Another manifestly unjust!

The law is having an impact despite the fact so many judges are reluctant to impose the third strike penalty of maximum sentence without parole.

Let’s look at the case of George Pomee.

  1. 1st strike: two aggravated robberies in November 2013. Given 23 months jail.
  2. 2nd strike: another aggravated robbery in April 2015 (so he must have been out on parole). Given 16 months jail which would have been without parole.
  3. 3rd strike: Two more aggravated robberies in August 2017, so would have been very soon after release.

All the aggravated robberies had violence and the last one a gun and threatening to kill. I understand 16 convictions in total by age 24.

The judge said that if not for the three strikes law he would have given him six years and three months prison with parole eligibility in three years and one month.

Ideally he would have got 14 years with no parole but the judge said this would be manifestly unjust. I don’t think so as the offender has shown a pattern of the same offending soon after release.

But even with the judge refusing to give the full third strike, the offender still gets a 14 year jail sentence with no parole eligibility for five and a half years years.

So thanks to the three strikes law his parole eligibility is 66 months instead of 37 months.

And if he doesn’t get parole we’re safe from him for 14 years instead of six years and three months.

Comments (70)

Login to comment or vote

Add a Comment

%d bloggers like this: