|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Public schoolboys should get a lower sentence
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
I read this today and I was disgusted at the judges comments. Apparently if you go to a 'good school' ie. if your parents are rich you get a shorter sentence then if you're poor and were educated in a normal school.
I know this is unsurprising but this is a ridiculous situation to be in in 2014. How the fuck is this a good way to sentence anyone?
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
Are you sure the sentence was any less than that imposed on those of deprived backgrounds?
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
The judge stated as much in his sentencing! He referred to his 'Good Christian family' and having attended a 'very good school' (actually King's Bruton isn't very good; it's probably no more than good).
Anyway, an expensive education and being from the right kind of people, shouldn't be a 'get out of jail free card'.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I think that the Judge was actually saying that this looked like an error by someone who will probably not repeat it, and will go on to be a good and useful citizen.
I think the reporting is somewhat biased, and, if correct, the actual comments were bad. So yes, just because he went to a good school, has good parents, and wants to continue his education should not mean he is "let off" or given a reduced sentence. Almost the opposite - he should be given a significant punishment to ensure that he learns the lesson and doesn't do it again.
"I know your school" sounds like an old boys network. That is wrong, completely. As if a judge knowing your school means anything. Ill judged comments at the least.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
A six month suspended sentence is probably the norm for growing a small amount of cannabis, especially if it's a first offence, so it doesn't appear that he's been let off lightly.
The judge's comments seem to be reminding him how lucky he's been with his privileged background and why he should be ashamed of himself.
[ 15. November 2014, 09:33: Message edited by: Spike ]
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091
|
Posted
While some of the comments left me slightly uneasy, due to the class assumptions, I think it was a good judgement overall. To me, the judge was saying that the man had the background and future options not to do this again. The suspended sentence is of a significant amount of time. Send him to jail, and you may simply enable him to learn new tricks and disrupt his future long enough to make him go back to criminal behaviour.
It isn't unusual for judges to take individual circumstances into account when passing sentence.
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
The UK judicial system - judges and barristers especially - is riddled with class bias. The overwhelming majority are privately educated, Oxbridge graduates, and have become barristers (and thence judges) by using their and their parents' peer networks.
The sentence in the OP is relatively constrained by the sentencing guidelines, which are here. Cannibis is class B, and you could reasonably argue (as he was actually growing the stuff and selling it) he was taking a 'leading role' in the crime. The starting point is 4 years in prison, assuming a 100g-6kg stash.
I don't know if anyone's got the energy to appeal the sentence, and I have no particular wish to destroy one young man's life. But the idea that he's been stupid and silly, as opposed to knowingly and willfully setting up a criminal enterprise to supply controlled drugs? Don't buy that for a second.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
Bear in mind that we don't know all of the story - we know what have been reported. I suspect by putting on a good contrite show, dressing up smartly, getting parental support etc he has managed to get a more lenient sentence than if he had been poor and from a broken home.
His background should not impact his sentencing. The truth is, if you do the right things, you put on the right show, you will be treated better. Heck, if it ever happened to me, I would use every trick I could to get leniency. That doesn't mean it is right, but today in our society, privilege is a way of getting away with things. That is wrong, but most of the time it is DADT.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
In Texas a kid who killed four people while driving drunk was given 10 years' probation but no jail time because he was a "victim" of "affluenza."
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
In Texas a kid who killed four people while driving drunk was given 10 years' probation but no jail time because he was a "victim" of "affluenza."
A 16 year old is indeed a "kid" as you note. What sentence did you want? The article suggests 20 years was wanted. Do also think that it is legitimate that "healing process" is dependent on punishment as the article says?
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
In Texas a kid who killed four people while driving drunk was given 10 years' probation but no jail time because he was a "victim" of "affluenza."
A 16 year old is indeed a "kid" as you note. What sentence did you want? The article suggests 20 years was wanted. Do also think that it is legitimate that "healing process" is dependent on punishment as the article says?
It's probably a Pond thing, but should a kid be in charge of a car?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
In Texas a kid who killed four people while driving drunk was given 10 years' probation but no jail time because he was a "victim" of "affluenza."
That sucks. I can accept and understand lower sentences for people who give the appearance of not being career criminals, but they should still be within the reasonable scales. Murder should mean jail time.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Prison is a brutal place packed with violence, injustice, and petty tyranny from the guards. (Not all, but enough.) In its arbitrariness, it tramples over everything the law claims to hold dear.
