Editorial: Lenient judges, lax parole boards imperil communities
In recent discussions surrounding public safety and criminal justice reform, a troubling trend has emerged: the leniency of judges and parole boards towards violent offenders is undermining the efforts of law enforcement and communities striving for safety. A stark example is the Massachusetts parole board’s recent decision to release Jody Oleson, who was convicted in 2000 for the brutal second-degree murder of 71-year-old Alfred Fisher. Despite being denied parole multiple times since 2013 and facing opposition from both the Suffolk District Attorney’s office and Fisher’s family, Oleson was granted freedom after his fourth hearing. This decision raises critical questions about the weight given to victim impact statements and the overall approach of the justice system, which increasingly seems to prioritize the rehabilitation of offenders over the rights and voices of victims.
This pattern is not isolated to Massachusetts. The case of Lawrence Reed, who was arrested for setting a woman on fire in Chicago, illustrates a similar failure in the justice system. With a staggering 22 prior arrests and multiple felony convictions, Reed has spent only a fraction of his life behind bars, raising serious concerns about public safety. Prosecutors have labeled him a “clear danger” to the community, yet the system often fails to heed these warnings. Such leniency towards repeat offenders highlights a growing perception within the justice system that criminals are victims of circumstance, while the voices of victims and their families are often sidelined. This shift in focus has been further exemplified by the recent Mattis decision, which allows for the possibility of parole for young offenders convicted of first-degree murder, arguing that their brains are still “emerging.” However, many argue that taking a life should never be dismissed as a mere rite of passage.
As communities grapple with these challenges, district attorneys like Timothy Cruz are stepping up to advocate for victims who no longer have a voice. Cruz emphasizes the importance of holding violent criminals accountable and ensuring that their release does not come at the expense of community safety. The current climate calls for a reevaluation of how the justice system balances the rights of offenders with the need for justice for victims. It is imperative that judges and parole boards are held accountable for their decisions, ensuring that the safety of communities is prioritized and that justice for victims is not just a fleeting hope but a tangible reality. The ongoing dialogue around these issues underscores the urgent need for reform in a system that must do better to protect its most vulnerable citizens.
We can do all the right things to keep communities safe — pass common-sense police budgets, boost officer hiring, and encourage dialogue between law enforcement and the people they serve. But all that is fruitless if lenient judges and lax parole boards cut criminals loose at the first opportunity.
The Massachusetts parole board was at it again last week, releasing Jody Oleson — who was 25 when he was out on parole and bludgeoned a 71-year-old man to death. He was found guilty in 2000 of the second-degree murder of Alfred Fisher, who was killed in his Southie apartment.
Oleson was denied parole after an initial hearing in 2013, and after review hearings in 2018 and 2023. Fourth time’s the charm, and Oleson is out, despite opposition from the Suffolk DA’s office and from Fisher’s family.
Why do victim impact statements from family members and pushback from prosecutors bear so little weight?
An increasingly progressive justice system sees criminals as victims, and victims are inconsequential. That’s long before a perpetrator starts their prison sentence, however truncated. And that’s not just in Massachusetts.
Earlier this month, 26-year-old Bethany MaGee was set on fire on a Chicago train. Suspect Lawrence Reed was arrested the next day and hit with federal terrorism charges, according to the New York Post.
Reed had 22 prior arrests since 2016, and 53 criminal cases in Cook County dating back to 1993 — nine of them felonies for which he pleaded guilty, officials said.
But he’s only served time twice, spending just two and a half years behind bars in total, according to CWB Chicago.
At a hearing Friday, prosecutors asked the court to keep him in custody, arguing that he “presents a clear danger and persistent threat of terror to the community,” ABC News reported.
No kidding. But prosecutors don’t always get what they ask for, which is to keep dangerous people off the streets. Ask those in district attorney’s offices around the Bay State who go before our parole board to plea on behalf of victims’ families and communities, only to watch as convicted murderers walk free.
The latest ace in the hole for the criminal coddling crowd is the recent Mattis decision, which nixes the sentence of life in prison without parole for those convicted of first-degree murder if they were 20 or younger at the time of the crime.
Their brains are “emerging.” That may be true, but homicide is not a rite of passage for young adults.
“As district attorney, I will always speak up for murder victims like 21-year-old Travis Powell, who no longer have a voice,” DA Timothy Cruz said as Powell’s killer, Nathaniel Harbin, was granted parole last week.
“We will continue to oppose the release of violent criminals who ignore our laws and have forever harmed innocent people in our communities.”
Police and prosecutors are doing yeoman’s work to keep our communities safe and to keep people like Lawrence Reed from escaping justice only to harm again.
Soft-on-crime judges and lax parole boards must be held accountable. Justice for victims has to be more than a fleeting hope.
Editorial cartoon by Gary Varvel (Creators Syndicate)
