Display:
Actually, he is not allowed to talk publicly about the crime, because of his parole (see Action Directe's Jean Marc Rouillan sent back to jail after returning too openly to politics. What are your opinions on that ?).

And I'm not so sure he'd have got a shorter sentence in France. I have the (maybe wrong) impressions that Central and Eastern Europe doesn't have harsh penalties (like life without parole, or even life terms) for murders and the kind. I might be wrong on that, though.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Mon Nov 17th, 2008 at 07:48:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There are life terms for murder, even life without parole (though usually the President can still give parole). Check Wikipedia.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Nov 17th, 2008 at 07:57:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In France, he would have got mitigating circumstances from the fact that they were stoned, for one, and he would never have been tried for deliberate homicide (that's the main thing). But Lithuania had no concept of involuntary homicide.

Now, he doesn't need to speak about the crime proper to deliver a message of rehabilitation, of no-one being above nasty impulses, of the need to adress your weaknesses lest they take control of you... Besides, I doubt he'd be sent back for saying something like "not a day passes when I am not terribly sorry", or "there is no greater horror that a man can do than hurting someone who trusts him fully".
The problem with Rouillan was that, while not allowed to speak about it, he very strongly hinted that he'd happily do it again (having said that, I believe that he should be allowed to say it -but then he should also respect the terms of his parole).

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Mon Nov 17th, 2008 at 07:58:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series