"Life" for the Killer

The verdict has been handed down. Thierry Deve-Oglou has been sentenced to prison without parole for 22 years. This is a "life" sentence. The Assises Court of Val-d'Oise included in the sentence a requirement for "follow-up social-judicial measures". This means that the criminal will receive some kind of psycho-therapy for an undetermined period of time.

At least, that is how I understand the article at Le Salon Beige. According to one reader:

- A life sentence of 22 years in confinement means that the convicted man cannot benefit from any reduction in his sentence for 22 years. But in addition, it does not mean that he will AUTOMATICALLY serve only 22 years. Various parameters can prolong the period of detention: his attitude in jail, his mental state, etc... These are the technicalities inherent in the application of the sentence.

Note: This is (more or less) what Philippe Schmitt feared. Deve-Oglou is safely in prison for 22 years, but there is always the possibility that he will actually be released after 22 years. He will be 56. He can still do great harm. The good thing is that he cannot be released before the 22 years are up. By that time, who knows what changes will have transpired.

The Catholic readers at Le Salon Beige have mixed feelings about the death sentence. And some readers fear he may actually be released before 22 years.

Another article at LSB on the same topic reveals that some readers believe the Vatican is opposed to capital punishment, citing the official Vatican reactions to the execution of Saddam Hussein and the commuted death sentence of Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Finally, a great deal of commentary is flowing over the remarks made on French television by Robert Menard, former head of RSF (Reporters Without Borders), who was engaged in a discussion on the trial. According to the left-wing Rue89:

For Robert Menard to favor capital punishment is nothing new. He has already expressed himself on this point. But for him to say it again, and to be firmly silenced by a television host, is so rare and unusual one can't help mentioning it.

Julian Burguier, co-host of the discussion, reprimanded Robert Menard when he exclaimed:

"There are times when we are sorry there is no death penalty."

The journalist retorted drily:

"No, Robert, I do not agree. Nothing justifies the taking of a life. Thank you Robert."

Rue89 closes by saying that the honor of the TV station was saved by Julian Burguier.

Menard apparently was put down. But he could have replied that if nothing justifies the taking of a life, then why is the death of Anne-Lorraine justified by keeping her killer alive?