3 ms·
The Norway example is misleading for people who are primarily familiar with US sentencing. Twenty one years is the maximum sentence one can be given initially,
by awillen 7y ago
The Norway example is misleading for people who are primarily familiar with US sentencing. Twenty one years is the maximum sentence one can be given initially, but it can be extended five years at a time at the end of the sentence. There are no limits on the number of five year extensions, so a twenty one year sentence can effectively be a life sentence.
It's basically equivalent to a US sentence of life in prison with the possibility of parole after 21 years, though the default is that you're released after 21 years, as opposed to the US default of you continuing to stay in prison unless you can convince a parole board to release you.
- Tomte 7y agoI'd expect Norway to let the judiciary decide whether someone is a still a threat and needs to stay in prison. In America, it's governors who ultimately decide, and a politician has vastly skewed incentives.
- mieseratte 7y agoIn what state(s) do governors decide parole? Typical parole boards exist for this purpose.
- Tomte 7y agoMost of them? The parole boards recommend, the governor decides. That was a point in a decision by the German Federal Constitution Court in an extradition case.
- coldtea 7y agoYes, but it will also be far more common to be actually released at the default (or close). Heck, "real" life sentences in the US are handed out as peanuts... Also no death penalty. Plus much much nicer prison terms (very human hotel-like prisons, permission to study, no solitary crap as punishment, very low recidivism rates, prisoners can take leaves -like "vacations" and come back, etc).
- maxerickson 7y agoDo you think your example is going to get released after 21 years? Because that's what they were pointing out, that your example was an extreme and likely not to receive the common treatment.
- miracle2k 7y agoIf the system in Norway releases based on someone being a continued threat to society, which is the case if I understand it correctly, the government will probably have to make an argument to that effect, and it strikes me as very possible they might lose that argument at some point.
- Filligree 7y agoI hope he'll change, but even if he doesn't, he's sure to be released once he's too old and physically broken down to be a threat. That's effectively life, though.
- e12e 7y agoRecent changes means the new max is 30, with a possible mandatory 20 years served. The 5 year indefinite extension remains (but as far as I understand extensions are not intended as punishment - rather as a way to protect society in the face of a real risk of the prisoner committing new, serious crimes on release). As I recall there is some newfangled stuff about "terrorism" on the books - but the change was apparently mostly motivated by the NOKAS-robbers possibly being released earlier under the new "forvaring" (containment?) system than under the previous 21 year "life sentencing". (they'd be given a max of 10 year mandatory imprisonment even with a 21 year sentence).