Apparently that is not the case in the State of North Carolina. The Parole Board does consider evidence not presented at trial. You may have a problem with that, but that is the law in North Carolina. Given that the Parole Board does consider this information, how can you fault them? You have a man with repeated convictions and at least two violent assaults who refuses to comply with the rules of incarceration. How is the Parole Board to determine that he is rehabilitated?
The record indicates that rehabilitation in prison is a complete sham...and every parole board in this day and age knows it.
Oh, they are not to make this determination. The Parole Board is just to declare that the process of rehabilitation is a sham, and turn 'em loose!
As far as your personal attack on me, I have not condemned anyone to prison for anything. I am just pointing out that the Parole Board is doing it's job.
Apparently the Parole Board is permitted to review all of the evidence in the case, including police reports and the like. There is an awful lot of evidence gathered that never gets presented at trial. It looks like the evidence of the beating was not presented in this case.
This is the position of many other posters as well.
But in post #106 you say
Apparently that is not the case in the State of North Carolina. The Parole Board does consider evidence not presented at trial. You may have a problem with that, but that is the law in North Carolina.
I don't have a problem with the law. I have a problem with people who claim they know the law but apparently don't.
AND...
Allen's former attorney claimed that the Judge imposed such a harsh sentence because of the alleged beating...even though the prosecution never presented any evidence of a beating. Clearly something a judge should not do.
Oh, they are not to make this determination. The Parole Board is just to declare that the process of rehabilitation is a sham, and turn 'em loose!
That is a problem isn't it? That's why the parole system is being abandoned.
As far as your personal attack on me
I don't feel that's a fair characterization of my last post. I attacked your reasoning on this case. I said your conclusion could not properly be drawn from the facts. That's quite different than a personal attack on your character or general abilities. Lots of quite admirable and talented people make mistakes. In fact everyone does. How is anyone to point out a mistake if every criticism is regarded as a personal attack?