is a rarely used option to do so

The average time served before release is increasing over time also - you had people doing 15 years for capital murder in the past for instance.

suicide_circus

L1011 wrote: »

Generally, we aren't, though; as the other figures given in this thread show.

Its just there is a rarely used option to do so

The average time served before release is increasing over time also - you had people doing 15 years for capital murder in the past for instance.

Ok well thats good

IAmTheReign

suicide_circus wrote: »

Why are we paroling people sentenced to LIFE in prison after 7 or even 12 years? Total slap in the face to victims.

Because under Irish law there is very broad definition of murder and it comes with a mandatory life sentence. There is no option under Irish law to convict under a lighter sentence where there was no intent to kill, so crimes that in other countries would be considered manslaughter would result in a murder conviction.

The change to the law that's asking to get rushed through would actually remove the mandatory life sentence for a murder charge, meaning murderers could theoretically get an even shorter sentence than 7 years.

Gregor Samsa

As others have mentioned, even though one can apply for parole after 7 years, the reality is that no-one serving a life sentence gets it first time. Those serving life sentences (or sentences more than 10 years) can only apply every 3 years. I don't think that anyone serving a life sentence has got parole on their second application (10 years) any time recently either, so you're looking at a practical minimum of 13 years before being actually considered. As L1011 said, of the prisoners serving life sentences who have been released, the average sentence served in prison is approximately 18 years (and the trend seems to be upwards).

Also, it's the Minister of Justice that makers the determination to grant parole. The Parole Board only advises. For general crimes, the Minister probably just rubber stamps what the Board suggests, but for high profile murders, they're bound to take the public perception into account.

It would be good to see the law making it official, and I'm sure it's harrowing for Kathleen Chada to have to make a submission opposing it after only 7 short years, but in practical terms, this law will make little difference to the amount of time lifers spend in prison.

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

Ah great, so. They are allowed out of prison..But still really a life sentence..

I’ll sleep much better now knowing this..

Not all of them. John Shaw and Geoffrey Evans were never released. Many convicted murderers who've been released on parole pose no risk to the public. One condition of release is avoiding contact with the relatives of the victims.

political analyst

IAmTheReign wrote: »

Because under Irish law there is very broad definition of murder and it comes with a mandatory life sentence. There is no option under Irish law to convict under a lighter sentence where there was no intent to kill, so crimes that in other countries would be considered manslaughter would result in a murder conviction.

The change to the law that's asking to get rushed through would actually remove the mandatory life sentence for a murder charge, meaning murderers could theoretically get an even shorter sentence than 7 years.

But doesn't the mandatory life sentence remain under the new law that puts the Parole Board on a statutory footing, given that murderers will be allowed to apply for parole 12 years into the life sentence?

political analyst

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

one of highest levels of prisoners serving life sentences in europe.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30915065.html

the average time served by life sentence prisoners is 18 years.

In some cases where people who caused deaths in violent incidents are charged with murder, juries have convicted on the charge of manslaughter instead - even where death was caused by stabbing.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

Not all of them. John Shaw and Geoffrey Evans were never released. Many convicted murderers who've been released on parole pose no risk to the public. One condition of release is avoiding contact with the relatives of the victims.

I realize that some lifers spend more time behind bars than others..

My point was that some (probably most/many) do get out before dying (into old age) behind bars..

And some get out after very short periods of time, relative to what life should mean..

It’s disgusting to think that say, a 23/24 year old who murders, could expect to be released aged 40 or just above, with potentially 30-40 years of their life to live..

There should be a mandatory 60 years imposed...or just a law to say you never ever get released!!

Btw, who signs off on this “no risk” to the public? Because that sounds like a crock of Sh1t...

political analyst

IAmTheReign wrote: »

Because under Irish law there is very broad definition of murder and it comes with a mandatory life sentence. There is no option under Irish law to convict under a lighter sentence where there was no intent to kill, so crimes that in other countries would be considered manslaughter would result in a murder conviction.