So if a person can possibly be spared it without endangering society, damn straight they should be.
In sentencing, creative arguments can be (and are) deployed on behalf of those from deprived backgrounds. They've got a much better excuse, after all. Sure, the rich can hire better lawyers, and might get a walk, but when it comes to a judge's discretion, it's a lottery. A judge can decide they've wasted their chances, and throw the book at 'em to "set an example."
Whatever his background, I'm glad he didn't get jailed.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
[...] His background should not impact his sentencing. [...]
Background should always impact sentencing. A woman who murders her abuser after years of physical and mental torture deserves an infinitely more lenient sentence than a woman who slays him to cash in on life insurance and run off with her lover.
Likewise, a kid who runs with a gang 'cause he raised himself while his mother's away with the pipe should expect an easier time of it than a kid who robs 'cause he's bored.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
According to this report he had four cannabis plants growing on the premises, and was supplying the drug to his friends. This guidance suggests to me that his role would in these circumstances be regarded most probably as 'lesser' (although possibly 'significant') rather than 'leading'.
The definitive sentencing guidelines class 9 plants or fewer as being a 'domestic' level of production in the lowest category of seriousness (Category 4) with an assumed yield of 40g/plant.
So we've got (IMO, according to the guidelines) a lesser role offender with a category 4 offence. The starting point is either a Band C fine (125%-175% of relevant weekly income) or a high level community order (150-300 hours). The range of sentence is anything (across the possible range of seriousness of offence here) from discharge to 6 months custody. Relevant mitigating circumstances include: - No previous convictions or no relevant or recent convictions
- Remorse
- Good character and/or exemplary conduct
- Determination and/or demonstration of steps having been taken to address addiction or offending behaviour
And he pled guilty, which also reduces sentence. I think the sentence looks about normal.
I'm not sure (having read the various reports) whether the judge's remarks about the school have the force of "you went to a good school so you can't blame that a bad background led to your offending", or "you went to a good school which is part of your claim to good character", but in either event it doesn't appear to have altered the sentence.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Prison is a brutal place packed with violence, injustice, and petty tyranny from the guards. (Not all, but enough.) In its arbitrariness, it tramples over everything the law claims to hold dear.
So if a person can possibly be spared it without endangering society, damn straight they should be.
This is an entirely separate argument. The question is, given the sentencing guidelines, do people from wealthy, well-educated backgrounds receive lighter sentences for the same or similar offences than those from poor, badly-educated backgrounds?
The answer that should be yes. The answer is, at least on this data point, no. It certainly is 'no' when you consider the colour of the convicted criminal's skin.
The only time this is reversed is in the notion of Doli incapax, where kids from good families who have been taught right from wrong get tried, and those who've been raised by wolves (human or otherwise) get other interventions.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
According to this report he had four cannabis plants growing on the premises, and was supplying the drug to his friends. This guidance suggests to me that his role would in these circumstances be regarded most probably as 'lesser' (although possibly 'significant') rather than 'leading'.
Oh, so he had a wide range of pharmaceuticals as well as growing cannabis? At least he got Poca'd on top, but he was still bloody lucky.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
This is an entirely separate argument. The question is, given the sentencing guidelines, do people from wealthy, well-educated backgrounds receive lighter sentences for the same or similar offences than those from poor, badly-educated backgrounds?
The answer that should be yes. The answer is, at least on this data point, no. It certainly is 'no' when you consider the colour of the convicted criminal's skin.
The only time this is reversed is in the notion of Doli incapax, where kids from good families who have been taught right from wrong get tried, and those who've been raised by wolves (human or otherwise) get other interventions.
He's one guy.
To establish patterns of discrimination, you'd need data from a bunch of sentences for this crime. Right now, we've no idea whether a person of color, before the same judge, on the same charge, would've received a more sever sentence.
This is just anecdote.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Posh judge handing down a sentence on a posh kid who went to a posh school from a posh family.
Don't give me that apologetic BS. This is no different to your tactics elsewhere.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Posh kid from a Christian background should get a tougher sentence on the grounds he should have known better.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
All judges will be "posh" in the sense that they went to law school, often a good one.
The person being sentenced was "posh" in the sense he had a comfortable background and decent education.
This is, apparently, enough to reach a conclusion that the sentence was one rich guy giving another an easy ride. Well fine, I trouble myself with things like evidence, but whatever works for ya. Mandatory minimums for everyone who graduated college, just to be sure.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
You trouble yourself with evidence? Then you agree that rich people receive more lenient treatment than poor, that white s treated better than black?
