We’ve written here before about the quandary faced by actually innocent, wrongfully convicted prisoners seeking parole. Please see The Catch 22 of Parole for the Wrongfully Convicted.
The issue here is that it’s uniformly standard practice for parole boards to refuse parole for defendants who will not admit guilt. So, what’s a wrongfully convicted, actually innocent prisoner to do?
However, a California appeals court has recently ruled that the parole board cannot keep refusing parole to a prisoner simply because he will not admit guilt. See the article By Maintaining Innocence, Convicted Murderer is Denied Parole by Seth Augenstein here.
This is a big deal. Could this be precedential?
Excellent! In Arizona, we are hearing from those knowledgeable of the “system”, that yes, they will work to violate one, who is wrongfully convicted in order to avoid the civil lawsuit that would follow a wrongful conviction. Especially, in the light of Debra Milke’s recent exoneration. We are seeing the concerning signs in other cases, of those who have their Writ of Habeas languishing in the courts.
OMFG makes me sick to think you have to admit to a crime you did not commit or took no part in to get or be considered for parole, yet you can be a lifer give evidence in court for the c.p.s & the police on information given to you by them & bang you get parole after the person or people are convicted in some cases never even return to prison this is what we call justice OMG.
i make you right chris,its these areas the ministry of justice need to correct in the uk,its illogical political justice.and it makes no sense.laws wrote by the simpletons!