My concern is on the casting of the die at the front end, whether it's 25 going to 27, 30, or 50. The difficulty we have, voiced at this committee and over the last two weeks since Mr. Olson's parole hearing, is the pain of appearing at a parole hearing that could be seen as either hopeless or frivolous. If you are going to put a check on that—and it may well be that it is required in cases of this nature—you would want to do it at a pre-screening of the board or use the judge-jury option in the faint hope clause. This would be better than to establish a law that will end up with someone serving a flat 50-year sentence with no option.
