Legal double standard

jasonmanley writes: "In New Zealand a guy gets convicted of gang raping a woman. The crime took place in 1989 and the man was convicted in 2005. Because the crime took place in 1989 the man was sentenced according to the law of the day i.e 7 years. However he has since been granted parole based the law as it stands today i.e. You must have served one third of your sentence — not as it was in 1989 where you must have served two thirds of your sentence. This is such a double standard! That is not the only problem as I see it:
1] He only got 7 years
2] He was up for parole 3 time in 2007! WTF: Assuming his first petition is denied — let him wait a year and then reapply — but up for parole 3 times in one year!
Why do legal systems favour the criminals and never the victims?"