Posted on 12/16/2007 8:48:18 AM PST by knighthawk
The parole panel that voted to free cop-killer Shuaib Raheem afforded him the utmost consideration and respect when he appeared to petition for freedom. And that's a damnable fact.
Not only did the three-member board fail to take testimony from the family and friends of slain NYPD Patrolman Stephen Gilroy, they also passed on asking Raheem hard and obvious questions about his actions in the 47-hour hostage-taking that culminated in Gilroy's death in 1973.
Instead, according to a newly released hearing transcript, the panelists oohed and aahed over Raheem's "remarkable" record behind bars. And they let him get away with lame excuses and rationalizations for his role in the deadly siege. Then they voted 2-to-1 to cut Raheem loose.
Shamed, the board agreed to reconsider after it hears from Gilroy's widow and any other victims who want to speak. Any serious analysis demands that it reverse course and keep Raheem off the streets forever.
To judge from the chitchat, Raheem's sympathetic questioners - board members Thomas Grant and Deborah Loomis - were ready to spring him from the get-go.
Yes, Raheem made sure to apologize to Gilroy's family, to the owner of the Brooklyn gun store he and three cohorts tried to rob and to the dozen hostages they held for almost two days.
But Raheem also denied that he or his co-defendants fired the bullets that hit Gilroy in the head. Raheem claimed the gunmen were aiming for "signs" across the street to scare away the hundreds of cops surrounding the store. He also implied that bloodshed could have been avoided if the NYPD had not fired first.
These excuses and evasions - which contradicted eyewitness testimony at his trial - are what you would expect from a guy who thought robbing a gun store was the best way to defend his family from the threat of violence from a rival Muslim organization.
Grant and Loomis - standing in for Raheem's victims and the people of New York State - listened without protest. Actually, they threw him softball questions such as, "The sole purpose of this [armed robbery] was to get guns and ammunition to protect yourselves?"
The bottom line for us is that no cop-killer comes close to deserving parole. But voting to free Raheem without subjecting him to a rigorous cross-examination piles outrage on top of outrage.
Ping
I’m sure they’re safe in gated communities.
Liberal scumbags.
Liberty and freedom cannot be maintained by a stupid populace.
Parole boards should be required to live with those they parole for a minimum of 1 year.
Amazing!
I’d vote for a blindfold and one last cigarette!
And I’d vote for no blindfold and no cigarette.
How do these morons get appointed to parole boards?? These people have no doubt cost us countless lives by releasing savage criminals back out onto the streets where they prey on the rest of us. Of course if citizens do nothing then I suppose the system will never change.
I often say, how many of the people who rant and rave about crime also vote for Democrats (or even “moderate” Republicans) who support a continuation of the soft on crime policies we have in place.
So... In NY, self defense is OK, but only if you rob a gun store (in itself an amazingly stupid act) to obtain the means to do it?
If you don’t use the death penalty, this is the result. Ship them all to NJ to be hugged
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.