Virginia Bill Would Allow Even Serial Killers to be Released After 15 Years

from the  Liberty Unyielding blog

On January 9, a bill was introduced to let Virginia prison inmates be released after 15 years with the approval of a judge. Even serial killers serving life sentences without parole would be eligible for release. In 2022, a similar bill easily passed the Democratic-controlled state senate, only to die in the GOP-controlled House of Delegates. But this year, Democrats control both houses of Virginia’s legislature, so it may pass.

The bill, HB 834, would not require all inmates to be released after 15 years, but it would encourage their release by letting judges release inmates based on factors slanted in favor of release, and by giving most inmates the right to a taxpayer-funded lawyer to argue for their release. The bill instructs judges to consider factors that typically favor release, such as “support from” stakeholders for the inmate’s release, “and the petitioner’s efforts to participate in any educational or therapeutic programs.” It does not list factors such as deterrence and retribution, even though the Supreme Court has ruled that those are both valid reasons to keep an inmate in prison, in decisions such as Tison v. Arizona (1987).

Such early releases would increase crime and make it harder to deter premeditated murders. A 2014 study in the American Economic Journal found that early releases of prison inmates increased Italy’s crime rate. A 1998 study found that longer prison sentences deter violent crimes more effectively than short ones, based on California’s experience after it increased sentences for repeat offenders who commit murder, robbery, or rape. (See Daniel Kessler, et al., Using Sentence Enhancements to Distinguish between Deterrence and Incapacitation, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 6484 (March 1998)).

Similarly, a study of the London riots found that more severe sentences reduce subsequent crime. (See Brian Bell, Laura Jaitman & Stephen Machin (2014) “Crime deterrence: Evidence from the London 2011 riots.” The Economic Journal 124(576): 480–506).

When El Salvador increased its incarceration rate to the world’s highest rate, its murder rate fell enormously. The Wall Street Journal reported that “El Salvador, long whipsawed by gang violence that made it one of the world’s most dangerous countries, turned things around by jailing huge swaths of its population. The country once known for having the world’s highest murder rate now has the world’s highest incarceration rate.” (See Kejal Vyas & Santiago Perez, “The Country With the Highest Murder Rate Now Has the Highest Incarceration Rate,”  The Wall Street Journal, July 10, 2023).

HB 834 is a more sweeping version of Washington, DC’s existing “second look” law. Under DC’s law, many murderers, such as a criminal who killed two people, have been released, and some released offenders have reoffended and had to be arrested again even in the short time since they were released. In February 2023, The Washington Post reported that 135 out of the first 164 inmates who sought release were in fact released, of whom “the majority had been convicted of murder.” The Daily Caller reported that 28 of the 135 who were released had already been arrested again. Washington, D.C., does not seem like a good model for Virginia to follow, given that it experienced a 36% increase in murders in 2023, and a doubling in car-jackings.

HB 834 would release far more criminals than D.C.’s law, because it applies to inmates who committed crimes at all ages, while D.C.’s “second look” law only applies to inmates who committed their crimes before 25 years of age. Moreover, unlike D.C.’s law, HB 834 does not require judges to find that an inmate “is not a danger to the safety of any person or the community” before releasing an inmate or reducing their sentence, the way D.C.’s law does. (See DC Code § 24–403.03).

Backers of Virginia’s “second look” legislation downplay the risk that inmates will return to crime after their release. A progressive ex-cop testifying in support of Virginia’s 2022 “second look” bill on behalf of a criminal-justice reform group erroneously claimed to the House Courts of Justice Committee that keeping people in prison who were sent there “a decade ago” does “very little, if anything, to maintain safety.”

But even after a decade in prison, inmates are typically arrested again after being released. 57.5% of federal inmates imprisoned for violence for ten years or more were arrested yet again after being released, according to a 2022 report from the U.S. Sentencing Commission. (See Recidivism of Federal Violent Offenders Released in 2010, pg. 33 (Feb. 2022)).

Backers of the legislation claim a “long sentence” is unnecessary because inmates age out of crime by their 40s. This is untrue.  According to Bureau of Justice Statistics, 81.9% of all state prisoners released in 2008 were subsequently arrested by 2018, including 74.5% of those 40 or older at the time of their release. (See Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Recidivism of Prisoners in 24 States Released in 2008: A 10-Year Follow-Up Period (2008-2018)” (Sept. 2021), Table 4 “Cumulative percentage of state prisoners released in 24 states in 2008 who were arrested following release, by sex, race or ethnicity, age at release, and year following release”).

