Step forward for victims
Occasionally, the General Assembly acts in the public interest, and that is what has occurred through unanimous passage of legislation allowing crime victims and/or their representative(s) to testify at parole hearings for the criminals who shattered their lives.
Pennsylvania had been behind the times in regard to victims' rights, as it is in a multitude of other ways. I remember years ago watching relatives of murder victims of the loony Charles Manson testify at his “theater of the absurd” parole hearings. In part due to their steadfastness and diligence, and that of the esteemed prosecutor in the case, Manson has not ever been seriously considered for parole and is not likely ever to be granted release.
He and his fellow murderous savages should have been executed decades ago, but in lieu of that, life in prison will have to suffice. No one affected by his crime spree should ever have to worry that he will be sprung from prison.
Pennsylvania has taken a step forward in prioritizing those who have suffered due to the barbaric acts of criminals.
Now, if only we had a death penalty statute that had not been nullified by our liberal courts.
Oren M. Spiegler
Upper St. Clair
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Beware this Wolf I
- Incomprehensible? That’s Obama
- Reverse red-kettle ban I
- Reverse red-kettle ban II
- Not taxpayers’ responsibility
- Good riddance
- No ground troops