For example you’re reading about someone convicted of a crime and they get…2 consecutive life sentences.
Or where one guy gets 300 years and another gets 500 years?
I’m not sure of the additional years are meant as a punctuation to a sentence that reflects the crime, or isbthe judge/system trying to cover their bases in case of life extension becoming a thing? (And even if life extension is discovered, that person would be serving a sentence, and probably not eligible or rather able to get/receive whatever the extension would involve)
So, anyone wanna break this down for me?
*Not sure if my flair on this relates to economics, so putting it on other for now*
In: Other
The short answer: parole eligibility.
The details will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but take for an example a place where a life sentence is eligible for parole after 25 years if the convicted person has had exemplary behavior.
If someone is convicted of two crimes and sentenced to two life sentences to be served concurrently, then after 25 years they are eligible for parole; if one of the convictions is overturned they are still serving the same sentence.
If someone is convicted of two crimes and sentenced to two life sentences to be served consecutively, then they are eligible for parole after *50* years.
Similarly, a 300 year sentence (generally multiple smaller sentences to be served consecutively) might mean parole eligibility after 75 years, which for most people is going to effectively be a life sentence with no possibility of parole.
Latest Answers