Evidence. We have evidence. True, without going into this judge's history we cannot know that he judged this case with a bias. But given his statement, we have evidence that he likely would. The evidence? His statement. It indicates bias. It is the very definition of bias.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
To establish patterns of discrimination, you'd need data from a bunch of sentences for this crime. Right now, we've no idea whether a person of color, before the same judge, on the same charge, would've received a more sever sentence.
This is just anecdote.
You mean, like this? Or this? Or this (pdf), if you're an American?
So, when an anecdote fits a known, observable, repeatable pattern, what do we call it?
Alternatively, don't be so deliberately pig-shit stupid because you can't be arsed to look beyond the end of your nose, and then have the front to parade your ignorance on the internet.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
You trouble yourself with evidence? Then you agree that rich people receive more lenient treatment than poor, that white s treated better than black?
Evidence. We have evidence. True, without going into this judge's history we cannot know that he judged this case with a bias. But given his statement, we have evidence that he likely would. The evidence? His statement. It indicates bias. It is the very definition of bias.
I took the trouble to look in Debrett's. M'lud is from Southampton and has extensive involvement in the CofE in Southern England. I'm not at all surprised he's aware that Joseph Collins, resident near Warminster, Wiltshire, is from a good Christian family.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Doc Tor, that's race, not class. Presumably basic reading comprehension factors into your porcine idiocy scale. Piggie, heal thyself. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
The problem with these studies is that each case is different. The do, at first sight, strongly suggest racial bias, but to know for sure, we'd have to see details of each crime. Ultimately, it's a qualitative judgment.
LilBuddha the statement doesn't indicate bias at all. The judge said that Collins went to a good school. Given the tuition costs, that's presumably a statement of fact. The judge didn't say that it mitigated his crime.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Doc Tor, that's race, not class. Presumably basic reading comprehension factors into your porcine idiocy scale. Piggie, heal thyself.
Oh FFS.
quote:
Right now, we've no idea whether a person of color, before the same judge, on the same charge, would've received a more sever sentence.
If you can't even remember what you wrote, what I was responding to, then either you're a manipulative dipshit attempting to gaslight me, or you're too stupid to breathe. Don't rush back to let me know which it is.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Rush? Pal, I'm strolling. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Ethnicity was one factor amongst many in your post. I took it as specimen count, but you focused on it exclusively when it came to put-up time. I'll spell it in future, have no worry.
This is by the by. You fired off a bunch of insults. Hey, we're kicking in Dante's hood, that's how the game's played here, but if you choose to play it that way, I'll assume you're flyting, not debating.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Whatever else went on, it was a pretty stupid remark for a judge to make, if he indeed said "I know your school." Judges should stick to sentences not peripheral comments - keep the reasoning to an objective, separate written statement.
That said, I've seen or one two "suspect" things myself in a courtroom, that does lend credence to the suspicion that a degree of bias operates in the law.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
I agree, ! . Whatever else was going on, the judge's chummy comments to the defendant were ill- advised.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Whatever else went on, it was a pretty stupid remark for a judge to make, if he indeed said "I know your school." Judges should stick to sentences not peripheral comments - keep the reasoning to an objective, separate written statement.
You would expect judges to at least appear to be impartial. quote:
That said, I've seen or one two "suspect" things myself in a courtroom, that does lend credence to the suspicion that a degree of bias operates in the law.
A degree or two wouldn't be much of a problem. When it gives the appearance of an entire semi-circle, who can be surprised when people lose faith in the judicial system.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Of course there's bias within the law, it's run by people, people shot through with biases, prejudices and assumptions.
The ADA's gonna look more kindly on the tearful, pretty teen with a bright future ahead of her than the sullen gangbanger with a string of priors. No system can ever be perfect enough to stop things like that. What it can do is minimize bias with safeguards like sentencing guidelines and appeals.
Merely commenting on a convict's school doesn't show that they've been ditched, nor does it show that the judge is looking to be BFF with the person he's sentencing. It may simply be part of the narrative he's had typed up. Hey, judges can get bored spending their days on the bench, some like to spin a yarn every so often.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Of course there's bias within the law, it's run by people, people shot through with biases, prejudices and assumptions.
The ADA's gonna look more kindly on the tearful, pretty teen with a bright future ahead of her than the sullen gangbanger with a string of priors. No system can ever be perfect enough to stop things like that. What it can do is minimize bias with safeguards like sentencing guidelines and appeals.
