Professor with (triple) murder record leaving Penn St. for Calif. school

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
I really wonder what you all think of this. There is no doubt that this guy was rehabilitated- but still, a triple murder? 3 life sentences? 3 other lives snuffed?



http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-5/10591691507650.xml


Professor with murder record leaving Penn St. for Calif. school

By DAN LEWERENZ
The Associated Press
7/25/2003, 7:03 p.m. ET


STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Last month, Penn State University officials learned something about professor Paul Eric Krueger that wasn't on his resume — he is on parole for a triple murder committed in Texas nearly 40 years ago.



University spokesman Bill Mahon said Friday that the university knew nothing about Krueger's conviction until late last month, when the Pennsylvania Bureau of Probation and Parole first contacted the university. Parole officials in Texas only notified Pennsylvania in February.

"We're in shock to find out some of the details, and we're still looking into it," Mahon said. "We've never had a situation like this before."

Mahon said the university doesn't require prospective faculty to report their criminal backgrounds.

But it may soon be a moot point. A spokesman for National University in California confirmed that Krueger had accepted a teaching job there, and parole officials in Texas said they already were working on that move.

"We are, as a matter of fact, to meet with him at our headquarters here today to do some of that paperwork," said Kathy Shallcross, deputy director of Texas' parole division said Friday.

Hoyt Smith, spokesman for National University, the La Jolla-based college where Krueger will be associate professor of business, said officials were shocked to learn of the conviction from a reporter Friday, but that it wouldn't necessarily affect his employment.

"He had excellent credentials. He came highly recommended from Penn State," Smith said.

Krueger, who has been at Penn State for four years, has no telephone listing in the State College area. He did not immediately respond to an e-mail from The Associated Press.

In 1965, when he was just 18, Krueger and a friend, 16-year-old John Angles, left San Clemente, Calif. The two passed through Texas and rented a motor boat hoping to travel to Venezuela, where they intended to become "soldiers of fortune," according to a 1979 story in the Austin American-Statesman.

Along the Intracoastal Waterway near Corpus Christi, they encountered a fishing boat with a crew of three, John D. Fox, 38; Noel D. Little, 50; and Van D. Carson, 40, all from Corpus Christi. As night fell on April 12, 1965, all five went to shore and put in for the night.

For reasons Kreuger never made public, he shot the three fishermen that night, unloading a total of 40 bullets into their bodies. Sam Jones, then the district attorney for Nueces County, later referred to the shooting as "the most heinous crime in the history of the Gulf Coast."

Krueger pleaded guilty in 1966 to three counts of murder with malice aforethought and was sentenced to three life terms, to be served concurrently.

Corrections officials described Krueger as a model inmate. He earned his diploma and an associate's degree from inside, volunteered with alcohol and drug rehabilitation programs and reported for the prison newspaper.

Two parole commissioners, in 1977, called Krueger, "probably the most exceptional inmate" in the entire state. "There is nothing further he can do to rehabilitate himself," they said. Two years later, he was paroled to West Covina, Calif., where he enrolled in graduate school.

Krueger's academic credentials are unquestioned — he graduated summa cum laude from Sam Houston State University, going on to earn a master's degree from California State University-Los Angeles, a Ph.D. in sociology from South Dakota State University and an Ed.D. from the University of Southern California.

He was a visiting professor at Idaho State University and held a tenure-track position at Augustana College in South Dakota before coming to Penn State, where Krueger was director of the Institute for Research in Training and Development, teaching mostly graduate courses and studying employee training programs.

Some of his previous employers also expressed surprise when learning of Krueger's conviction.

"I'm sitting here thunderstruck. I'm virtually speechless," said Anne Oppegard, chairwoman of the business department at Augustana. "I'm practically stuttering I'm so dumbfounded."

Rick Davis, who teaches business ethics at Susquehanna University, said he was unsure whether Krueger was obligated to reveal his background.

"That's an awfully long time ago," Davis said, "and if somebody would say that the university has an ethical obligation to refrain form hiring people like that, then what they're saying is that these people can never, ever enter into the professional world again, and I think that's wrong.

"A major purpose of going to prison is to be rehabilitated, and if in the opinion of the system they are, then I think the university is entitled to rely upon that."
 
I "harbor" negative feelings about academia with their nihilistic and destructive values and policies. I neither like nor trust them.

That said, and without further facts about this case, I don't see why this professor should not have the right to work and teach wherever he can get hired.

He paid his price, he seems to have changed drastically for the better, and I think he now has the same rights as anyone else.



matis
 
SW:

You either kill him for the murders, or you've got to let him earn a living.

They didn't execute him, so, logically, what would you have him do?

He appears to be smart and learned, from the academic point of view at least, so why from any point of view does it make sense to have him picking crops in some field? Yes, I know about retribution, but society has a net gain from his current work (maybe, since I don't know him and haven't taken a course from him.) .

As for me, I believe in the death penalty, once you're sure, beyond all shadow, that you've got the right guy.

' tends to minimize problems like this.
 
MicroBalrog:

"Once you've got the guy shackled, killing him is murder."


True enough, I guess.

So, once you have the taxpayer shackled, and covered by the inevitable weapons, it's OK to steal a significant portion of their life, since you lose time to get money, to keep a murder alive????
 
Well, now, MicroBalrog, it sure cuts down on recidivism. :D

It would have an entirely positive effect on the whole society, except for that giant moral problem..."Aye, there's the rub."

Art
 
It would have an entirely positive effect on the whole society, except for that giant moral problem..."Aye, there's the rub."

