But it was not murder, and he should be paroled by now. The only reason he's not been paroled is because he hasn't said sorry. Why should that be?

Why should he be treated any differently to everyone else? If you don't show remorse you don't get parole. This is true in most Western countries, and indeed in the USA it can mean the difference between life and death (a death sentance cannot be commuted if the condemned does not admit guilt, or so I understand).

The legal stance on this is thus: your guilt is not in question, because you have been convicted. Therefore, as a guilty man, you should be shown leniancy only if you have acknowledged your wrong doing and convince the parole board that you will not reoffend.

This doesn't work well for people who were falsely convicted, however the legal system cannot second guess itself - and that's a different issue. Martin isn't disputing what he did, he is disputing that he was wrong to do it, and in law that is clearly untrue. Therefore he is demonstrating that he has not been rehabilitated and should not be released early.

Rob