when is a sentence over?

Isle of Wight sheriff investigated over aide who is felon


Posted to: News Virginia

• Login or register to post comments
  

myvid = "194158";
mypath = "/simpleview";




Related

• Former sheriff's aide, a felon, described adventures on Facebook - May. 28
  

The Associated Press
© June 29, 2010

ISLE OF WIGHT
The Virginia State Police will investigate the role of a former volunteer aide who's a convicted felon in criminal investigations conducted by the Isle of Wight Sheriff's Office.
Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli ordered the investigation Monday.
Isle of Wight Commonwealth's Attorney Wayne Farmer's office is reviewing 12 to 14 cases in which Jonathan Burns was involved.
Farmer requested the state investigation in May after he discovered that Burns was helping making arrests and transporting evidence. Burns also was issued a stun gun. All those activities are illegal for a felon.
Sheriff Charles Phelps has said he wasn't aware that Burns was participating in investigation. Phelps dismissed Burns last month.

The article lacks a lot of information. Specifically, what was the felony conviction for? In my mind all felonies are not equal. There is a difference between a rapist or a murderer and someone that wrote a $500 bad check. All behaviros are wrong... but not equally wrong.
Is there a time when we are willing to say the sentence is served they may rejoin socitey with full rights and privaleges or must we continue to exclude certain members based on a past decision? Does the continual exclusion of certain members of society further pepetuate a situation where they revert to crime because of a lack of other options?
A side issue would be the right to vote. Should someone lose their right to vote if they have been convicted of a crime?

Scott wrote:The article lacks a lot of information. Specifically, what was the felony conviction for? In my mind all felonies are not equal. There is a difference between a rapist or a murderer and someone that wrote a $500 bad check. All behaviros are wrong... but not equally wrong.
Is there a time when we are willing to say the sentence is served they may rejoin socitey with full rights and privaleges or must we continue to exclude certain members based on a past decision? Does the continual exclusion of certain members of society further pepetuate a situation where they revert to crime because of a lack of other options?
A side issue would be the right to vote. Should someone lose their right to vote if they have been convicted of a crime?

Thats the big question in criminal justice circles, some of these people have no other choice than to continue on with a life of crime because nobody will hire them or give them the time of day. I imagine it isnt easy getting out of prison and trying to start over and most of them end up right back doing what got them there to begin with because thats the only way they can survive.

We dont rehab people we punish them and I have never liked that about our system.