I'll answer your first question. The second question I'll defer, since I'm not, quite frankly, aware of the systems in Europe.
Much of sentencing and when people are released is based on public perceptions and public climate—quite frankly, the political climate. With respect, I would suggest that we're in a political climate where it's difficult for people to get released. Although the board certainly makes its decision on a case-by-case basis, I can't say that they would be immune to realizing what the public opinion is.
With respect to your first question, which I'm more comfortable answering, you have to note that there's no discretion in the sentencing. If a person is convicted of first-degree murder, it is life. It's not a matter of reasonable doubt. It's in front of a jury. The jury is not instructed as to what consequences occur should there be a conviction.
With respect to the slight amount of discretion, if it's a second-degree murder conviction and the judge can impose anywhere between 10 and 25 years of parole ineligibility, I suggest it's on basic sentencing principles that judges are instructed and taught not to take that into account. It's the crime that fits the parole ineligibility. If the particular heinous crime is above and beyond, if you will, a second-degree murder conviction, the person is looking at greater than 10 years. The parole ineligibility--that's what the judges look at. I would suggest that you do not look at the fact that this person may not get out because there's no faint hope anymore.