Two Tier Keir Strikes Again

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 265726
  • Start date Start date
From what I cam gather the 'sentencing council' are accountable to parliament, so if the justice secretary ain't happy then these guidelines should be scrapped/amended.
Make you wonder what goes on under the radar though.
 
Also, why should disclosing you are transgender affect how you are sentenced? If you are gay, you don't get special treatment so what is the deal here?
 
From what I cam gather the 'sentencing council' are accountable to parliament, so if the justice secretary ain't happy then these guidelines should be scrapped/amended.
Make you wonder what goes on under the radar though.

I wonder what accountable to Parliament means in practice. It doesn't say accountable to the government. The original article says that the Tories had a similar problem last year. The Justice Secretary at the time asked them to amend some new guidance but they refused.
 
I wonder what accountable to Parliament means in practice. It doesn't say accountable to the government. The original article says that the Tories had a similar problem last year. The Justice Secretary at the time asked them to amend some new guidance but they refused.
Is this a rogue judiciary system we have here or a political problem or both?
 
Also, why should disclosing you are transgender affect how you are sentenced? If you are gay, you don't get special treatment so what is the deal here?

Maybe being in prison is more dangerous for transgender people? I don't really know what they are looking at in pre-sentence reports.
 
I wonder what accountable to Parliament means in practice. It doesn't say accountable to the government. The original article says that the Tories had a similar problem last year. The Justice Secretary at the time asked them to amend some new guidance but they refused.
On their own website it just says they are accountable to parliament, and the MOJ.
I take that to mean that they can only be overridden by an act of parliament?
Dunno.
 
Maybe being in prison is more dangerous for transgender people? I don't really know what they are looking at in pre-sentence reports.
I seem to recall seeing stats somewhere at some point which indicated to it being more dangerous for female prisoners being housed with males who identify as women but we digress. The point is the law is treating some of us differently to others.
 
Jennrick stirring things up, nothing to say on the current world crisis
 
Jennrick stirring things up, nothing to say on the current world crisis
Don't be absurd. We cannot have a judicial system that treats sects of our society differently because of faith, culture, race or whether they are transgender or not.
 
Don't be absurd. We cannot have a judicial system that treats sects of our society differently because of faith, culture, race or whether they are transgender or not.
It doesn't treat them differently, it takes relevant factors into account, its tne judge who decides tne sentence. Don’t forget that personal circumstances can aggravate as well as mitigate. Jenny can’t resist stirring tne pot.
 
It doesn't treat them differently, it takes relevant factors into account, its tne judge who decides tne sentence. Don’t forget that personal circumstances can aggravate as well as mitigate. Jenny can’t resist stirring tne pot.
Why is being gay not listed then? Or being white? Or being heterosexual?

It is bias.
 
Some people are at more risk in prison or are likely to have worse outcomes where a non custodial sentence is more likely to prevent reoffending. That's what the pre sentencing reports are for. They're produced for some categories of offenders automatically, and others on request.

The category of offenders who get them automatically has been increased. That's all as far as I can see.
 
Back
Top