This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
  • wildpig777 Aug 21, 2013

    he'll be back--

  • Lightfoot3 Aug 21, 2013

    "I wonder what Nancy Grace would think about this..." - Coach K is still GREAT

    There goes my breakfast...

    But on the subject, letting him out is a good legal ruling. The law is the law, and if this is how they did it when he was sentenced then legally he should be released. That doesn't mean it's a good thing. That doesn't mean it's moral, or ethical. Personally I think he should have been swinging at the gallows soon after the conviction.

  • lwe1967 Aug 20, 2013

    Life is life! Are his victims coming back also?

  • Ex-Republican Aug 20, 2013

    what kind of financial compensation would this man receive? What penalties will be brought to bear on the prosecution, if they are still alive.

    Justice must be served, but a miscarriage of justice must be remedied if at all possible. This should make the prosecution think seriously about their actions.

  • Justic4All Aug 20, 2013

    What is really wrong is 1st degree murder during a hold up. 1st degree murder is when someone plots and plans to intentionally murder someone. This sounds like a robbery that didn't go smoothly.. But we must understand in 1975 NC was also neutering people deemed not stable so it was still an anything goes era.

  • cam7002 Aug 20, 2013

    johnnybgood, you being a "law and order" type, don't you reckon that a judge is supposed to rule based on the actual LAW that applies to a particular situation, instead of perhaps polling victims about what sort of law should apply or what sort of penalty they would prefer? God forbid the judge should actually interpret the law as it was written.

  • Igor Aug 20, 2013

    Amazing so many commenters do not understand what "concurrent" means...

    Unfortunately, the law is the law, and the dude has played the system as it was written back in the day. Hopefully he will be a good boy from now on...

  • cam7002 Aug 20, 2013

    chrisnrali, I would hardly say he "got away with murder". Whether you agree with him not doing a full 80 years or life or whatever, do you really think he "got away" with it? Sheesh.

  • madukesellis Aug 20, 2013

    I am sorry but this is just not right. The two people who were killed did not get a chance to live there lives!!! He should not be allowed out of prison at all.

  • Good Bye WRAL Aug 20, 2013

    Even if concurrent sentences, it's still 2x life, so 160 years. Was he such an exemplary prisoner that he earned 130 years credit? Really? And he was 30+ years old at the time of the crime, not an 'impressionable' teenager. He should stay in prison!

    Maybe we could save lots of money and just open wrist slapping stations and do away with the penal system altogether?

  • mattcli Aug 20, 2013

    I feel badly for the families of the victims. What an abject failure of the system. He may have "paid his debt to society," but he hasn't paid for his crimes. I hope he understands that, but I doubt he does.

  • Obamacare saves lives Aug 20, 2013

    Maybe he did the warden's taxes and got out on good behavior.

  • GrandmaEva Aug 20, 2013

    jdraleigh....being dead is a long time, too.

  • dontstopnow Aug 20, 2013

    Even the law in the 70s said 80 yrs was life and this guy has not spent 80 yet so that whole thing of good behavior is just crazy. He should not be released!

  • cyndistevenson Aug 20, 2013

    Since retiring from coaching football at FSU, he's really let himself go.

  • englandumd Aug 20, 2013

    No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. Art. 1 Section 9. People must be convicted and punished as the laws existed at the time the crime was committed. This one was pretty easy. That's a pretty important clause of the Constitution.

  • HANS FOR PRESIDENT!!!!! JK Aug 20, 2013

    Life in prison should mean what it says. What's he going to do now? End up homeless on the streets? BubbaDukeforPr

    Sooo, if it were YOU, would you want to just stay in prison?


    Sooooo, it shouldn't matter what he "wants". He took two lives. Even if you're a bleeding heart and don't believe in an eye for an eye he should pay his one for the two he took. Furthermore, if it was YOU that buried your family due to his acts I doubt you'd care so much about what he wants either. But if you aren't wearing the shoe so who cares if it fits, right?

  • Paladin2 Aug 20, 2013

    jdraleigh, the victims had no chance for life. The murderer has had a chance for redemption for the past thirty years. No record of any redemption was noted since he didn't change the mind of the parole board.

  • dollibug Aug 20, 2013

    There are a lot of NC LAWS which need to be reviewed and some which need to be changed or perhaps even done away with. NC has Self Initiated Warrants and this allows anyone to take out a warrant against a NC Citizen for anything, without any evidence. IT seems like no one is concerned though about these laws which are laws until they are updated. It is time to put people into the NC General Assembly who will do something about the laws which need to be addressed. Only when and IF someone is exposed to such do they care about what is going on and by then it is too little, too late.

  • Lone Voice in the Wilderness Aug 20, 2013

    @Hills-n-Hollers: It really isn't that hard to follow. Our Constitution states that no person can be sentenced ex post facto. If the law at the time ruled that "life = 80 years," then that is what the state has to go by. If a later law then changes the definition of life, it can't retroactively apply that definition to crimes that occurred before the law was passed.

    Remember, we are a nation of law; not a nation of fairness or common sense.

  • OpenM1nd Aug 20, 2013

    How can two life sentences be served concurrently (at the same time)? That would be like me being two places at once. Sentences should always be consecutive; otherwise they have no meaning.

  • f6rider Aug 20, 2013

    I hope he moves in next door to one of the NC appeals court Judges! But we know that's not likely.

  • Paladin2 Aug 20, 2013

    jcthai, obviously the law is not as clear as you allege if the Court of Appeals had to rule on the matter. You should research the matter instead of making flippant comments.

