If you were REALLY sorry for your crime...(TW: SA)

[RottingInBed]

Hello all,

I've been binge watching a series called "Kids Behind Bars: Life or Parole" on Ch4. Basically teenagers who committed horrendous crimes (incl gang rape, burning someone to death) finding out whether they will stay in jail forever or be given a chance at parole at some point.

The victim's family is present during these hearings, hoping they will be told the criminals are not eligible for parole. Now of course, the criminals all claim to be rehabilitated (often having found God inside!) and to be truly sorry for their actions. But are still arguing that they SHOULD be released, in total defiance of what the victim's family wants.

So this is my question - if you had killed someone and you were IN FACT truly sorry and wanted to make it up to the family, would you not just STAY in jail (or even undergo the death penalty maybe, if that's what you'd been sentenced to?)

Has someone ever, in the history of the world, said "I did a terrible thing and I've rightly been sentenced to a full life term/the death penalty and frankly I deserve it and therefore I won't appeal?"

Thanks

Well when you think about the bad things you’ve done OP, would you like to be punished forever?

it does rather (conveniently) create a catch-22 situation. You have to be rehabilitated to get parole, but saying you’re rehabilitated and asking for parole shows that you can’t possibly be.

yes there should of course be long sentences, with the activities required for actual rehabilitation. But punishing a 70 year old for something they did at 17? No.

No. I'm talking about murderers and torturers. (I'd rephrase part of my OP to refer to "murder" rather than "just" killing (which can be manslaughter).

I'm mostly talking about people with whole life tariffs. But even if you "only" get 20-30-40 years, what I'm saying is that if you were REALLY sorry you would serve your sentence and not appeal it.

I actually know someone in real life who committed a culpable homicide when he was 17. He was truly remorseful, served his entire sentence without demur and then lived a blameless life for several decades (doing tons of charity work and working with young offenders) before he himself died of an illness.

So I'm not saying ALL killers are irredeemable.

Remember, a lot of IRA members went back to day jobs when the GFA was agreed. Never to raise a finger again.

So it's nowhere near as simple as people like to think.

@LeoTheLeopard I'm saying you can ask for parole....but only at the end of your sentence of 20-30-40+years.

If you're trying to "get out" of your punishment then to me, you are not truly sorry/not truly rehabilitated.

And if your sentence was 999 years or whatever, well, if you're sorry, you will accept the court's judgement and get on with serving your sentence. (assuming it was within the sentencing guidelines/law of that country)

You say parole then change to appeal....which do you mean?

@RottingInBed

"If you're trying to "get out" of your punishment then to me, you are not truly sorry/not truly rehabilitated."

Then by your logic SC should still be in prison because she, quite rightly, was "trying to get out of her punishment".

@HelloMiss yes that's a good point, apologies. I think I haven't clarified my own thoughts on the whole matter, hence this thread perhaps, to try and do that!

I think it's more a general musing about how I would feel about being punished if I had committed a crime, especially if I was truly sorry for it. But then again, in the unlikely event I killed someone it would be an accident or maybe if I was provoked or something. I'm not going to torture and burn someone to death on purpose! (except maybe if they hurt my child perhaps).

I'm particularly interested in anyone who knows of a case where someone has said "I'm truly sorry for what I did. I was sentenced to death and I accept that". Am not sure how I would find that on google!

Thanks by the way to everyone who has contributed, even (especially?) those who disagree with me.

Appealing your conviction/sentence because you think there was an error of process is different. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial.

But once a sentence is lawfully handed down, I think you should serve it.

I do disagree with you

You know, prison is for everyone. Anyone can end up in there for a mistake

But the victims are your own family too. Would you not go for parole so you are out for your dying mother,sick father,growing children? They are victims too and you have a chance with parole, to help them by getting out and moving on.

