Options
Mark Chapman denied parole again.
dodrade
Posts: 23,861
Forum Member
✭✭✭
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28905473
This may not be a popular opinion but I think he is only being kept in prison because he killed a celebrity. He was only convicted of second degree murder and has served well in excess of his minimum term. Unless he poses a genuine risk to the public I cannot see why he should not have been released by now.
This may not be a popular opinion but I think he is only being kept in prison because he killed a celebrity. He was only convicted of second degree murder and has served well in excess of his minimum term. Unless he poses a genuine risk to the public I cannot see why he should not have been released by now.
0
Comments
They may want to keep him in for his own safety.
I doubt he will last long without a new identity if he is let out.
I don't know. There can't be too many people left who are still massively bitter about Lennon's death. I don't really know why he was only found guilty of second degree murder, though - presumably it was premeditated?
Criminals need to learn that whatever the law tries to do, the reality is that not all victims are equal and that will affect what happens afterwards.
He knew what he was doing and the risk he was taking; I have no sympathy for him at all. None. Although, I am happy that parole boards will continue to decide his future: they have all the facts, we do not.
Let's show people killing is wrong, by killing.
Amazing logic there.
Let's replicate the crime as a punishment, and act superior. Brilliant.
Quite. The murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand is a great example of the shit-storm that the murder of certain individuals can cause.
Mark Chapman specifically decided not to enter an insanity plea because he wanted people to know that he fully intended to kill John Lennon. That is pretty cold and calculated if you ask me. He wanted infamy. He has it and unfortunately for him, that comes with a price.
I think because in New York they classify murder differently:
In New York, first-degree murder involves "special circumstances", such as the murder of a police officer or witness to a crime, multiple murders, or murders involving torture. Under this system, second-degree murder is any other premeditated murder.
Second degree murder still carries a life sentence though.
This is a guy who stalked and killed someone for very little actual reason, and has admitted that Lennon wasn't the only person he thought of killing, just that he was the easiest to get to. I think someone like him is likely to still be a danger to himself and others.
Reading into it, he's still not quite right in the head, despite being a model prisoner. He still harps on about Jesus and "wants to start a church with his wife".
It's more likely that the parole board look at the god bothering as a sign that he's not entirely in control.
I completely disagree - he certainly found infamy and is known by millions.
Really? I might go out into central London and do a survey of 100 people asking people if they know the name of John Lennon's killer. I guarantee you most people won't have the faintest.
Everybody knows who sucked Bill Clinton off though.
Thats a very scientific survey you've carried out there;-)
I wonder how many random people would know who John Lennon was for that matter?
Yoko is still very much against his release. I'm not sure what his children's position is but the family will still have a very large say in what happens to Chapman.
Whilst you're doing your survey, maybe ask who sucked off Bill Clinton, too.
I guess it depends on a persons age and whether or not they have a passing interest in the Beatles…..and because The Beatles were one of, if not the most popular band ever, I think more people than you realise know who killed John Lennon…..just like the fact that many people also know that George Harrison died of Cancer and that Paul McCartney had a photographer wife...
And who made the vilest sausages known to man...
Hilary Clinton?
Probably not, no one knows who Madonna, Elvis, Michael Jackson are either.
So many devil's advocate opinions on this forum just for the sake of engineering a disagreement.
Why's that? Surely even those who've heard of john lennon realise that he was vastly overrated?
They were fine. But her meals weren't so good when Heinz/Hain took over the brand.