  • SFSOLDIER Aug 20, 2013

    Wonderful. He murdered two people and he walks...makes me sick!

  • jdraleigh Aug 20, 2013

    ...Before the state's Fair Sentencing Act, which took effect in 1994, the old prison guidelines allowed prisoners to earn credit toward their release for good behavior.....

    Sorry. The Fair Sentencing Act took effect in the late 1970's. The Structured Sentencing Act, in effect now, took effect in 1994. But neither of those could have changed this man's sentence retroactively, as some have suggested. The Constitution forbids this, remember?

    This man was sentenced under very different laws. In my view were were a better nation then, when we were not so obsessed with exacting harsher and harsher revenge.

    But what about the victims? There are individuals on whom I could pull the switch, for what they did to me at one time or another. This does not mean that my feelings should be the only consideration. That is why we have civilization, isn't it? No matter what someone did, they should have an opportunity for redemption at some point. 30 years in prison is a long time.

  • aquamarine46 Aug 20, 2013

    Oh wonderful......still young enough to pick up where he left off because he most likely was not given any rehab training, just 30 yrs behind bars with the likes of himself. Look out people, here comes a murderer let loose to do it again.

  • Chloe93o Aug 20, 2013

    The law apply to some not all!

  • 37 Aug 20, 2013

    He must have been really well behaved to get more than 100 years knocked off a double murder conviction. Is there a written justification out there somewhere?

  • lanecc Aug 20, 2013

    I am sure the victim's family thinks this is fair.

  • McLovin Aug 20, 2013

    Sooo, if it were YOU, would you want to just stay in prison?

    After 30 rather stay in prison - he will probably end up homeless and resort to more crime...this man is institutionalize and wont be able to adapt

  • Milkman Aug 20, 2013

    This early release happened because the laws regarding sentencing were changed. The lawmakers had the power to "fix" this, but both sides (Dems under Perdue, and now Republicans under McCory) have chosen not to bother.

    What a horrible miscarriage of justice that these people will continue to be let free after being convicted of heinous crimes.

  • Coach K is still GREAT Aug 20, 2013

    I wonder what Nancy Grace would think about this...

  • Makami Aug 20, 2013

    what about all those people who are getting a slap on the wrist for vehicular manslaughter??? What about the teenager from Wakefield who killed his friend, driving drunk, who only received probation, and then was arrested AGAIN and again????at least this man served 30 yrs.....

  • Makami Aug 20, 2013

    @patriciaarmstrong- "he has it made"????in prison for 30 yr probably no family left, no way of finding a job when he get out and you call that having it made?????? wow you have a warped since of having a good life...

  • Ven Aug 20, 2013

    Life in prison should mean what it says. What's he going to do now? End up homeless on the streets?

    Sooo, if it were YOU, would you want to just stay in prison?

  • kernsburt2 Aug 20, 2013

    Two life sentences 80 and 80 that is a far cry from 30 sounds like he has another 130 yrs to go. Ok we will let him only have to do another 100 for good behavior. Nobody said anything about being wrongly convicted,
    so you do the crime you do the time

  • NotUrTypicalAmerican Aug 20, 2013

    30 years in

    What's he going to do when he gets out? How's he going to support himself? What useful skills does he have?

    He'd be better off in prison.

  • DontVote4LiarsCheatsOrThieves Aug 20, 2013

    "...North Carolina's old sentencing guidelines, which stated that a life sentence equated to 80 years in prison."

    That's not a life sentence then, and his victims got a death sentence.

    Hard to understand the messed up judicial system in this country.

  • ecp1951 Aug 20, 2013

    life in prison should mean just that! the two people he killed aren't getting a second chance!

  • educgrad Aug 20, 2013

    So why should he be released when he killed 2 people?these families lost so much when they lost family members.

  • BubbaDukeforPresident Aug 20, 2013

    Life in prison should mean what it says. What's he going to do now? End up homeless on the streets?

  • Its me again Aug 20, 2013

    the judges should have to house him in their homes

  • Scubagirl Aug 20, 2013

    hmmmmm, lets see 1 life sentence = 80 years; 2 should equal 160 years, so WHY should he get out after only 30? Thats not even half of ONE life sentence, much less two.

  • cwilliams27801 Aug 20, 2013

    My brother in law been in prison since 1978. He is one that Perdue denied. Hecommitted Burgalry. Not murder. Whay can't he get out. "name (Charles Lynch) He killed no one. Look at his profile. go to NCDOC and search offender search.

  • dwntwnboy2 Aug 20, 2013

    Wow, those 80 years went by quick didn't they? Sorry but first degree murder should mean the rest of his natural life behind bars. He is a danger to society and has taken a life willingly. No sympathy, no parole, no nothing but a cell, cot and 3 meals til he leaves jail in a pine box.

  • meeper Aug 20, 2013

    Your liberal democrat judges and politicians at work here. I wonder how the families feel? Two murders and an armed robbery? He should never get out of prison!

  • WIPP Aug 20, 2013

    Life in Prison with the new laws mean "Life"

  • Glock07 Aug 20, 2013

    This is a sad, sad story. I feel for the families of the victims.

  • shawn36003 Aug 20, 2013

    Wrong on so many levels!!!!!

  • johnnybgood Aug 20, 2013

    This is reprehensible. He murdered not 1 but, 2 people and because of the good behavior he earned in prison he can get out. I wonder if the judges who ruled in favor of this asked the victims family what they thought.

Oldest First