Yet Daniel Landsman, a FAMM lobbyist who supports the legislation, claimed on January 15 that “Once an individual reaches their 40s and 50s, the likelihood of offending is small and approaching zero.” Landsman made this claim in written testimony in support of HB 1325, a “second look” bill pending in the Washington Legislature. On January 16, he took part in a lobby day in Richmond to push for Virginia’s second look legislation.

The same false claim has been made to Virginia’s legislature in the past. A woman writing in support of Virginia’s 2022 second look legislation, SB 378, mistakenly claimed to the House of Delegates that inmates age out of crime by their late 30’s. But the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s 2022 report discloses that even among inmates over age 60, 25.1% of violent offenders were arrested again within 8 years of their release. (See Recidivism of Federal Violent Offenders Released in 2010, pg. 6).

Advocates of second look legislation falsely claim that “long prison sentences can increase, rather than reduce, recidivism.” But in reality, long prison sentences decrease recidivism. The U.S. Sentencing Commission found. in its 2022 report, that violent criminals’ re-arrest rates were generally lower with longer sentences.

Criminal defense lawyers who developed second look legislation say inmates should be released because children of inmates are “more likely to end up incarcerated themselves.” But that’s because many inmates are anti-social and are poor role models for their children. Incarcerating criminals actually cuts their kids’ crime rates. Criminal justice expert Charles Fain Lehman points to a recent study finding that “parental incarceration reduces children’s propensity to be incarcerated.” (See Samuel Norris, et al., “The Effects of Parental and Sibling Incarceration: Evidence from Ohio,” American Economic Review, Volume 111, no. 9, September 2021 (pp. 2926-63)).

Backers of Virginia’s second look legislation argue that “everyone deserves a second chance.” But the legislation goes beyond giving offenders a second chance, because it gives even the most persistent re-offenders an opportunity to seek release. The typical released state prison inmate has five prior convictions, according to Rafael Mangual, a criminal-justice expert at the Manhattan Institute. So, such offenders have already had their third, fourth, and fifth chance.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

51 responses to “Virginia Bill Would Allow Even Serial Killers to be Released After 15 Years”

  1. Second chance legislation should have a significant amount of money attached available for second change victims after they are released. If there is little risk, the money will be safe.

  2. DJRippert Avatar

    How does this happen?

    Let’s look at the patron, Rae Cousins.

    Elected in the new House of Delegates District 79 0n Nov 7, 2023.

    Of the 61,832 registered voters in the district, 19,832 voted. A 32% turnout.

    Of the total $608,872 campaign contributions given to Rep Cousins, $344,900 came from two donors – Clean Virginia and Sonja S. Smith. That’s 57% of the total.

    Off-year elections provide for low voter turnout while unlimited campaign donations allow the very few to provide the bulk of the support to candidates like Ms Cousins.

    Clean Virginia is a PAC led by Michael Bills. And who is Mr. Bills’ wife?

    If you said Sonja Smith … you win the prize.

    A single couple donated 57% of the total donations to Ms. Cousins. That money was spent convincing less than one-third of the registered voters who actually voted to support Ms Cousins.

    Politics in Virginia is very badly broken.

  3. LarrytheG Avatar

    The only bills that will pass that the GOv objects to are the ones that have supermajority votes in the GA.

    This is much ado about nothing IMO.

    I’d much rather see them take measures to assure that innocent
    folks are not sent to prison for decades.

    1. I’d much rather see them take measures to assure that innocent folks are not sent to prison for decades.

      So would I, but “progressives” seem a lot more interested in emptying our prisons as soon as humanly possible, regardless of the guilt or innocence of those being released.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        So if one is not in favor of that, they’re not a progressive?

        1. Not in favor of what? Emptying the prisons or taking measures to assure innocent people are not unjustly imprisoned?

          And I think Lou Reed accurately described most “progressives” when he sang: “I’d try to be as progressive as I could possibly be
          As long as I don’t have to try too much.
          .

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            so if you’re NOT in favor of release violent felons, you’re not a progressive?