Merely commenting on a convict's school doesn't show that they've been ditched, nor does it show that the judge is looking to be BFF with the person he's sentencing. It may simply be part of the narrative he's had typed up. Hey, judges can get bored spending their days on the bench, some like to spin a yarn every so often.
I wouldn't be surprised if this one is going to be spending more time fly-fishing, gardening and with his family.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
[...] who can be surprised when people lose faith in the judicial system.
Good God, people have faith in the criminal justice system? I'd hope we all know that it's a deeply flawed, often brutal enterprise, albeit a necessary one.
The only way it's kept even remotely fair is by a complete lack of faith, and aggressively fighting for the rights of those caught up in it. When it comes to the exercise of coercion, the operating assumption should be that that it'll tend towards injustice and cruelty, unless it's held to account.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Attending a "good" school is no guarantor of good behaviour. It simply means if one is going to steal, it will be from a greater number of people.
Having more resources does mean that, in general, one is less likely to commit a crime because the need is not present.
This kid has shown that he is willing to break the law even absent that need. Once again, if it demonstrates anything about his character, it is that he lacks a good one. That, despite his advantages, he will still make poor choices.
The judge commented on his religion and schooling. In the sentencing. Occam's Razor and common sense indicate that this is related.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Hey, judges can get bored spending their days on the bench, some like to spin a yarn every so often.
Hey, it's not reasonable to expect bored, long-- suffering judges to uphold standards of professionalism in the courtroom!
I think the people expecting such standards to be kept are showing a lot more respect for judges and the legal profession in general than people who blow off a rhetorical misstep as " spinning a yarn." It implies that they have faith that most people involved are capable of keeping those standards.
[ 15. November 2014, 16:52: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Rush? Pal, I'm strolling.
Ethnicity was one factor amongst many in your post. I took it as specimen count, but you focused on it exclusively when it came to put-up time. I'll spell it in future, have no worry.
Damn right. If you make stupid arguments, you get called on them. If you make stupid arguments and struggle on through the hail of evidence, insisting that you're right despite everything, then expect everyone else to point at you and laugh.
I mean, there are whole books on the subject. If you want a quick snapshot, try this. That edumacation thing is wonderful. I suggest you try it.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
We often hear the story about how the nice young man from a good school made one mistake, but it's an aberration, and he's a nice young man and deserves a second chance, whereas the scum from the housing estate is a hardened criminal, his family are hardened criminals, and we need to be protected from his criminal lifestyle.
If we strip out the obvious prejudice, is there any factual basis at all? Do young men from "nice" families benefit from the "short sharp shock" of being arrested and tried, and go on to lead a law-abiding life to a greater extent than their poorer coaevals? Has anyone done a proper study, where you control for background, education etc.?
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Doc Tor, c'mon, let's decide, d'you want a debate, or a grade-school pissing match?
If it's a debate you're jonesing for, you'll need to do better than a link to Amazon, and a piece that, bizarrely, projects that flaws of NYC's bail system onto the entire union.
Kelly Alves, what professional standards is the judge supposed to've broken? Spinning yarns is a trial lawyer's raison d'être! All those defense attorneys presenting their client as a blameless paragon of fluffiness; all those prosecutors sobbing before ledger blowups of the victim. When it comes to sentencing, judges live for homilies. This is positively restrained.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
Call me a cynic, but a cannabis grower who wants to go on to study horticulture doesn't sound like a chap who's decided to put his criminal past behind him.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Doc Tor, c'mon, let's decide, d'you want a debate, or a grade-school pissing match?
If it's a debate you're jonesing for, you'll need to do better than a link to Amazon, and a piece that, bizarrely, projects that flaws of NYC's bail system onto the entire union.
Kelly Alves, what professional standards is the judge supposed to've broken? Spinning yarns is a trial lawyer's raison d'être! All those defense attorneys presenting their client as a blameless paragon of fluffiness; all those prosecutors sobbing before ledger blowups of the victim. When it comes to sentencing, judges live for homilies. This is positively restrained.
Professional standard -- guarding your commentary against things that imply bias. Most judges manage to pull off homilies without getting this criticism thrown at them. And again, I think my assumption that most judges care about this is more respectful than your apparent belief that they are more concerned about their chance to shine than to project an attitude of fairness. Do you really think most people in the legal profession "live for " the spectacle, rather than for the idea of helping people get a fair trial and seeing justice done?