The change to the law that's asking to get rushed through would actually remove the mandatory life sentence for a murder charge, meaning murderers could theoretically get an even shorter sentence than 7 years.

But there have been many cases of violent death in this country in which defendants were charged with murder but juries convicted on the charge of manslaughter instead - even where death was caused by stabbing.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/d4-knife-killer-walks-free-after-six-years-in-jail-30708023.html

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

I realize that some lifers spend more time behind bars than others..

My point was that some (probably most/many) do get out before dying (into old age) behind bars..

And some get out after very short periods of time, relative to what life should mean..

It’s disgusting to think that say, a 23/24 year old who murders, could expect to be released aged 40 or just above, with potentially 30-40 years of their life to live..

As well as conditions attached to release, there are other consequences - restrictions on travel, being shunned, inability to secure employment because of criminal record. Therefore, granting of parole doesn't necessarily mean the perpetrator is "getting off lightly".

Murderers who are that young have also been granted parole in Britain. So it's not just an Irish issue.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

As well as conditions attached to release, there are other consequences - restrictions on travel, being shunned, inability to secure employment because of criminal record. Therefore, granting of parole doesn't necessarily mean the perpetrator is "getting off lightly".

Murderers who are that young have also been granted parole in Britain. So it's not just an Irish issue.

I don’t care about Britain that much. But the rules there should be similar..

The average lifer is released after 17/18 years, yes? That to me is despicable..

Sick!!

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

Btw, who signs off on this “no risk” to the public? Because that sounds like a crock of Sh1t...

I don't think Malcolm MacArthur has a motive to kill again - he has no pretence of luxury to maintain, given he's a convicted murderer.

jmayo

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40019975.html

The Department of Justice said that the new legislation cannot be enacted until the Parole Board's members and chief executive and staff are appointed.

Why have successive governments failed to give judges the power to set minimum tariffs for life sentence prisoners?

I remember that there is a serious question as to whether the model of sentencing used in England would be consistent with our Constitution (RTÉ News, Saturday, 24 February 2018). How?

Why should the life of a member of a gangland or terrorist organisation who is murdered in a feud (e.g. Peter Butterly, who was killed in 2013) be regarded as equal to the lives of Kathleen Chada's sons or to the lives of other innocent people who have been murdered?

They should have doused the car in petrol, set it alight and done the world a favour.

CrabRevolution wrote: »

That's not really correct though; the longest serving cases aren't included in the figure since they're still in jail. Similar with prisoners who die in jail e.g. Geoffrey Evans died after 34 years in prison so his figure won't be included in that average.

You forgot his partner in crime and Malcolm Macarthur to further your point. :rolleyes:

Then again they were the complete exceptions to the norm.

For instance, why in the name of fook, is a double child murderer like the aforementioned piece of excrement even considered for parole after 7 years.
Seriously WTF.

And just to highlight how fooked up this state is, what about another child murderer and rapist the scumbag Brian Hennessy who had his three consecutive life sentences for the rape and murder of Sharon Whelan and the murder of her duaghters reduced to a single concurrent life sentence?

political analyst wrote: »

Not all of them. John Shaw and Geoffrey Evans were never released. Many convicted murderers who've been released on parole pose no risk to the public. One condition of release is avoiding contact with the relatives of the victims.

And as for loads of life sentence parolees not re offending would someone like to tell that to either the families of Nancy Nolan in Galway (murdered by day release psycho Thomas Murray) or Bettina Poeschel from Germany (who was raped and murdered in 2001 by Mickey “The Monster” Murphy 17 years after his first victim).
And here is the kicker he has been out in Drogheda on day release and is due for release again.

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

I don’t care about Britain that much. But the rules there should be similar..

The average lifer is released after 17/18 years, yes? That to me is despicable..

Sick!!

Many relatives of murder victims do, given they want our government to bring in the same method of sentencing, i.e. the setting of life sentence tariffs.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

Many relatives of murder victims do, given they want our government to bring in the same method of sentencing, i.e. the setting of life sentence tariffs.