I suppose you have to remember that prisoners also have families on the outside who they will be desperate to see. Elderly and failing parents possibly, who they want to spend time with before they die. Or children who need their parent. Going to prison affects the entire family, and I think most prisoners probably want to get out and start making amends to their family more than anything else.

@HelloMiss that's a very good point about the offender's family. I hadn't thought of that, thanks.

Cross post with @MeinKraft !

Also.... you think sentences should be fully served

Our prisons are full to the brim. Rammed. There's no staff. People are on early release schemes to ease the pressure

There's no money. Sounds like the U.S system may have more funding

Yes it's interesting isn't it the differences between length of sentence in Western countries.

I'm always really surprised that non-violent offenders in particular get such long sentences in the US. Eg life without parole for drug dealing. Here you'd get about 10-20 even for really serious level stuff. You'd have to literally be El Chapo to get more than that.

And then - Germany - apparently INCREDIBLY lenient towards young offenders. You can kill there and be out in a few years.

Not that I want to minimise drug dealing! Obviously drug dealers are responsible for deaths in an indirect way.

Yes I completely agree OP, although I'm actually for the death penalty so go against the grain a lot, if the criminals were GENUINELY sorry for the crime they committed and for the hurt they caused, they would absolutely serve their complete sentence without parole, early release or whatever. Also if they cared about their own 'loved ones' as mentioned above, they wouldn't have done the atrocious thing they did in order to end up in prison.

Have a read up on Mary Bell OP, it's an interesting case and fits in with this theme.

Ok so let's throw in 'mental health'

Does that change anything?

Well when you talk about the James Bulger killers, apparently Robert Thompson is leading a law abiding life and has been since his release, not a hint of any kind of reoffending. So I’m not sure you can use that case as an example.

I used to do a job where my role was supporting the victims and families of serious crimes. Murder, sexual offences, etc. Overwhelmingly the thing they wanted most was to know the perpetrator wouldn’t do what they did to anyone else. Very few of them, less than 5% wanted the person to just be punished.

Weird as it may seem to you, I saw it brought them comfort when I could tell them the person was doing well in prison and making good progress. Very few of them expressed a desire that the person should be locked up forever. The ones that did, I’m afraid they suffered more. They couldn’t move on with their own lives as they were so consumed with anger and hatred. They say when you forgive someone, you do it for your own sake, not theirs. And I saw that to be true every day in that job.

@MrsMiddleMother again, good point about the offender's family.

Interestingly, in this series, one of the offender's parents was a church minister and he developed a rship with the deceased's family. He seemed to accept the son had to serve whatever he was given.

The most powerful episode was the woman who was subjected to a gang rape at age 20. She had to come back to court 25 years later to tell the court of the continued effect it had on her life (couldn't have children, eating disorder). She was shaking, having to face the attackers again. She was satisfied that the teens who did this to her would stay in prison until they were early 60s.

So I guess I'm wondering how I would feel as a survivor of such a crime - being called back to court every few years seems horrific.

Thanks @EmpressSoleil that's interesting. I've posted just below that, before I saw your post, about survivors/victim's families being called back to court.

I suppose that's one "advantage" of the death penalty - the closure. You know the full sentence has been served, they won't reoffend and you won't keep being called back to court. The downside of course is zero opportunity for rehabilitation.

SCs sentence for murder was lawfully handed down.

Are we allowed to ?

remember she's protected until the end of time.

@VeniVidiWeeWee you know much more about the case than me. I recall the name but had to google it to get the details. So I will defer to your greater knowledge. But I understand she appealed her conviction for murder and was convicted instead of manslaughter. And she had already served the sentence for that. So that is different from the cases I have in mind who are a) truly vile murderers b) seeking to have their sentences reduced

I work in this field op, I'm sure others will come along to disagree with my experience but the only time I've ever known someone to say "yes I'll stay in prison until I have to leave" has done so because he has said he is settled and happy in prison. He knows prison release means licence conditions including attending prigrammes. And he doesn't want to do any programmes