          2. You’re probably not a true hard-core, Marx-quoting, America-hating, social anarchist type “progressive”. Those people are genuinely mentally ill and cannot be helped.

            However, I am sure many, if not most, people who lean left are not too keen on having violent felons roaming our streets. That’s why I don’t understand this proposed legislation.

            And I understand even less why the same people who want to endanger me by emptying our prisons are also bound and determined to prevent me from defending myself against attacks by the the violent criminals they want to set upon us.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            we have a far left just as we have a far right. Both the “fars” managed to make azzes out of themselves and tar others….. Every year, both sides seek out the more extreme legislation to flog….

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        “So would I, but “progressives” seem a lot more interested in emptying our prisons as soon as humanly possible…”

        Not everyone sentenced to prison for life without parole is a murderer, you know. One can land there for a simple robbery offense, for instance. I think the desire here is to provide an opportunity to rectify the overzealous nature of Virginia’s mandatory sentencing laws (particularly the three strikes laws) and give some options back to the judge to render sentences in line with the actual offense. A lot of blanket progressive vilification happening in this thread.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          per as usual………

        2. Thank you. I had not taken that into account.

          I will amend my proposal to prohibiting only those who have received a sentence of life without parole for a capital offence – a crime previously eligible for the death penalty – from being considered for parole. But I’d like to require 20 years to be served instead of 15 before consideration of parole for all other life sentences.

          But the proposed legislation still does not address that issue.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            I would have no problem with such a restriction. Right now this bill would rely on the judge to handle that issue. I doubt it makes it very far in any case.

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    The death penalty is final and given the possibility of error, review comes at huge expense. A life sentence is far cheaper until you get to LWOP where the expense of last years adds in.

    Makes sense to “age out” to let ‘em die in the park, or with the aid of relatives, rather than on the taxpayer ticket.

    Recidivism, rehabilitation, appeals, medical care, food, etc… it’s money, just money. Minimize the Benjamins.

    1. Perhaps we should allow those who have been sentenced to life without parole to opt for execution at any time during their sentence.

      A lot of old guys (and girls) might take that route 40 years in, when their health starts to decline and they have no hope of being released to die at home in their own bed.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Why should they have it so good when those who’ve led a good and proper life are forced by some States to die painfully with no hope?

        1. Good point. Maybe everyone should have the option of being executed by the state – criminals and the law abiding.

          Build some of Kurt Vonnegut’s Ethical Suicide Parlors?

          1. Not Today Avatar

            It’s on table this session as ‘compassionate care’

      2. LarrytheG Avatar

        one presumes that whenever one wants to check out, really does, it’s not that hard.

        Prison must suit some of them more than death.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      There may be something to this aspect of the issue. Geriatric care is expensive and labor intensive. Are we going to now provide assisted living for convicted murderers? Would we not sort of have to if they continue as wards of the state?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        There’s gonna be prisons designed for housing older inmates with care needs if not already IMO.

        Some families are not going to want them and some nursing homes are not going to want them and some of them will purposely commit criminal acts that will keep them in prison.

  5. DJRippert Avatar

    Why not just allow the parole board to parole those who were sentenced to “life without parole” along with all the prisoners who have sentences that allow for parole?

    Going judge by judge seems like a quick way to inconsistent decision making.

    Also, do the victims or their families play a role in this bill?

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      There is no going judge by judge. The judge who entered the original sentence is the one to hear the petition for release. If that judge is not available (i.e. dead or retired), the chief judge of the circuit assigns it to a judge in the circuit.

      Yes, there is a hearing and victims or their families get to comment.

      1. DJRippert Avatar

        Thanks for the clarification. I do wonder how often the original judge will be available at least 15 years after the original sentence was handed down.

        Any thoughts on why the parole board isn’t the right approach here?

  6. Historically, the death penalty has been the most serious punishment that could be handed out to a criminal in this country, and it was reserved for the most heinous of crimes. Over the years, my evolving opinion on the death penalty has led me to be open to replacing that most permanent of punishments with a sentence of “life in prison without the possibility of parole”.

    This shift in my opinion, and my acceptance of doing away with the death penalty were predicated in large part on the promise from anti-death-penalty advocates that “life in prison without the possibility of parole” would be an adequate substitute, because it meant convicted capital murderers would spend the rest of their lives in prison without any possibility of ever receiving parole.