And what would that be?...:scrutiny:

Personally, I think that anyone sentenced to serve more than 25 years (before or w/o parole) SHOULD be considered a death-row candidate. Two reasons:

1. Why should society be forced to pay for their upkeep for such a long period?

2. Any sentence past 25 years & that person will probably spend their entire life in prison. When faced with that, most prisoners realize that they don't have anything to lose & won't hesitate to shank an inmate, attack a guard, etc...

But that's just me...:cool:
 
And what would that be?...

Personally, I think that anyone sentenced to serve more than 25 years (before or w/o parole) SHOULD be considered a death-row candidate. Two reasons:

1. Why should society be forced to pay for their upkeep for such a long period?

2. Any sentence past 25 years & that person will probably spend their entire life in prison. When faced with that, most prisoners realize that they don't have anything to lose & won't hesitate to shank an inmate, attack a guard, etc...

But that's just me...


What if they're innocent? And, even if they're not, killing a person, other than in self-defense, is murder.

1. Because murder is wrong.

2.What if he is paroled?

3.ATF busts into your house and finds three full-auto sears. Machinegun posession, 3 counts, 30-year sentence. String 'im up, boys!:evil:
 
"A major purpose of going to prison is to be rehabilitated, and if in the opinion of the system they are, then I think the university is entitled to rely upon that."

I was lead to believe that the purpose for going to prison was to serve your time for commiting a crime.

During which if your rehabilitated, all the better.

But with three life sentences, this guy should still be behind bars.
What part of "LIFE" is not understood?

I thought Texas knew better.

Ahh............those think tank liberals in our institutes of higher learning are getting back one of their own. How fitting he is going to California.
 
Standing Wolf posted "It costs more to keep a felon in prison for a year than it would to send a deserving young person to virtually any college in the nation for the same period of time."

I'm quite sure this is true, however the other side of the coin is: The cost to society incurred in keeping an active career felon in jail is far less than than the cost of dealing with his criminal acts if he is free to practice his "trade" This includes all costs arising from criminal activity such as increased insurance, paying police to investigate, replacing stolen/damged property etc.

This was stated in a newspaper article I read several years ago and I have no clue anymore who did the study, so take this with the proverbial grain of salt.

Don in Ohio
 
He should have been executed for comitting the three murders instead of given three life sentences. What a joke. He kills three people...40 bullets into three people and he gets three life sentences then gets paroled? No one can say that that is right. Anyone should see this as a big screw up by the legal system. He'll probably be a good fit in California though.:barf:
 
We in California should be proud to have a model convict impress upon our youngsters the morals of today. The man is an authority and can speak comfortably on issues which are unique to him. :barf: Just another reason to leave this state.:rolleyes:
 
1. The sentance certainly sounds too light for having slain 3 people. Of course, we don't know the details of the case, but I would think it would require a pretty good argument to explain in a satisfactory manner why one man who took the lives of 3 others is now walking free.

2. That said, once you set him free, he has paid his debt to society. Oh, the Ivory Tower Types are startled that they have a killer in their tower? Boo fricken hoo. If asked, I'm sure that they would be in favor of whatever "progressive" corrections policy/trend/law unshackled him. They just want him set loose in someone else's neighborhood.

3. Both of those statements made, he does seem to have turned his life around and is now doing positive things. As a general policy this is not how I want murderers treated, but this one seems to now be a productive member of society. If so, good on him, and may he continue down the path he is currently treading.

Mike
 
3 lives lost - then paroled??

Did youall catch this: sentanced in 66, and released in 79. Thats about 4 years for each person he murdered!
 
The failure here is first in the legal system that let someone walk who had been (rightly so) sentanced to life in prison. The fact that he happens to make a good living and has stayed out of trouble after he was incorrectly and immoraly released from his proper punishment is irrelevant. Whatever 'benefits to society' we might get from him being released (and I disagree that there is any benefit, even if the guy is a rhodes scholar) is also irrelevant.

I'm sure he's a real nice guy. I bet he makes a great dinner guest and if we all got to know him, we'd feel real real bad about throwing him back in the slammer. But we have a duty to those whose lives he destroyed. That duty demands certain things of us. One of which is that we see that the perpetrators of disgustingly heinous crimes are punished in full, in spite of our tugging heart strings. He is a murderer. He, of his own free will as an adult man, murdered three other men. Game over. He should be in prison...at the very least. The fact that he is now in a position of role model to others, a teacher no less, makes me want to vomit.

- Gabe
 
ATF busts into your house and finds three full-auto sears. Machinegun posession, 3 counts, 30-year sentence.

Big difference, Micro, laws against gun ownership are BS, laws against murder are not.

Also, it is entirely moral to execute someone as punishment provided the charge is serious enough. Otherwise, criminals can take the lives of others but others cannot take the lives of criminals? Sounds like you're making criminals into a higher legal status. "The punishment must fit the crime" so goes the Chinese saying (The Chinese are really good at proverbs, aren't they?)

As for me, I believe in the death penalty, once you're sure, beyond all shadow, that you've got the right guy.

That's an impossible standard, which is why it's not used at all in law. The standard used is "beyond a reasonable doubt". If we used the shadow standard we could not ever convict anyone.

Bruce, the net gain society has is by instituting a firm punishment for a very serious crime, and making sure that folks know the legal system is not messing around. I don't care if he's old and nice, he should have been fertilizer long ago, and favors are not done to society by being soft. If you're concerned about the cost of jailing him, why don't we charge criminals for being jailed? Make them buy their own food and other consumables and bill them for rent.

I don't see why I should have to pay for his crime.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top