question: Why is there such a thing as 2 life sentences or over 100 years in prison? I'm sure no one lives that long.
comment: I believe it is just in case one life sentence gets overturned down the line, then there is another to back it up. This ensures that a serial killer, for example, never gets the freedom to murder again as prisoners constantly file appeals for better sentences and even parole or pardons.
passages: These provisions have been used in several cases since 2011, with parole ineligibility periods of 40 years (Travis Baumgartner and Alexandre Bissonnette), 50 years (in the cases of Emanuel Kahsai and Mark Smich), 70 years (in the case of Basil Borutski ), and 75 years (in the cases of Justin Bourque, John Paul Ostamas, Douglas Garland, Derek Saretzky, and Dellen Millard, Mark Smich's accomplice (originally 50 years, extended to 75 after sentencing for the murder of his father).
  
  Section::::Other offences.
   In many countries around the world, particularly in the Commonwealth, courts have the authority to pass prison terms which may amount to "de facto" life imprisonment. For example, courts in South Africa have handed out at least two sentences that have exceeded a century, and in Tasmania, Australia, Martin Bryant, the perpetrator of the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, received 35 life sentences, plus 1,035 years without parole, while Aurora Cinema shooter James Holmes, who received 12 consecutive life sentences and an extra 3,318 years without the possibility of parole for killing 12 and injuring 70 in his shooting spree, and also booby trapping his apartment with explosives. 
   BULLET::::- David Morris was convicted in 2002 murdering three generations of the same family in 1999. His victims were 80-year-old Doris Dawson, her 34-year-old daughter Mandy Power and her two granddaughters, 10-year-old Katie and 8-year-old Emily by beating them with a pole and then setting the house on fire where their bodies were discovered by firefighters and was given a whole life sentence by the judge for the "exceptional savagery" of the murders. However, in July 2007, the sentenced was reduced to a recommendation of 32 years in prison.
   These provisions of the Criminal Code came into force in December 2011, and permit a trial judge, after considering any jury recommendations, to impose consecutive parole ineligibility periods extending beyond 25 years. In the most extreme cases, this can result in a "de facto" term of life imprisonment without parole (i.e. a total parole ineligibility period extending beyond the offender's life expectancy). 
   Section::::Parole and nonviolent offenses.
  
  Under the federal criminal code, however, with respect to offenses committed after December 1, 1987, parole has been abolished for all sentences handed down by the federal system, including life sentences. A life sentence from a federal court will therefore result in imprisonment for the life of the defendant unless a pardon or reprieve is granted by the President or if, upon appeal, the conviction is quashed.
   Individuals convicted of multiple murder may be given consecutive parole ineligibility periods thus extending their parole ineligibility period beyond 25 years. In rare cases this ineligibility for parole may extend beyond a normal life span, meaning, in "de facto" terms, a sentence of life-without-parole.
  
  For a reflection on the work of a Member of the Parole Board see Lubomyr Luciuk's article in The Toronto Star, "Making parole decisions is one tough job," 23 June 2016.
  
  Section::::Authority.:Record Suspensions.
   Other specifics about life sentences in the United States continue to vary widely by individual states. Also, the sentence may be given for "drug kingpins" and "habitual criminals." It has been applied in every state except Alaska, as well as in the federal courts. In Alaska, the maximum term of imprisonment is for 99 years, but that is almost always considered to be a practical life sentence as a sentence of 99 years' imprisonment, especially without parole, generally lasts beyond a normal lifespan.
  
  Section::::Statistics.
   The criminal law and prisons are primarily administered by state and territory governments within Australia’s federal system. As such, there is considerable divergence of which offences can attract life sentences across Australia.
   BULLET::::- David Martin Simmons had originally received a whole-life term for rape and false imprisonment. This was reduced to a ten-year minimum when he appealed alongside Restivo, Roberts, and others whose appeals were not successful.
  
  BULLET::::- Donald Andrews had received a whole-life term for rape and kidnapping in 2012, while having two previous convictions for manslaughter. This was reduced to a twelve-year minimum when he appealed in 2015, making him eligible for release in 2024.
   The above penalties for murder apply when an offender is convicted of a single murder. When an offender is convicted of multiple murders (either first or second-degree murder), the court has the option of imposing consecutive periods of parole ineligibility for each murder. 
   Jeb Bush and Florida Legislature not only came up with the 10-20-Life system, they also came up with or modified several acts designed for repeat offenders. These acts include Violent Career Criminal, Habitual felony offender, Habitual violent felony offender, Three-time violent felony offender, Prison Releasee Reoffender, and Dangerous Sexual Felony Offender.
   The maximum determinate sentence is a life sentence with a 25-year parole ineligibility period. For offences committed prior to December 2, 2011 all life sentences and related parole ineligibility periods are served concurrently (at the same time). In cases of multiple murder, where the offence occurred after December 2, 2011 (the date new legislation came into force), a court may, after considering any jury recommendation, order consecutive parole ineligibility periods for each murder. There are also options for an indeterminate sentence. There is no death penalty in Canada.
  
