Pollard pleads against strict parole conditions

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raised Pollard’s fate with US Vice President Mike Pence in Washington last month.

March 2, 2017 04:01
2 minute read.
Jonathan and Esther Pollard

Jonathan and Esther Pollard. (photo credit: Courtesy)


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analysis from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief


Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard asked a US court of appeals on Tuesday to reverse a district court decision turning down his request to ease a series of strict conditions of his parole from prison.

The conditions were imposed on Pollard by his parole commission when he was released from prison in November 2015 after he served 30 years of a life sentence for passing classified information to Israel.

Jonathan Pollard freed from prison after 30 yearsThey require him to stay home between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., to be monitored by a GPS device that forces him to violate Shabbat and holidays, and for his computers to be monitored, which has prevented him from being employed.

Pollard’s lawyers, led by Eliot Lauer, wrote in the appeal that instead of enabling Pollard to work at a job consistent with his education and intelligence, the conditions are designed to have the opposite effect and keep Pollard from reintegrating into society.

They argued that Pollard could not possibly remember information he saw before his arrest, and that even if he did, the parole conditions arbitrarily limited his computer usage and not his ability to transfer information by other means.

“In light of the absence of evidence that Pollard accessed information of a type that can be remembered after 31 years, the special conditions are not rationally based, and cannot possibly be motivated by a sincere concern about preventing disclosure,” the lawyers wrote.

They said that unless there is such information, there was no possibility of further criminal conduct.

“The commission has not shown that there is such information,” they wrote.

“There is therefore no basis on which to satisfy the second regulatory requirement."

“Rather, the special conditions serve solely as vindictive punitive measures, cruelly imposed against a man who has served his time as a model prisoner for 30 years, based on the pretext that Pollard is in a position to disclose still-classified information and that the commission is genuinely concerned that might happen.”

To justify special parole conditions, the parole commission was supposed to prove that they were “reasonably related to the nature and circumstances of [the] offense or [the parolee’s] history and characteristics,” and that they are reasonably related to either the need to deter the parolee from criminal conduct, protection of the public from further crimes; or the need to provide the parolee with training or correctional treatment or medical care.

The lawyers warned that the parole commission’s position would enable any government agency to make entirely conclusory determinations that have no factual basis, and to have those determinations insulated from judicial review merely because the commission accepted them as true.

“That is not the law, and should not become the law,” they wrote. “To the contrary, the commission may not base its judgment as to parole on an inaccurate factual predicate.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raised Pollard’s fate with US Vice President Mike Pence in Washington last month. Netanyahu asked Ambassador Ron Dermer to handle the issue with the White House.

Join Jerusalem Post Premium Plus now for just $5 and upgrade your experience with an ads-free website and exclusive content. Click here>>

Related Content

The Empire State Building rises above New York, U.S., January 23, 2019
June 25, 2019
Steve Dunleavy, tabloid journalist who loved Israel, passes away


Cookie Settings