Medical Parole?

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116
Medical Parole?

Is this a valid reason for parole?

California is considering the release of a quadriplegic inmate who has served fewer than four years of a 68-year sentence for a home invasion, citing a new law that allows the release of medically incapacitated inmates to save the state money.

If a parole board determines that Craig Lemke, who tied an elderly couple together after he broke into their home in 2006, is no longer a threat to public safety, he would be released on “medical parole,” the Los Angeles Times reported.

Under the law, if his condition improves, he would need to return to prison, the Times reported.

The state, which is struggling financially to support its large prison population, passed the bill in September with the hope of saving the state millions.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the state will save up to $750,000 a year in guarding costs if it releases Lemke and an undetermined amount in medical costs.

The board previously denied parole to a paralyzed rapist, the Times reported. The board considered him a threat because he could still speak. Lemke, 48, is the second inmate considered for medical parole.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/06/16/california-to-release-quadriplegic-inmate-to-save-money/#ixzz1PTzZxANq

wlillie's picture
Joined: 09/17/07
Posts: 1796

Hahahahaha. Cause a crook who broke into someone's house and now for sure can't work is not going to cost the state anything in healthcare and other costs. What freaking idiots. They'll be paying for his house, his food, his home care nurse 24/7, his clothing, his utilities, and his other miscellaneous expenses. Damn we have some dumb politicians in this country.

eta- I wonder how much it would cost to keep him locked up in Arizona?

Joined: 06/04/07
Posts: 1368

Saving $750,000 a year in guarding a quad? Seriously, how in the world did they come up with those figures? It's not like he's much of a flight risk. :confused: Medical costs would remain the same regardless of location, but I wonder if they're thinking it's a state savings if he qualifies for medicare since they can't receive medicare while in prison. So their fix is to dump the medical cost on the fed budget and whatever isn't covered by medicare, the state would pick up, hence the undetermined amount. I would say that's not a valid reason to release him after only 4 years.

ClairesMommy's picture
Joined: 08/15/06
Posts: 2299

What I'd like to know is....68 years for a home invasion? Not saying the guy's an angel, but lots of felons get way less time for murder! And sorry, but who's on the hook for his medical bills if he is released? Will the costs be ultimately absorbed by the taxpayers? If so, it seems like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

wlillie's picture
Joined: 09/17/07
Posts: 1796

Wow. These people are even more idiotic than I originally thought.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20110616/ARTICLES/110619581/1350?p=1&tc=pg

Starryblue702's picture
Joined: 04/06/11
Posts: 5454

I'm totally against this! If the state really wanted to save money, they would send all of the illegal aliens back where they came from instead of crowding them into our jails and making us pay to house, feed, and take care of them when they're not even this country's problem!