Two Tier Keir Strikes Again

[Deleted member 265726]

But what if, just for the sake of argument, it was shown that BAME offenders were being sentenced more harshly. Would these PSR rules be one way of addressing that? I believe the quote from the full report I posted earlier might be saying that, although I found it quite confusing!

Do you believe that report is suggesting there is systemic institutional racism within our Judicial sentencing system?

 

[Notch7]

started a thread showing how the UK sentencing system is going to be tiered differently due to the ethnic, cultural and faith of offenders as evidenced by the Telegraph article and MP Robert Jenrick. Changes are due to be implemented in April unless there is intervention.

the thread title is: "two tier Keir"

but the changes to the sentencing guidelines were made by an independent body, nothing to do with the Labour government

the Telegraph article and dishonest Bob Jenrick both blame Labour government.........both are false and both were posted by you

thus you are being dishonest and continue to be dishonest

 

[Notch7]

You just like arguing for arguments sake. Don't be a coward mate, if you don't like what the Telegraph or Robert Jenrick said, get yourself on X and post your ramblings on there to them directly.

I am not arguing just pointing out fact:

1) thread title is false, the Labour party had nothing to do with the sentencing guidelines
2) Telegraph article falsely claims claims it is the Labour party which are responsible, they are not
3) dishonest Bob falsely claims claims it is the Labour party which are responsible, they are not

When are you going to admit you are posting misinformation?

 

[blup]

I concede I made a mistake with the dates.

They aren't in power now. Labour is. Keir Starmer is PM.

I started a thread showing how the UK sentencing system is going to be tiered differently due to the ethnic, cultural and faith of offenders as evidenced by the Telegraph article and MP Robert Jenrick. Changes are due to be implemented in April unless there is intervention.

Jenny implied the guidelines were a policy decision by Kieth himself, designed to favour ethnic minorities in a racsist way. None of that is true.

 

[Deleted member 265726]

Access Restricted

 

[Notch7]

Access Restricted

before posting more, you need to address your original posting of misinformation first:

You need to admit your thread title is wrong
You need to admit the Telegraph article and Jenrick tweet you posted as evidence are wrong

 

[MNW67]

Do you believe that report is suggesting there is systemic institutional racism within our Judicial sentencing system?

I don't know. It seemed to be hinting at something. It was far from clear! This is the section I posted before containing the reasoning. What does it mean?

Regarding ethnicity, the Imposition guideline review of trend analysis published in 2023 found no clear evidence of differential impacts on the Imposition guideline for different demographic groups. However, it highlighted that the proportion of black offenders receiving a community order continues to be lower than white offenders, even after the implementation of the guideline. One possible interpretation of this gap between the proportion of community orders is that the Imposition guideline had a greater impact for white offenders than for black offenders, in relation to the increase in proportion of community orders. While the trend analysis alone is not evidence of a disparity due to the guideline, the Council believes that the revised guideline may be able to contribute to addressing this observed imbalance by emphasising that the court should request a PSR for female offenders from an ethnic minority background to ensure it has sufficient information about the offence and the offender before sentencing. An HM Inspectorate of Probation thematic on race equality in probation placed considerable importance on quality PSRs for black, Asian and ethnic minority offenders. The Council therefore disagreed with the justifications given for removing this cohort from the list of cohorts, and also disagreed with the justification given for removing ‘those at risk of a custodial sentence of 2 years or less’.

 

[Deleted member 265726]

I don't know. It seemed to be hinting at something. It was far from clear! This is the section I posted before containing the reasoning. What does it mean?

I'm asking you as you are/were a legal bod of some sort.

 

[Notch7]

Jog on.

This thread will evolve as new information becomes available.

the information was available before you posted the thread

You need to admit your thread title is wrong
You need to admit the Telegraph article and Jenrick tweet you posted as evidence are wrong

It has been proven to be wrong a number of times on this thread by a few people

So why will you not admit it is incorrect?

 

[MNW67]

I'm asking you as you are/were a legal bod of some sort.

It's not my area. There was a general perception, though, in my day, that judges at the lower level like middle class white people. I can certainly believe there is some sort of unconscious bias when it comes to sentencing, especially in the Magistrates.

 

[Deleted member 265726]

the information was available before you posted the thread

You need to admit your thread title is wrong
You need to admit the Telegraph article and Jenrick tweet you posted as evidence are wrong

It has been proven to be wrong a number of times on this thread by a few people

So why will you not admit it is incorrect?

I've posted up the argument. Both Jenrick and Mahmood's sides have been represented. Just because you don't like it, has no bearing on it.

 

[Deleted member 265726]

It will be interesting to see which of these conclusions come to pass:

1) Sentencing Council relents and withdraws the guidelines
2) Sentencing Council refuses and Labour let it go
3) Sentencing Council refuses and Labour change the law to get rid of them
4) Jenrick's Judicial Review forces change in the law/withdrawal of guidelines

 

[motorbiking]

For me it doesn't matter where it came from, it would be a massive loss of faith in the criminal justice system. 100% two tier justice.

One group getting special treatment based on characteristics they cannot control.

 

[Deleted member 265726]

For me it doesn't matter where it came from, it would be a massive loss of faith in the criminal justice system. 100% two tier justice.

One group getting special treatment based on characteristics they cannot control.

Agreed.

At this point in the game, it looks like a uni-party affair between the Cons and Lab going back sometime.

It is live news and new info may come out.

 

[blup]

Classic mountain and molehill