But didn’t you say the issue of lifers being released is not just our issue?

Don’t want to get bogged down here..

Ireland: 17/18 years average time a lifer spends locked up is despicable..

Same view if it happens anywhere on earth..

political analyst

jmayo wrote: »

And as for loads of life sentence parolees not re offending would someone like to tell that to either the families of Nancy Nolan in Galway (murdered by day release psycho Thomas Murray) or Bettina Poeschel from Germany (who was raped and murdered in 2001 by Mickey “The Monster” Murphy 17 years after his first victim).
And here is the kicker he has been out in Drogheda on day release and is due for release again.

A very serious error was made in the Murray case, from which lessons have been learned.

As for Michael Murphy, he was convicted on a manslaughter charge for his first killing.

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

But didn’t you say the issue of lifers being released is not just our issue?

More so in Ireland than in Britain because our judges don't have the power to set tariffs - except in cases in which the perpetrators are juveniles.

Spanish Eyes

The victims loved ones have to do a double sentence when these people are granted parole. It must be absolutely devastating.

I hate to say it but you'd nearly want to kill them yourself in a fit of anger or something and serve a few years for manslaughter yourself.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

A very serious error was made in the Murray case, from which lessons have been learned.

As for Michael Murphy, he was convicted on a manslaughter charge for his first killing.

Signing off any lifer being released as “no risk” screams of potential error to me..

walshb

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The victims loved ones have to do a double sentence when these people are granted parole. It must be absolutely devastating.

I hate to say it but you'd nearly want to kill them yourself in a fit of anger or something and serve a few years for manslaughter yourself.

Just thinking it..

I’d do it, and spend the 17-18 years in prison if convicted of murder..or less if convicted of manslaughter.

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

Signing off any lifer being released as “no risk” screams of potential error to me..

I didn't say "no risk". It is a manageable risk - a bit like the lifting of Covid restrictions (a poor analogy but it's the best I can think of).

political analyst

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The victims loved ones have to do a double sentence when these people are granted parole. It must be absolutely devastating.

I hate to say it but you'd nearly want to kill them yourself in a fit of anger or something and serve a few years for manslaughter yourself.

Convicted murderers have been told to stay out of the areas in which the victims' relatives live except for medical appointments or visiting their own relatives - subject to Probation Service approval.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

Convicted murderers have been told to stay out of the areas in which the victims' relatives live except for medical appointments or visiting their own relatives - subject to Probation Service approval.

Your post number 21 mentions, or at least implies a “no risk” being posed on many lifers being released...

Spanish Eyes

Apologies if this is overstepping the mark, but I have often wondered why Kathleen still calls herself Kathleen Chada, the surname of her murderer husband. Maybe legal reasons or something, but it doesn't sit well with me, not that it's any of my business, just an observation.

walshb

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Apologies if this is overstepping the mark, but I have often wondered why Kathleen still calls herself Kathleen Chada, the surname of her murderer husband. Maybe legal reasons or something, but it doesn't sit well with me, not that it's any of my business, just an observation.

It’s not at all overstepping the mark. Very normal observation..

political analyst

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Apologies if this is overstepping the mark, but I have often wondered why Kathleen still calls herself Kathleen Chada, the surname of her murderer husband. Maybe legal reasons or something, but it doesn't sit well with me, not that it's any of my business, just an observation.

It's because it was her children's surname.

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

Your post number 21 mentions, or at least implies a “no risk” being posed on many lifers being released...

I said many murderers who've been released pose no risk to the public. If the murder was committed in a street disturbance or was motivated by jealousy (e.g. a "crime of passion") or didn't personally inflict violence on the victim but was convicted because of joint enterprise (e.g. Boy B in the Ana Kriégel case) then I don't believe the murderer will kill again.

Spanish Eyes

political analyst wrote: »

It's because it was her children's surname.