    Apparently, they have changed their minds. I consider this legislation to be a stab in the back from mentally ill (aka “progressive”) zealots who firmly believe that the lives of society’s most vicious, violent and evil criminals are worth more than the lives of law-abiding citizens, and who are willing to act on that evil fantasy.

    Whatever democrats want to propose and discuss regarding sentencing and parole “reform” in Virginia, the sentence of “life in prison without the possibility of parole” needs to be left out of that discussion. It needs to mean what it says.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      I saw where Alabama was going to execute a prisoner using oxygen deprivation with nitrogen gas. The least they could do is use helium. Less traumatic for the witnesses if his last words sound like Daffy Duck.

      1. I’m not so sure about using Nitrogen (or even Helium, LOL). I would think carbon-monoxide would be just as effective and probably less painful.

        I think if I was going to be executed I’d opt for a firing squad.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          A bolt. Like in No Country for Old Men.

          1. That’d work. Although for some reason shooting (or ‘bolting’) people in the head is considered unacceptable.

            Firing squads are required to aim for the heart. But again, if I had to to be executed, I think I’d prefer the instant “lights out” aspect of a head shot. Probably a bit more messy to clean up, but that would not be my problem…

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Thus, the bolt. No muss, no fuss. The mechanics are spalling the skull into the brain.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar

            general anesthesia then beheading.

          4. Do we then bury them with their body facing up and their head facing down?

          5. LarrytheG Avatar

            head on a pike at victims house

          6. I guess. If they’re into that sort of thing…

          7. LarrytheG Avatar

            an option….

          8. The Ketatine…

            A large dose of Ketamine,
            Followed by a guillotine.

          9. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Guillomine?

          10. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Thus, the bolt. No muss, no fuss. The mechanics are spalling the skull into the brain.

          11. I agree. But as I said, “putting one in the brain” is unfortunately not allowed as a method of execution.

          12. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Well, this thread went hilariously gruesome…

            H is for Hector done in by a thug
            https://i.pinimg.com/736x/ad/81/fe/ad81fec2063a7639a166d38bebff0616.jpg

          13. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Well, this thread went hilariously gruesome…

            H is for Hector done in by a thug
            https://i.pinimg.com/736x/ad/81/fe/ad81fec2063a7639a166d38bebff0616.jpg

        2. James Kiser Avatar
          James Kiser

          Carbon Monoxide is quick and painless.

          1. And if you mix in a little nitrous oxide they can die laughing.

    2. James Kiser Avatar
      James Kiser

      You are just figuring that out? I have known that about democrats for years. The illegal and the lawbreaker make up their party.

  7. DJRippert Avatar

    How does this happen?

    Let’s look at the patron, Rae Cousins.

    Elected in the new House of Delegates District 79 0n Nov 7, 2023.

    Of the 61,832 registered voters in the district, 19,832 voted. A 32% turnout.

    Of the total $608,872 campaign contributions given to Rep Cousins, $344,900 came from two donors – Clean Virginia and Sonja S. Smith. That’s 57% of the total.

    Off-year elections provide for low voter turnout while unlimited campaign donations allow the very few to provide the bulk of the support to candidates like Ms Cousins.

    Clean Virginia is a PAC led by Michael Bills. And who is Mr. Bills’ wife?

    If you said Sonja Smith … you win the prize.

    A single couple donated 57% of the total donations to Ms. Cousins. That money was spent convincing less than one-third of the registered voters who actually voted to support Ms Cousins.

    Politics in Virginia is very badly broken.

    1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      District 79. So that is Ginter Park, Church Hill, down to Manchester. Not surprised a bill like this comes from dear ole 79.

      1. Lefty665 Avatar

        That was the Briley bros old stomping grounds on Northside.

  8. Proponents should house the released criminals….. let’s see how their support continues with such a caveat….. make them a stake holder.

    1. I think I could agree to that proopsal.

  9. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    Wasn’t the argument in favor of eliminating the death penalty that the Commonwealth would keep convicted criminals who would have been subject to the death penalty in prison for the rest of their lives? There are many Democrats who are simply pro-criminal.

    1. DJRippert Avatar

      That was the original premise as I recall. Of course, tolls will be taken off the Dulles Toll Road as soon as the construction costs of that road have been recouped.

      Never believe politicians.

Leave a Reply