Irish legal system should consider turning Japanese in sentencing
SOMETIMES the law isn’t an ass. On Sunday the case of an American man who killed a County Wexford woman in Japan caught my attention as, for once, the victim, the victim’s family and society, in general, seemed to have been the priority for the courts.
At a time when Irish offenders are getting softly softly treatment in our courts due to: a. the lack of prison cells available, b. weak antiquated laws and c. weak sentencing guidelines, it was refreshing to see a prisoner not to be granted an early release for a crime which, always to my mind, warranted more than a measly five to ten year sentence, (he was due to be out in five).
The case involves Richard Hinds, the Memphis man who killed a talented, intelligent, beautiful Irish woman in Japan in 2012.
Nicola, from Curracloe in Wexford, was 23 when she was strangled to death by Hinds at the Keio Plaza Hotel in Tokyo on May 24, 2012. Despite Hinds giving evidence on his own behalf in which he lied repeatedly about the events leading up to Nicola’s murder, the trial revealed that he intended on raping his victim after carrying her unconscious back to his hotel room and murdered her when she called out for help. No remorse was shown and the only inkling of humanity displayed by the defendant in his trial to the Furlong family was when he informed Nicola’s father Andrew that she did not suffer.
At the time Nicola’s death shocked the county and the country. One cannot imagine the effect the details of her passing had on her family, who adored her, and how the court case affected them.
Hinds was jailed to Fuchu prison but failed to rehabilitate in jail, even after undergoing a five year ‘regime of classes and interviews’ in a program designed to foster a sense of remorse for the murder. He has also had to endure strict routines and hard labour.
Hinds’s lack of engagement was punished by an extended sentence and this is exactly the kind of ‘hanging’ sentence judges sitting in fancy courthouses across our land should be sending out, provided they were given the powers to do so.
The defendant is allowed mitigation. The defendant is entitled to time cut from their sentence, (25 per cent usually), not for ‘good behaviour’, but as per habit.
Why can’t prisoners who have committed heinous crimes not have open-ended sentences applied whereby they are rewarded for their effort to rehabilitate and kept in jail for longer when they don’t, especially when it costs around €100,000 a year to keep them in comfort. Japanese officials refused to release Nicola’s killer, despite the fact he reached the end of his five year sentence, two months ago. Japanese experts said they only have a ‘moderate expectation’ Hinds can be rehabilitated. Documents obtained by the Sunday World also detailed how prison authorities have not been impressed with Hinds’ attitude while serving his sentence. ‘The thought he could have been out living his life at 24 years of age was sickening to me,’ said Nicola’s dad Andrew Furlong. He said he was happy that Japanese authorities have exercised their right to keep Hinds in continuing custody and hopes he will be remanded in custody for the maximum 10 year term.
How many times have we read reports of defendants who get early release from our prisons who go on to commit murders, robberies and rapes. A hard look is needed at how we imprison people and to what end.