Natural life should join capital punishment in Illinois' history scrap bin

Kudos to the Illinois Prisoners Review Board (IPRB) for releasing mass killer Carl Reimann April 26, on his twentieth try for freedom. Reimann committed a truly horrible crime in 1972, killing 5 in a Yorkville restaurant robbery. But unlike the Trib Editorial Board (An Illinois mass killer walks free, May 1) the IPRB used enlightened criminal justice principles to release the 76 year old Reimann whom they've determined poses no threat to warrant squandering further precious tax dollars. The Trib is outraged, even giving implicit support for the death penalty as a means of preventing society from having to deal with the trauma of experiencing Reimann's release. But the Trib offers no argument at all other than the knee jerk response of 'lock em up till they're dead'. Releasing elderly offenders such as Reimann who has passed scrutiny for 45 years as no longer needing to be incarcerated, is more than fiscally responsible. It is both humane and in the interests of promoting a just society.

Back in 1924, two Chicago men, not much younger than Reimann in 1972, got life plus 99 years for the kidnapping and murder of a distant cousin simply to prove their superiority to mankind. The prosecutor Bob Crowe was outraged when famed attorney Clarence Darrow plead them guilty, then used their case to keep Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb from the gallows and begin the long, uncompleted march to end capital punishment for mankind (now ended in Illinois). Loeb was murdered in prison in 1936 but Leopold dedicated his prison life to serving his prison mates and society in general. His good works won him parole just 34 years later. He continued his educational and pubic service activities in Puerto Rico till his natural death 13 years later. Whether conscious or not of the Nathan Leopold saga, the Illinois Prisoners Review Board did the right thing. Maybe the Trib Editorial Board should review the Leopold - Loeb 'thrill killing' in the Trib's archives....and rewrite their editorial.