Since the article does a poor job of telling the whole story I have a couple of questions for anyone in the know.

 

Who represented McCafferty?

 

And, if she had eligibility for parole in just two years why was she denied a full hearing after two years?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Cheryl McCafferty's father-in-law - that is to say, the father of the man she shot while sleeping - pay for Cheryl's defense attorney? I seem to remember some talk about Robert's family coming to Cheryl's side through all of this.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Cheryl McCafferty's father-in-law - that is to say, the father of the man she shot while sleeping - pay for Cheryl's defense attorney? I seem to remember some talk about Robert's family coming to Cheryl's side through all of this.

 

I have no idea. Just very sad all the way around.

CINCINNATI (Joe Webb) -- A new law and an old sentencing agreement will add up to convicted killer Cheryl McCafferty serving less than half of her 18 year sentence.

 

According to Kentucky’s Department of Corrections, the Fort Thomas woman is likely to be released in early 2016. She’s been locked up since shooting her husband Robert in the head June 25, 2007. In March 2009, a Campbell County jury found McCafferty guilty of first degree manslaughter.

 

Instead of letting the jury decide the sentence a deal was worked out between prosecutors and McCafferty’s defense team. They agreed to an 18-year prison sentence under some specific terms. McCafferty waived all rights to an appeal. In return, the prosecutor did not challenge a defense motion asking the judge to rule that McCafferty was a victim of domestic violence.

 

That decision meant McCafferty’s crime was, in the eyes of the law, a non-violent crime. All of this figures into the state’s calculation of McCafferty’s sentence and eventual release.

 

Four years after her conviction, Kentucky enacted what was called House Bill 463. Among other things, HB 463 created “Mandatory re-entry supervision.” In essence, this gives non-violent offenders automatic parole six months prior to the end of their sentences. The logic behind this was twofold: 1.Clearing out jail space and 2.Forcing offenders into at least six months of supervised release.

 

Because of McCafferty’s sentencing deal, she is considered a non-violent offender and qualifies for the early, supervised release. According to Department of Corrections, Cheryl McCafferty has spent 3,046 days in the county jail and state prison. Add in 3,104 days of accumulated good time and work credit and her total time is 16 years, 10 months and 10 days. That leaves 420 days on her 18-year sentence. The state’s math says she will likely qualify for release in April 2016.

 

McCafferty was denied parole in January 2011 but has a second parole hearing in November. Campbell County Commonwealth’s attorney Michelle Snodgrass says she will oppose parole even though McCafferty will get out in a few months.

 

If the parole board grants her parole, she will likely get out in January 2016

 

So can we say the over crowding in prisons is due to the Heroin epidemic? Not sure Snodgrass is a big fan of McCafferty. We shall see how the parole hearing goes.

Edited November 3, 201510 yr by Colonels_Wear_Blue
Adding In Quote Box

I was able to spend some time with Cheryl while she was awaiting sentencing. I was also able, many years ago, to spend some time with a young man name Clay Shrout, who if you recall, killed family members.

 

In no way are these two people, who both murdered people they live with, remotely the same.

 

I think it is difficult, at times, to ascertain what the effects of certain relationships can have on an otherwise "normal" person and how they will respond.

Good for her.

 

I was able to spend some time with Cheryl while she was awaiting sentencing. I was also able, many years ago, to spend some time with a young man name Clay Shrout, who if you recall, killed family members.

 

In no way are these two people, who both murdered people they live with, remotely the same.

 

I think it is difficult, at times, to ascertain what the effects of certain relationships can have on an otherwise "normal" person and how they will respond.

 

Maybe Cheryl should have left long before it came to her taking a life.

 

I would also be real interested in the advice she was getting right before the murder and who she was getting it from.

I get both sides. I get my friend Roman Empire's thoughts.

 

However, knowing someone very well who knows her VERY WELL and knowing that there were issues WAY BEFORE she killed her husband I can say there's a part of me that is glad she will be released.

 

Still a very sad situation for all involved.

I get both sides. I get my friend Roman Empire's thoughts.

 

However, knowing someone very well who knows her VERY WELL and knowing that there were issues WAY BEFORE she killed her husband I can say there's a part of me that is glad she will be released.

 

Still a very sad situation for all involved.

 

Since you are in the know, why didn't she leave way before she killed him?

Since you are in the know, why didn't she leave way before she killed him?

 

I'm not THAT in the know. Fair question to ask but also an easy one from a distance. It's not as easy as your question may seem to imply.

Maybe Cheryl should have left long before it came to her taking a life.

 

I would also be real interested in the advice she was getting right before the murder and who she was getting it from.

 

Maybe so. Maybe she didn't have a choice but to take a life. We don't know what happened in that house that morning.

 

Maybe the years of alleged domestic violence had already taken a toll on her and broke her down to the point where she wasn't strong enough to do anything to help her situation.

 

Whatever advice she was getting, if any, I'm sure it wasn't from someone who is trained in dealing with domestic violence. Relying on advice from family and friends who have never been in that situation is not a good idea.

Maybe so. Maybe she didn't have a choice but to take a life. We don't know what happened in that house that morning.

 

Maybe the years of alleged domestic violence had already taken a toll on her and broke her down to the point where she wasn't strong enough to do anything to help her situation.

 

Whatever advice she was getting, if any, I'm sure it wasn't from someone who is trained in dealing with domestic violence. Relying on advice from family and friends who have never been in that situation is not a good idea.

 

I wonder if any of that advice was from a professional and/or legal advisor.

I wonder if any of that advice was from a professional and/or legal advisor.

 

As in a divorce lawyer?

I'm not THAT in the know. Fair question to ask but also an easy one from a distance. It's not as easy as your question may seem to imply.

 

When it involves taking a life, easy or not doesn't enter into the equation.

 

Some of you are offering justifications for taking the life and those need to be ultra specific.

As in a divorce lawyer?

 

Absolutely, and especially if that divorce lawyer had other skeletons in the closet.

Maybe so. Maybe she didn't have a choice but to take a life. We don't know what happened in that house that morning.

 

Maybe the years of alleged domestic violence had already taken a toll on her and broke her down to the point where she wasn't strong enough to do anything to help her situation.

 

Whatever advice she was getting, if any, I'm sure it wasn't from someone who is trained in dealing with domestic violence. Relying on advice from family and friends who have never been in that situation is not a good idea.

 

1. One would think that had their been a history or pattern of domestic violence, someone, somewhere would be able to document and prove these allegations.

2. Unfortunately, we will never hear Robert's side of the story because she made sure his story would never be heard.

 

I see a machinating black widow in this murderer.

Maybe Cheryl should have left long before it came to her taking a life.

I would also be real interested in the advice she was getting right before the murder and who she was getting it from.

 

I think this is an easy statement for anyone to make who isn't or hasn't been in a protracted situation like this appeared to be, but I understand your position.

 

I'm willing to bet that any advice she got prior to her action had little to no bearing on her decision to do what she did.

 

None of us will ever know what choices she had to choose from...