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.
Just what do you think the parable of beams and motes is about, Larry?
As to your questions:
The Prosecution managed to get this guy behind bars for thirty years without relying on uncorroborated testimony from the victim, so they seem to have made the right call by not including the assault in the charge.
The Parole board is considering information regarding the assault which was included in the police reports, as they are, apparently, allowed to do in North Carolina.
North Carolina is not in the business of letting unrehabilitated prisoners loose on society. What would be the State's motive for making the law retroactive?
Similarly, the State of North Carolina does not need to justify anything to anyone. This guy is in jail for thirty years, the other guy is in jail for six. The fact that some other fellow got punished less does not change the elements of this case. Keep in mind that in Post #76 you said that if he were guilty of assaulting an 87-year-old woman in her home, you would be "willing to accept almost any sentence, including life imprisonment."
The Parole Board is not acting as judge and jury. They are acting as a Parole Board. They look at the totality of evidence and make their best judgement as to whether or not this individual is rehabilitated. That's their job. If this fellow had followed the rules in prison, he would have been out ten years ago. Unfortunately for him, he keeps giving the Parole Board reasons to believe that he still belongs behind bars.