well you know those that he killed... the family's would want him in jail forever...or even death penalty ... I say a institution until an ongoing treatment plan can be implemented outpatient?

now not sure of ...the out patient part ... that would be a heavy burden on someone to make that decision ... for fear of him snapping again... and what made him snap to begin with and is that treatable ...

One more big thing that I forgot to point out about prison, is that its existence, and the fact that we put people into it, serves to make a society feel that they have taken appropriate action to fix certain problems.

It's VERY important, but a bit subtle to understand. Putting someone in a prison is a very different punishment than taking their possessions, or limiting their activities while they are otherwise free to move about. Most significant, is that even if the person themselves don't appear to gain anything from the prison experience, the society gains the feeling that they have a system, a plan, to cause balance to be restored.

That's why many of us often find that we want to see someone in prison, who's only punishment has been that they had to pay money.

Here's an ethical dilemma for you.

I know a man who is in prison because his wife, a real piece of work, tried to get her hands on a $4 million piece of inherited property he owns, by filing for divorce and simultaneously accusing him of sexually molesting their young daughter.

The man refused to testify against his own wife, even though she was leveling a false charge against him, out of moral principle. He's half Native American and his tribe is matriarchal and has a strong tradition of chivalry.

The judge in the molestation case heard enough to know that the wife was BS'ing and the daughter had been coached and terrorized into lying. But he viewed the man's silence as odd. So he deferred judgment for one year on the condition that the man undergo a state-prescribed course of psychiatric counseling.

Not long into the counseling course, the man filed a request with the court to be assigned a new counselor. The counselor simultaneously filed a memo with the court, accusing the man of being uncooperative.

By this time the first judge had retired and a new judge was on the bench. This second judge issued a finding that the man had violated the conditions of his stay-of-judgment, and sent him to prison for the same 11-year term which he would've received had he been convicted on the sex charge. He's been in state prison for 9 years now.

His attorneys advised him not to fight the sentence.

Why? Because it leaves his record free of any sex charge, he is convicted of just contempt of court. Which means, his now-ex cannot sue for civil damages based on the sexual-molestation allegation. By the time he gets out, the daughter will have reached the age of 18 and the nutjob mom can no longer sue on her behalf. No one expects the daughter to sue of course.

In exchange for 11 years of his life, he will get to keep his property.

no dilemma, just tragic injustice

that is a shame