At age 69, Betty Smithey learned that sometimes you really do get a second chance.
She’s 69 years old, she’s been in prison for 49 years, she needs a cane to walk. Is anybody going to hire her? Who is going to pay her medical bills? What kind of “second chance” is this?
And the reason she was in prison for 49 years is that she strangled a 15-month-old baby. I don’t see anyone giving Sandy Gerberick a “second chance”.
Honestly, I’m not sure what justice would be in this case. Should Ms. Smithey have died in prison? Maybe. I want to believe that people deserve a shot at redemption, though. My problem is less with the commutation of her sentence and the granting of parole by Arizona authorities (which I suspect was motivated at least in part by not wanting to pay the medical bills of an old woman), and more with the LAT‘s hopelessly optimistic characterization of releasing a woman who has spent the past half-century in prison as giving her “a second chance”.
> Is anybody going to hire her? Who is going to pay her medical bills?
Yes, and the answer to both is “we the taxpayers.” At 69, she can claim Social Security and Medicare.
Of course, had she stayed in prison, the answer would still be “we the taxpayers.”