[ 15. November 2014, 17:45: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
We often hear the story about how the nice young man from a good school made one mistake, but it's an aberration, and he's a nice young man and deserves a second chance, whereas the scum from the housing estate is a hardened criminal, his family are hardened criminals, and we need to be protected from his criminal lifestyle.
If we strip out the obvious prejudice, is there any factual basis at all? Do young men from "nice" families benefit from the "short sharp shock" of being arrested and tried, and go on to lead a law-abiding life to a greater extent than their poorer coaevals? Has anyone done a proper study, where you control for background, education etc.?
If there's no priors, then regardless of background, sentencing guidelines (and a judge's common sense) tend to be lenient (mandatory minimums excepted).
I'm not sure it even is prejudice. A prosecutor would need a heart of stone to send a remorseful kid with a clean record off to do hard time, especially when s/he'll be aware that the kid runs a serious risk of ending up in sexual slavery. Law without compassion descends swiftly into bureaucratic horror.
I'd be interested to read studies on this if anyone's got 'em. There's so many variables (definition of privileged/crime charged/1st or repeat offenses, etc) that it'd be tough to do, but instructive.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Professional standard -- guarding your commentary against things that imply bias. Most judges manage to pull off homilies without getting this criticism thrown at them. And again, I think my assumption that most judges care about this is more respectful than your apparent belief that they are more concerned about their chance to shine than to project an attitude of fairness. Do you really think most people in the legal profession "live for " the spectacle, rather than for the idea of helping people get a fair trial and seeing justice done?
Nope, I think they live to do their job, which isn't delivering "justice."
Defense attorneys' job is to get their client off. Short of suborning perjury and other crimes, they're unfettered. They can, and do, falsely accuse witnesses, get evidence suppressed, and cast any doubt as reasonable doubt. Prosecutors are, officially, held to a higher standard, in that they're expected to act fairly, but if they've probable cause and a realistic chance of winning, they'll go for it. Judges are there to enforce the law as it's written.
Sometimes this is just. Many times, it isn't.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Nope, I think they live to do their job, which isn't delivering "justice."
Defense attorneys' job is to get their client off. Short of suborning perjury and other crimes, they're unfettered. They can, and do, falsely accuse witnesses, get evidence suppressed, and cast any doubt as reasonable doubt. Prosecutors are, officially, held to a higher standard, in that they're expected to act fairly, but if they've probable cause and a realistic chance of winning, they'll go for it. Judges are there to enforce the law as it's written.
Sometimes this is just. Many times, it isn't.
Wow. Re- read what you wrote, then, because none of this was in it.
And what does it benefit anyone, incidentally, if nobody points it out when justice is not served?
[ 15. November 2014, 17:58: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Wow. Re- read what you wrote, then, because none of this was in it.
Well in an oral system of trials, these priorities often present as theater. Trial lawyers get a rush out of it, especially cross-examination and closings. Surely this is uncontroversial.
quote:
And what does it benefit anyone, incidentally, if nobody points it out when justice is not served?
Of course not, it should be pointed out. The system, as a whole, aims for justice, even if its participants have other priorities. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
IMO, justice is best served by a fair and honest jury, who apply common sense and compassion to the evidence, and aren't afraid to nullify bad laws.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
There is a difference between someone getting a rush out of the proceeding and someone msking it their raison d'etre ( your phrase) in such a way that compromises their professional behavior-- which is exactly what you said was acceptable. If I were a lawyer, I'd be pretty damn insulted if someone said my need for drama might overtake my standards. And that that was to be expected.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
I don't think mentioning the guy's school was unprofessional, as there's no clear sign of bias. Sentencing is an art, not a science. Background is relevant, especially the likelihood of recidivism. Education, past and future, is part of that. A kid from the projects could equally point to their academic record.
Judges ramble all the time. They crack (bad) jokes, they make smartass comments, they get testy. In short, they're human. Rarely does it rise to the level of reversible error.
If the prosecutor thinks the sentence is too light, they can appeal, and get it raised. If they're happy with it, it suggests, in their eyes at least, that this was an OK result.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Oh, that's all right then.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Unless you can show how it's reversible error, yup, that's exactly what it is.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
The goal post shifting is making me cross eyed. If you don't think mentioning the stuff the judge did was unprofessional, why not start there, instead of painting this flamboyant picture of a courtroom whose natural state seemed to be roadside carnival?
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Gothic flourish comes natural in this bailiwick. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
