Hey, there! Log in / Register
The Parole Board's decision to release the guy charged with murdering a Woburn cop
By adamg on Thu, 12/30/2010 - 1:57pm
MuckRock posts a copy of the 2008 decision to release Dominic Cinelli, at the time serving three life sentences for a variety of violent robberies in Boston and in Middlesex County.
The Globe reported today the Parole Board never notified the Middlesex County District Attorney's office of the hearing; three years earlier, the DA's office had strongly urged the board to keep Cinelli locked up, which it did at that time.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
I am 100% against the death
I am 100% against the death penalty, but think that a life term should be just that...a life term with no possibility of parole.
Someone convicted of murder should be incarerated for life in solitary confinement. I PROMISE you this would be much more of a deterinent than the death penalty.
It that was the law, the police officer would be alive
Isn't that determined at sentencing?
Years ago, sentences rarely if ever precluded parole. The state is bound by the terms under which an inmate was sentenced. The SJC has been pretty damn clear about that - you cannot change these terms just because time changed and people don't like it now. That is not considered to be acceptable.
That said, the parole boards have some things to answer for here. Just because people like, say, Mark David Chapman are eligible for parole doesn't mean they have to get parole. However they are determining who gets parole doesn't seem to be working very well (although, without statistics on recidivism, it is difficult to tell what the serious parole fail rate really is - some people may actually be making good on it). In any case, there needs to be a review of what parolees are not coming back and which are, and some application of some pretty basic best practices thinking to who gets let go in the future. It is and will continue to be a problem, if you consider that a large number of midlife cons from the baby boom era are becoming eligible to be let loose after they were jailed during the crime wave called the 1970s and 1980s.
I wonder what the current status of his parole was..
Like if he had failed the drug tests he was required to take. I also wondered if he had to take drug tests during his last few months/years heading into his release.
It's tough to solely blame the parole board here. People do turn their life around. I mean, the option of parole is there in the first place, he was sentenced with parole as an option. Let's hope this case finds somethings everyone can learn about and hope things like this don't happen in the future.
That's right. One cop's life
That's right. One cop's life is a small price to pay to keep the parole system functioning in a nice, progressive way.
Actually I do take some of that back.
This guy should have been in prison his whole life, plain and simple. Although I do not know the entire circumstances around his prior sentences and wether or not the state let him plead guilty in order to get parole 20 years later.
Either way, someone who did commit the crimes he committed should have never been released from prision, ever.
parole eligibility date was adjudicated
His eligibility date to be considered for parole was determined in court while he was in prison.
The document above says that
The document above says that the parole board based their decision in part of the fact Cinelli had no disciplinary issues in jail since 1999. It also says the vote was unanimous.
It does not say is the Suffolk DA and/or Middlesex DA opposed or concurred with the parole.
Adam G, thank you for posting that document.
In the article it says they didn't know about it.
He may have gotten out anyway but I think that was O-Fish's point is that no one knew about it.
There is this.
From this article.
The news said two members on
The news said two members on the parole board had the responsibility to notify the Suffolk DA in 2008 and did not. All that does is say the parole board would have heard an argument opposing. They voted unanimously to parole Cinelli. The first place I'd look is at the parole boards decision making criteria to see if the facts fit their standards.
Why no permanent prosecutor assigned to the Parole Board?
With the revelation that the DA's office wasn't notified and nobody spoke against Cinelli's parole the last time, I'm assuming there's nobody permanently representing the prosecution (aka, the people) at these hearings. If that's true, it's outrageous! With layabout lawyers infesting every state agency, we can't spare one or two to at least present an argument against parole and make sure the DA's office and any victims are notified? Maybe read the police report and victim impact statements into the record? I've been to Registry hearings where an RMV lawyer argues against minor traffic scofflaws seeking a lighter license suspension, but we can't get an Assistant AG to argue, full-time, against parole for lifers?
The Middlesex DA said he was
The Middlesex DA said he was not notified of Cinelli's parole hearing. We haven't heard yet whether the same is true for the Suffolk DA. Cinelli was in jail for crimes in both jurisdictions.
The document Adam posted above does portray a picture of a convict who has turned his life around. Now naturally, if they vote to give him parole it's in their interest to write it up in a way that justifies the vote. The document claims he prevailed over substance abuse and had no disciplinary problems since 1999. Clearly, in hindsight, we know his criminal days were not behind him.
Understanding the criteria for parole, and what happened in this case, is probably the best way to learn the right lesson from this horrible tragedy and loss of life.
Three life sentences are what, just a suggestion?
It's unbelievable that a guy with such a serious-sounding sentence would even be considered for parole. Why, because he didn't kill anybody? Well he has now. The "system" was slopily administered, and gamed by a sociopath.
Very poor job on the Parole Board's part. Heads must roll.
Just a thought
Keep violent offenders behind bars, and throw drug abusers in lock and key halfway rehabilitation houses instead of letting them take up cell space.
As for non-violent dealers, let's find a third option.
Jails shouldn't be pressured to patrol dangerous people because they need to open up cells. This guy shot a guard, and did have a record of violence in prison, but behaved for a few years straight. That's not a good reason to let him out. Especially if there's been no actual rehabilitation, IE lining up a job, family help, ect, ect. (not sure if he went though that)
Why is it worse that he
Why is it worse that he killed a cop than if he'd killed anyone else?