[fintstone]

Originally Posted by oldE

"Revealing his past now, Miller says, will free him to discuss his experiences with at-risk youth and people in prison, and perhaps help steer others away from violence and toward a productive life."

You are right, we'll have to take his word regarding whether living with the guilt of taking another's life for 56 years has indeed changed him. I would agree the fact he did not go back to the streets indicates there was indeed a change.

I think we'll have to disagree regarding the difference between seeking out a potential victim and taking life during a criminal activity. I know the law treats it differently, but in my pov, if you take a life while committing a crime, it is just as bad. Indeed the laws seem to echo this if the life taken is that of a police officer.

Regarding your comments regarding the treatment of rich socialites vs. poor truck driver, I think you're right: there is indeed a different standard. A poor person, if they stated their intention to work with youth at risk or incarcerated persons when they retired to attempt to atone for a crime committed half a century ago would be granted some grudging respect by some. A rich person better pay the family for what he did. It seems many value cash more than deeds.

Best
Les

To me, intentional murder should always warrant the death penalty...so I realize I am out of the mainstream (who find excuses for this and almost anything)...so I will expect to have differences there. My personal belief is that there should be no "coming back" from certain actions.

That said, I think that a man "living in guilt" for 56 years would have not waited until elderly and wealthy where there really was no risk to atone. He sounds more like folks my age who wish they had not picked on that one fat/different kid back in elementary school or unceremoniously dumped that nice girl for a hotter one. A little saddened by their behavior, but not enough to really make any sacrifice to do anything about it.

I think the differences in your example are less about cost in money than personal cost. Writing a book and getting paid to do so really does not come with much of a personal price, and indeed, the author attempts to use it to further burnish his reputation and gold plate his lifestyle. Now, he never has to worry about being exposed...as he has made his revelation a triumph for him. His wealthy and influential friends have turned a black mark into positive...as if his becoming wealthy after conviction as a murderer is something to aspire to. If I were a gang-banger, it would lead me to believe that I could commit almost any crime and still live a fairy tale life afterwards...certainly not the prohibition/warning used in my youth... that "it will be on your permanent record."

A poor person that chooses to contribute/spend their valuable time to do hard, gritty work with youth at risk (as a known convict/murderer) where they could instead be working to enrich themselves would be indeed be granted some grudging respect by some...as they have little else to sacrifice and have apparently gained in no way from their crime (a lifetime of hard knocks/sacrifice). A rich person would feel little pain being feted on the talk show circuit discussing his experiences from a soft recliner during his comfy retirement....while earning a fortune doing so. It seems quite the dichotomy...where the rich guy who murdered someone is portrayed as virtuous because he managed to get wealthy despite his heinous crime...and then is celebrated for doing so and selling that story. I would have had a lot more respect if this man had quietly worked with youth for decades without a payoff.