MovieChat Forums > The Farm: Angola, USA (1998) Discussion > 100 years, an effective life sentence, f...

100 years, an effective life sentence, for rape?

posted 9 years ago by WhenGreyjoysCry
6 replies | jump to latest

First time I have ever heard of that. He must have had the world's worst attorney representing him.

"Gold buys a mans silence for a time. A bolt to the heart buys it forever"

[–] thea-z-gould 9 years ago

I can't believe he's still waiting for an evidentiary hearing.

[–] samuel-m-ashdown 9 years ago

He had to represent himself, that case made me angry, the parole board was a joke you could even see one of the white guys signal to another to stop being so racist with the camera there.

I suppose if you take a former slave plantation, sold to the state and then run it by prisoners in a still deeply racist country what do you expect

[–] Sethslvr 9 years ago

I agree!! That was ridiculous!

You get what you put in, and people get what they deserve...KR

[–] Mngirl1974 9 years ago

I'm not a fan of sex offenders getting out. I don't know all the details of this mans case and will look it up. That said I believe life (or equivalent) should be used for murder, rape, child porn and child molestation. I don't see anything wrong in general with 100 years for tape. It's one of the crimes with a high recidivism rate. Obviously if there was a miscarriage of justice the case should be looked at.

I am not speaking of girls who are 17 with their 19 year old boyfriend the parents don't approve of...those cases should be treated much differently

[–] steadyteddy 9 years ago

I don't know all the details of this mans case and will look it up.

Don't worry, it didn't seem like the members of the parole board did, either. Neither did they appear to be particularly interested in hearing his arguments in his own defence. They had scant knowledge of the case, yet were quite confident in their judgement that, "he did it, he did it". It just boggles my mind that these men are probably respected members of their community and probably have a high standard of living off the back of their work; the evidence in the film suggests they were incompetent at their jobs and pretty lousy as human beings, too.

[–] Zero_Wolf 9 years ago

I could be mistaken, but I don't really think that's their job.

They couldn't possibly be fully aware of all the details surrounding the criminal cases of every inmate they are supposed to interview. And there's no reason for them to be since re-trying criminal cases is not their job.

Their job is to see whether a convict demonstrates suitable rehabilitation to be readmitted into society.

As soon as he said "I didn't do it." their job was over, and their answer had to be: No.

It isn't the purview of a parole hearing board to determine if there was a mistrial.

I'm going to start my own thread, since I really am curious, and I don't know what the rules are, if you'd like to reply to me there.

____________________________
Death is the road to awe.