Allen was a 30-year-old migrant farm worker from Georgia with a criminal history that included burglaries and a violent assault when he sneaked into an unlocked house and stole a 19-inch black-and-white television worth $140.
Some state records say Allen roughed up the 87-year-old woman who lived there, but he was not convicted of assault.
Instead, he was sentenced in 1970 to life in prison for second-degree burglary. The penalty for the offense has since been changed to a maximum of three years in prison.
The parole board denied him parole for 26 straight years. The man's been in jail for longer than I've been alive for (second degree?) theft of a TV. The fact that he was simply left in jail for that amount of time, and that the parole board (which had to have had new people on it in the last twenty years, right?) would continually deny parole in this case just boggles my mind. They can't even claim that the details just got lost in the shuffle, as the case has been in the local news for the past 2-3 years! Simply amazes me that anyone involved in this still has a job.
#2 Posted on 30.5.05 0023.09 Reposted on: 30.5.12 0025.38
Yes, those law abiding citizens who review people's cases and records while they SIT IN JAIL for CRIMES THEY WERE CONVICTED OF, should all lose thier jobs, because somebody didn't get paroled.
No mention of WHY his parole was denied. No mention of WHY he was kept for so long. I am quite sure, with all the murderers and pedophiles and rapists that get paroled after having served less time than this guy, that he must have not been quite the good citizen while locked up.
#3 Posted on 30.5.05 1051.16 Reposted on: 30.5.12 1052.53
Originally posted by StaggerLeeNo mention of WHY his parole was denied. No mention of WHY he was kept for so long. I am quite sure, with all the murderers and pedophiles and rapists that get paroled after having served less time than this guy, that he must have not been quite the good citizen while locked up.
From http://www.wral.com/news/2669296/detail.html The state said Allen's behavior is one of the reasons he is still incarcerated. In 33 years, he has committed 62 infractions -- about average for a maximum security inmate. All but eight are considered moderate by the Department of Correction.
He probably wasn't the best prisoner, but wasn't the worst either. He just did his crime at a bad time, when crime apparently did pay.
Oh, and by the way, he never me the Parole Board until last year, his request was reviewed by a prison commission and rejected. His FIRST parole board hearing resulted in an arrangement for his release. And both stories I read tell us he hasn't committed prison infractions for an amazing three years. I predict he makes it back.
#4 Posted on 30.5.05 1103.03 Reposted on: 30.5.12 1104.15
Well the thing I would be more amazed at, was that the actual crime back then, carried a life sentence. THAT Is outrageous. I am not sure why, when they changed the sentencing guidlines, somebody didnt do a review of the people it effected and start commuting sentences.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE