If it is not Constitutional, that is a matter for the appeals courts in North Carolina, or perhaps a Federal appeals court. It is not the job of the Parole Board to determine what is Constitutional. It is their job to consider the record and decide on parole. The record shows a multiply convicted violent felon who attacked a 87-year-old woman in her home in the middle of the night.
This person's lawyer may want to wish that record away, but the Parole Board cannot do this.
As for whether or not calling somebody is a hypocrite is a personal attack, I guess that depends on how you are used to interacting with people. Back where I come from, calling somebody a hypocrite is considered bad form, especially if you don't back it up.
Did I call you a hypocrite?
I never used the word, never thought of you as one, and never meant to imply it. I thought your conclusion didn't follow from the evidence and said so as forcefully as I could.
Whether I made my case is not for me to say. I'm just as subject to error as you. :)
Could it be that, as a practical matter...
It does not seem right that the prosecution would leave the determination of guilt - as a practical matter - to a Parole Board. That they might be able to do so is most definitely a fault in the law.
At the end of the day I'm left with more questions than when I started
Why did the prosecution reject the trooper's report?
What did the parole board do with that report?
Why did the State of North Carolina not make changes in the law retroactive?
How can it justify allowing one man to serve 6 years and another life for the same crime?
How can it justify allowing parole boards to act as judge and jury?
Without answers I have nothing more to say.
One more thing...which just occured to me.
I've had experience with appeals courts. An appeal is enormously expensive. Those courts will listen only to big bucks or their equivalent in publicity and legal importance. Do you really think this channel is open to some illiterate low-life?