ethnic minority criminals to get special treatment in courts

[Tauranga]

Two-tier justice’ as ethnic minority criminals to get special treatment in courts
Judges told to consider additional information on select group of offenders before passing sentence

Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, said the guidance was “completely outrageous” and enshrined a “double standard,.. is set to have an anti-white and anti-Christian bias,” he said.
Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, wrote to the Sentencing Council urging it to reverse its changes to the guidance and registering her “displeasure”.

https://telegraph.co.uk/gift/40afc8c10d91acc1

Who is making these rules if not Labour or Conservatives? Both parties disagree with it, how is it happening?
Today's world is so confusing!

It’s “interesting” how the Telegraph chose to highlight the ethnicity aspect and not the suggestion consider the reports if the offender is young, a woman etc.

Interesting.

Very interesting.

I think you are inferring that they are racist?
Perhaps they are making the point that being a specific 'ethnicity' should make no difference to your sentence?
Being a young person or a woman occurs to all races.

Are you objecting to the same process being followed if the offender is a woman aged 18-25? Is it just the race aspect you are horrified by, or are you equally as shocked by the sexist and ageist exception as well?

By OP's logic, men should be out protesting this. How can you get special treatment when you've committed a crime if you're a woman? Why can't men have the same treatment or at least women shouldn't? It should be fair to all. It's only men that haven't got the special treatment package in that decision, everyone else is considered!

This is currently being discussed on Radio 4.

Men are protesting, but not about the women aspect, as it makes sense.

It is well documented that prison doesn't do much for women, generally the crimes they commit are non violent and often at the behest of men. Some aspects of this make sense. Some don't.

It's not racist to wonder why in Britain, Brits are going to face the harshest punishments for the same laws.

The ethnicity of a man who commits the same crime as another man of a different ethnicity should make no difference. Just as being Trans should make no difference. It seems wrong to me.

A british man was given a suspended sentence for raping a 13 year old girl as he has a Muslim background ( in 2013) - he said he didn't know it was illegal.

Do you think a white guy one street away from this man would not have been let off for the same excuse?

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-48517157" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-48517157.amp

This was the case that sprang to mind when I heard this being discussed. White middle class girl given non-custodial sentence, for a stabbing, because it had the potential to damage her prospects.

Can't see how this is 'mitigating'.

So if a black boy is found guilty of carrying an offensive weapon whilst he has grown up and lives in a high crime area, plagued by gangs, the circumstances may be seen as mitigating when compared to a white boy from a low crime area, where there are no gangs, who is convicted of the same offence.

@Tauranga "It's not racist to wonder why in Britain, Brits are going to face the harshest punishments for the same laws" you may want to rewrite that unless you're seriously stating that people from ethnic minorities are not British.

Realistically and statically, you are more likely to be sentenced and get sentenced if you are an ethnic minority.

It's not racist to wonder why in Britain, Brits are going to face the harshest punishments for the same laws.

Yes, it absolutely is racist. You're saying that 'Brits' cannot be from an ethnic minority. It's the very definition of racism.

No, OP it should be fair to all. Everyone should have this PSR. I disagree with your female exceptionalism.

Men aren't not protesting about the women part because they think 'it makes sense'. They've simply been drawn into the ethnic minority part and that is always more important for some people to protest against regardless.

I do think they are racist and I think they exist to ferment hatred against ethnic minorities but that wasn’t the point I was making.

Why it fine to consider gender or age but not ethnicity seeing as all three are immutable traits?

Where have you read that? Please state the specific guidelines?

If that’s how you read this article then it equally means women and young people will be less likely to incur custodial sentences.

Is that ok?

(And we already have two tier sentencing and have for decades just not the way you think.)

British people can also be from ethnic minorities.

The fact you don’t realise that is concerning.

The ethnicity of a man who commits the same crime as another man of a different ethnicity should make no difference.

Then you will be thrilled to hear that the guidelines are trying to redress the current imbalance where black males currently receive harsher sentences than white peers for the same crime and same experience of crime.

Social class is also a major determinant with MC criminals receiving significantly lighter sentences than their WC peers for similar crimes.

But you know all this already. Which tells me more about you than anything else.

@Tauranga

The ethnicity of a man who commits the same crime as another man of a different ethnicity should make no difference. Just as being Trans should make no difference. It seems wrong to me.

And equally the gender of a person who commits the same crime as a person of a different gender should make no difference. Yet somehow that difference in treatment is fine for you (likely because you are a woman.)

Your position is incoherent.

I am a woman, but I am married and have sons, so more concerned for my children than myself.

The incoherence in your view, is due to me allowing for women to be given a lesser or suspended sentence when standing before a judge. Please let me explain.

This is because many or most women are there because they have suffered abuse, or were coerced. They often support children unaided, and have caring duties too. I have read many reports about how prison doesn't help women or society.

I listened on the radio just now, and WC and MC is not taken in to account. The woman speaking said this information should be made for every person appearing but the backlogs prevent this at the moment.

And no, I didn't know that about black men and white men. If that is the case then it is terrible and should not happen.

You are shifting the goalposts and you know it.

We are not talking about other criteria such as a history of abuse, caring responsibilities etc - but one trait: gender. Why should gender be a consideration but not ethnicity?

PSR's used to be a quality piece of work. The case would be adjourned for 3 weeks, a decent interview with the defendant (sometimes 2 interviews), time to complete any necessary checks etc. Time would be spent writing it up.

Now most of them are done on the day in Court by a harassed officer who has to complete x amount in a day. Quick in and out, typed up as fast as possible. No time to check anything. All done in "short format" rather than a proper full report.

I imagine if the amount of reports needed is increased further, then the quality will then reduce further still. To the the point where it will be almost meaningless.

I think what happens is, the judge gets a document about the person IF they fulfill one of the special traits, eg Trans, Woman, Ethnicity.

The document tells the judge about events in the persons life that may help the judge decide on the sentence.

Women usually have lots of things in their document as I mentioned.

You are correct, everyone should get a document prepared for the judge to read and then it would be fair, men and women.

The radio said that due to backlogs they cannot make one for everyone. This is clearly unfair.

PSRs look at background. Including economic background.

So basically you know nothing about the problems historically in sentencing, nothing about the remit of the guidelines group (who operate under governments of different complexions), nothing about the prison system at all it seems.

But you have decided to make stuff up based on "wot I heard on the radio" and come to lecture MNers about it all?

Hope it isn't too damp down there. HAND.

Thanks for explaining what the documents are, it is all new to me as you can probably gather.

I love your attitude!