  Section::::Sentencing hearing.
   As of 2013, 4,800 offenders were serving life sentences in Canada, though only 2,880 (around 60%) were incarcerated (the remainder being on parole). The vast majority of these offenders (about 96%) were serving their sentences for murder. "Lifers" constituted 23% of the federal offender population.
   Section::::Parole and nonviolent offenses.:Three-strikes law.
  
  Under some controversial sentencing guidelines known as "three-strikes laws," a broad range of crimes ranging from petty theft to murder can serve as the trigger for a mandatory or discretionary life sentence in California. Notably, the U.S. Supreme Court has on several occasions upheld lengthy sentences for petty theft including life with the possibility of parole and 50 years to life and stated that neither sentence conflicted with the ban on "cruel and unusual punishment" in the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. These court decisions have been the subject of considerable controversy.
  
  Section::::Notable examples.
   Some of Britain's most notorious murderers are not among those serving whole-life sentences. These include convicted child killers Roy Whiting and Ian Huntley. Both murderers have been issued 40-year minimum terms by the High Court, which means that they are likely to remain imprisoned for most if not all of their remaining lives, while many other prisoners are in a similar position due to the length of their minimum terms and the age they will be when they can be considered for parole.
   For multiple murder offences committed after December 2, 2011, a court may, after considering any jury recommendation, impose consecutive periods of parole ineligibility for each murder. While the provision is not mandatory, this means, for example, that an individual convicted of three counts of first degree murder could face life with no parole for 75 years – or 25 years for each conviction. This provision has been used in several cases where parole ineligibility periods have been extended beyond 25 years; in four cases to 75 years prior to parole eligibility.
  
  "See also:" "Life imprisonment in Canada"
   BULLET::::- However, as one can be sentenced to life without parole, another way to be sentenced for life in prison is a minimum number of years spent in jail depending on the life expectancy of the prisoner. Thus the prisoner will then spend the rest of his or her life in prison.
   While life sentences are rare in non-murder cases, the courts may apply a dangerous offender designation in cases involving serious violent or sexual offences. Such a designation results in an indeterminate sentence with no maximum limit, but a parole review occurs after 7 years and every 2 years after that.
   Under the "Controlled Drugs and Substances Act", trafficking, exporting or production of schedule I or II substances also carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment with a parole ineligibility period of between 7 years and 25 years.
  
  Current sentencing practices ensure that, except in the case of murder, a life sentence is rarely imposed, even when the offender is found guilty for particularly grievous offences. One common exception is cases which involve terrorism-related conspiracies.
   The longest minimum period of imprisonment on a sentence of life imprisonment is 30 years, currently being served by William Dwane Bell. No person in New Zealand has yet been sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
  
  Sentences where a minimum term of imprisonment of 20 years or more has been imposed include:
  
  The longest minimum period for a woman is 19 years, currently being served by Tracy Jean Goodman for the murder of pensioner Mona Morriss in the course of a burglary in Marton in January 2005.
  
  Section::::Preventive detention.
   Other countries either allow multiple concurrent life sentences which can be served at the same time (e.g. Russia), or allow multiple consecutive life sentences with a single minimum term (e.g. Australia), thus allowing earlier release of the prisoner.
   Minimum-sentence provisions, in terms of section 51 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, are very important for the sentencing process at present. The provisions were originally introduced as an emergency measure, renewable by the President every two years. They have now been made a permanent feature of the sentencing process. They provide for very severe punishments of various types of serious crime.
  
  The provisions provide for certain minimum sentences in respect of various categories of serious offences set out in the schedules to the Act. In certain instances these minimum sentences are life sentences: for example,
   In England and Wales, the average life sentence prisoner serves around 15 years before being paroled, although those convicted of exceptionally grave crimes remain behind bars for considerably longer; Ian Huntley was given a minimum term of 40 years. Some receive whole life sentences which make it almost certain that they will die in prison; they can only be considered for release on appeal to the High Court, or in exceptional circumstances such as great age or ill health.
   Norway ("de jure") and Spain ("de facto" from 1993 until February 2018, the question being now debated of reintroducing "de jure" life imprisonment, its habitual practice before it became a democracy in 1978-1983) have abolished life imprisonment but retain other forms of indefinite imprisonment. 
  
  In Europe, there are many countries where the law expressly provides for life sentences without the possibility of parole. These countries are England and Wales (within the United Kingdom), the Netherlands, Moldova, Bulgaria, Italy, Hungary, Austria, Malta, and the Republic of Ireland. 
   Section::::Life.:Imprisonment and execution.
  
presuppositions: It doesn't make sense to have 2 life sentences when you only have one life. Multiple life sentences are worthless.
corrections: In case a life sentence gets overturned in court, there is another to back it up. The 2nd life sentence is a backup in case the first one gets overturned on appeal for some reason. 
raw_presuppositions: It doesn't make sense to have 2 life sentences when you only have one life. Multiple life sentences are worthless.
raw_corrections: In case a life sentence gets overturned in court, there is another to back it up. The 2nd life sentence is a backup in case the first one gets overturned on appeal for some reason. 