Let me just say that, at least in the case of Clifford Olson, I would have to somewhat strongly disagree with you, in that I think it would have been apparent to a judge, in the case of a serial killer of that nature, and needn't have awaited the parole board.
But apart from that, I have another technical question that I wish to get to. I am no expert in parole hearings, I must confess, but my recall of the parole board is that they have policies and precedents that give guidance as to when parole will be granted or not. My recall of these is that they are keenly focused on public safety, but also remorse and rehabilitation.
I do not recall a policy or a precedent that would allow a parole board to deny parole when it was otherwise appropriate simply on the basis of the number of offences committed originally.
Are you saying there is such a policy? I thought I heard you say that a parole board would take that into account.