being granted a parole hearing does not guarantee parole, I feel that at any step after a third of a sentence in a convicted persons incarceration there should be a battery of testing and other evaluations to determine the state of that person and their eligibility for parole consideration.
Rather then a hardline number of 15 years i would suggest that their be a term set by a judge based on precedent, the crime committed and the current state of the offender at time of evaluation.
psychological testing and other evaluations can be conducted to gauge the individuals current state and compared to the person at the time of incarceration, from there after a cooling period after said testing processes, parole eligibility should be allowed on the table.
all currently established practices of victim participation and public safety considerations should be maintained in addition.
Be the first to reply to this answer.
Join in on more popular conversations.
