The problem is systemic. In an overwhelmingly liberal state one can only expect an overwhelmingly liberal government implementing overwhelmingly liberal policies. The sad truth is in Mass the criminal is often defended and the victim prosecuted or demonized. So no....the reaction was not nearly enough....however, here that is also to be expected.

Hi Predator,
Are you talking about the reaction of the citizens/voters or the fallout from thre event? Do either arguments hit home with you. Fallout enough...you probably answered that as No, The second argument was do you think it's a viable argument to say that if their judgement was so poor in appointing parole board members is it legitimate to say their logic will be flawed when deciding judgeships?

Both...the fallout from the citizens/voters in general and the fallout directed at the parole board AND the Gov's Council were sadly lacking. A police officer, a man who swore to protect us, was murdered by a POS who was already dealt with by society, problem solved. But wait....lets let him out. Brilliant! If a person or group of people cannot be trusted to keep violent CONVICTED felons behind bars they certainly should not and cannot be trusted to appoint those who will rule over those trials in the first place.

Agreed! Anyone else?

Tom, good for you in blogging about actual issues that we should be thinking about.

However, my concern on this case is more on the focus that everyone is putting on the parole board and trying to blame everyone except the culprit, Mr. Cinelli. There is no excuse for his behavior. It is not the parole board's fault that he killed a cop. It was entirely his fault. It was not the parole board's fault that he felt he had no alternative, where were all the people who came "in support" of his parole? Why weren't they there to support him in his endeavors to "re-integrate"? Why didn't they have any skin in the game for him to succeed since they were apparently instrumental in getting him out on parole?

The heart of the problem is the unwillingness of the system, the public and the media to put talk about the responsibility and blame that falls on Mr. Cinelli and his family members who asked for a concession from their community at little to no cost to themselves. And yes, that public is from where our parole board members are drawn. That public is from whom our Governors' Council is elected. That public is who voted them in. That public is us.

When we learn to stop helping perpetrators see others as responsible for their actions, we can then reform our system to protect the innocent. When we are willing to hold ourselves responsible for our role in this, our votes, our actions (sometimes through inaction), then we will have hope in reform.

I live in hope.

Greer....I think we are infact saying the same thing....just in different ways. I agree that the parole board did not cause the officers death, however they had it within their power to prevent it. The blame does fall squarely on Cinellis shoulders but the problem is that he had already been identified as a violent felon, tried, convicted, and imprisoned.....it is the parole board's job to keep him in prison and prevent further harm to society.

@Predator ,,, yes, I agree that the parole board did not do their job to service to the whole community.

I agree with both Greer and Predator (thanks for blogging). While I agree that Cinelli didnt have the resources to rehabilitate after he got out, and I believe there should be, my question still is do you feel that the people who put in place this parole board shares any responsibility for the debacle?
This is my opinion on what you blogged about and that is I do believe we need more concentration on helping convicts once they get paroled.
Jail is to serve the public in 2 ways: to rehabilitate the people that can be rehabilitated and to protect the public from those who can't be rehabilitated. I dont know what happened during the Cinelli parole hearing, it must have been an incredible dog and pony show, but I just can't get over the fact that he got out.

I do not know enough about the process that was followed that resulted in the current parole selection, so I don't feel that I'm in a position to judge whether the members of the Governor's Council did their job or not.

Are you suggesting that there was a problem in the parole board selection/nomination/confirmation process that resulted in a parole board that would end up not doing their job?

I would agree that it bears investigation if there hasn't been one. At this point, I don't have enough information to judge one way or another.

However, if you are implying that you are running for Governor's Council as a way to directly impact this process whether it be to shed more light on how future parole board members would be selected and vetted ... I commend you.

Hi Greer, One of the reasons I am running is to shed light on the process of vetting in both the parole board and for judgeships. I am arguing that there was poor judgement used by the governor's council in vetting both. I feel the process is flawed as well.

What is the vetting process?

Similar to an interview, only more in depth. It determines a person's ability, intelligence, character, and morals with regards to the required task.

The devil is in the details.

Greer, the vettig process are interviews, as predator stated, also open hearings on the candidates, testimoney from witnesses, (ie friends, clients, family, etc.), background checks, etc.