Most women these days keep their pre marriage surname though, the kids usually have the Dad's or a double barrelled name to include the mother's.

Going off topic. I'll shut up now.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

I said many murderers who've been released pose no risk to the public. If the murder was committed in a street disturbance or was motivated by jealousy (e.g. a "crime of passion") or didn't personally inflict violence on the victim but was convicted because of joint enterprise (e.g. Boy B in the Ana Kriégel case) then I don't believe the murderer will kill again.

Hold on..I know what you said..now you have repeated it..

Does posing risk mean that they won’t kill again? Is it just kill you mean, when talking about lifers posing risk?

Crime of passion , street disturbance? So, what if these type situations present themselves again?

Lifers being signed off as “no risk” surely cannot exist?

Or is this just your own personal view, that some pose no risk?

political analyst

political analyst wrote: »

I said many murderers who've been released pose no risk to the public. If the murder was committed in a street disturbance or was motivated by jealousy (e.g. a "crime of passion") or didn't personally inflict violence on the victim but was convicted because of joint enterprise (e.g. Boy B in the Ana Kriégel case) then I don't believe the murderer will kill again.

Whereas I believe that they should serve a serious amount of time in prison comparable with the crime that they were convicted of engaging in. Yup. I believe that people should be held responsible for their actions, and so, be punished for that action.

Nobody knows the genuine risks of releasing a convicted murderer back into society. I doubt the convict themselves know... but what I do believe is that unless they appreciate the actual cost for their behavior, then they'll have less inhibitions towards doing it again, than someone who has no idea.

Gregor Samsa

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Most women these days keep their pre marriage surname though, the kids usually have the Dad's or a double barrelled name to include the mother's.

Not sure if "most women" do that (some do), but regardless, she didn't.

Here's her own words on the matter:

She added: “I’m keeping the name Chada. Eoghan and Ruari were born as Chada, that is why. They were very proud of their name.

“Eoghan in particular was very proud of his Indian heritage.”

Source: https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/heartbroken-irish-mum-kathleen-chada-18206152

Spanish Eyes

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Not sure if "most women" do that (some do), but regardless, she didn't.

Here's her own words on the matter:

She added: “I’m keeping the name Chada. Eoghan and Ruari were born as Chada, that is why. They were very proud of their name.

“Eoghan in particular was very proud of his Indian heritage.”

Source: https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/heartbroken-irish-mum-kathleen-chada-18206152

Thanks for the info. I didn't intend to stir anything up about this, was just curious. Tragedy.

political analyst

walshb wrote: »

Hold on..I know what you said..now you have repeated it..

Does posing risk mean that they won’t kill again? Is it just kill you mean, when talking about lifers posing risk?

Crime of passion , street disturbance? So, what if these type situations present themselves again?

Lifers being signed off as “no risk” surely cannot exist?

Or is this just your own personal view, that some pose no risk?

In hindsight, I should have said "low risk". There are risks with everything. In cases of "crime of passion", most people probably won't even give the perpetrator the time of day and so the opportunity to re-offend would not arise. If the murder took place "in the heat of the moment" then recidivism is much less likely.

political analyst

Deleted User wrote: »

Whereas I believe that they should serve a serious amount of time in prison comparable with the crime that they were convicted of engaging in. Yup. I believe that people should be held responsible for their actions, and so, be punished for that action.

Nobody knows the genuine risks of releasing a convicted murderer back into society. I doubt the convict themselves know... but what I do believe is that unless they appreciate the actual cost for their behavior, then they'll have less inhibitions towards doing it again, than someone who has no idea.

I believe that's one of the purposes of Parole Board hearings.

walshb

political analyst wrote: »

In hindsight, I should have said "low risk". There are risks with everything. In cases of "crime of passion", most people probably won't even give the perpetrator the time of day and so the opportunity to re-offend would not arise. If the murder took place "in the heat of the moment" then recidivism is much less likely.

I understand your points here..

There are different types murders, alright. Not every murder is the same...