Parole board must ask about original offense

In the Times Union editorial “Parole needs reform,” March 25, the Editorial Board correctly points out that parole boards must ultimately determine whether the person is ready to reenter society or not, based on their prison record and presentation to commissioners. Yet at the same time, the editorial seems to eschew any inquiry by the board members into the original offense.

This view will, at best, result in a myopic decision. In order for parole commissioners to make an informed decision, they must be able to judge the credibility of the inmate on that subject along with the inmate’s institutional record. Thus, questioning an inmate about the offense may reveal whether an inmate is truthful about remorse or reveal that an inmate is untruthful, minimizing the conduct that led to the offense, falsely blaming the victim, and show that the claims of remorse and acceptance of responsibility are perfunctory.

Clearly, an inmate who lies to a parole board on the subject of the offense or conduct that was part of the offense ought not to be believed on the claim that they are no longer a danger to society. Circumscribing questioning on this topic only deprives the board of information relevant to the inmate’s credibility on the ultimate subject of whether they can be released safely.

Joseph E. Fahey Fabius Retired New York State Supreme Court justice and Onondaga County Court judge