[fuzzyangelbear]

I know you have answered some of my questions that I have, which are many. But one just came up and it again makes no sense to me.

My fiance was told regardless of him being innocent or guilty the parole officer was going to send him back to prison and you had more or less explained that it was "because they can." Come to find out, no one ever told my fiance that there would have to be a parole hearing before they actually sent him back. Instead they told him that if he signed this paper for this program, they would get him out of prison in about 3 months if he qualified. Why would they not tell him that he could have a hearing?

Also, we talked to the attorney and he is going to file the papers to withdraw this paper that was signed. The attorney also said that if he had a hearing, the other side would have to prove that a violation had occured and the attorney says that they do not have anything to go on, per the investiagor and himself. Is this true or is the attorney trying to get money? Is there a chance that they do have to prove this occured for him to be in violation like they say? Or is just "hearsay" enough?

Is sending him to a hearing going to take longer than just taking the program and getting out in approx. 3 months? As much as I would like him to prove his innocence, I would much rather have him home to be able to continue his life and to show people he is not the same person and he wants this this to be all over with.

[Mr. Knowitall]

I'm not sure that they didn't tell him he could have a hearing - the form he signed, for example, may include an express waiver of his right to a hearing. (Have you seen it?)

I don't know the underlying charge, and I don't know the alleged violation. It's ordinarily possible (and some might say probable) that if he goes to hearing he could get a greater sentence.

[fuzzyangelbear]

All I can say is HE said he was not aware of being able to have a parole hearing. My fiance was going to send me all that papers that were given to him, but the attorney asked for them first. I just spoke to the attorney yesterday and he said it was an express waiver form, stating he would not have a hearing with in 14 days. The attorney said that my fiance was unaware of the hearing and truely thought he was signing papers for this 3 month program that they explained to him. My fiance has a habit of signing papers with out reading them first, so that does not surprise me any.

The original charge over 7 yrs ago was assault to do great bodily harm less than murder. The allegations are that my fiance requested this person to steal a vehicle and hurt his aunt and uncle. Now you have to know this so called friend is only known by my fiance because they bail hay for for my fiance's grandfather, they did not hang our or anything else.

The attorney feels they will win in the hearing because he believes the other side can not provide proof that my fiance has said these things and my son had spoke to the "friend" and he had stated he was going to steal this car and not to let my fiance know. Of course more was said to my son and the attorney wants to hear it. The attorney said the person that is saying these things has no credibility and the investigator said there is nothing to go on. There are no criminal charges filed, just violations.

It just almost sounds like this is a waste of time! The prosecuting attorney is already angry that there is an attorney involved, can you explain maybe why this is? Now I am worried if they do not win the hearing, the 3 month program will not be offered and he will have already stayed the 45 days in jail and be sentenced to even more.

I will be speaking to the attorney saturday with my son, can you give me any questions I should possibly be asking? I have never dealt with this kind of thing and I really hope I do not have to do it again.