Lewdog
Gold Member
Ray, the dude has no idea of AmericaYou think sentencing is the same. It's by far not. Even when there are laws with "mandatory" sentences, they are often times targeted towards a particular racial group, like those that make crack laws carry harsher sentences than cocaine crimes.
I never said they were even, what I said is that there are circumstances surrounding the sentencing outside of race. Let's take your claim for example.
More people get killed selling and buying crack than any other drug including cocaine. Crack influences gang wars in the street because it's a cheaper drug than cocaine. Wouldn't it make sense to have harsher sentences for selling a drug that creates more crimes than one that's not?
But let's take a similar crime--crack. Two people, one white and one black are convicted of buying crack. The black suspect gets three years more than the white. You think that's all that needs to be known.
What you don't know is what the judge knew who sentenced these two people. The black may have a history of repeated buying. How did each suspect interact with police? That's something a judge considers. How did they conduct themselves in court? Another factor a judge uses.
I've been in court on a few cases. A judge has a meeting with the police officers involved in his chambers. He or she wants to know if the suspect gave them a hard time, fought with them, what they did while being processed. If they were honest and admitted to the crime, or refused to cooperate with the officers. Guess what? If a suspect fought with police and gave them a hard time, that person will likely receive a harsher sentence than one who didn't and fully cooperated with the cops.
But you think it's all about race. Watch the show COPS sometime. Take notice of what race of suspects constantly run or fight with police; trying to hide evidence like dropping the bag of dope on the ground and kicking it under the police car. Or when a police officer traces the foot chase and finds the gun or dope. Blacks refuse to admit it was theirs. Do you think a judge doesn't know what's going on?
A friend of mine works in the court system downtown. Because this subject comes up so often, I asked for his opinion about sentencing and race. He has no data to support his claim, but his opinion is that yes, at times race does play a factor. But the judges that are known to give more time to blacks than whites are black judges themselves. It makes sense too. Some of these judges live in the neighborhoods these crimes take place. Of course they want the black troublemakers off their streets for longer periods of time. On the other hand, if you are a white judge and had a hatred of black people, the worst thing you could do for the black community is give lenient sentences to those who will likely cause trouble again.
Statistics can be helpful and honest, but they can also be misleading.
What he (she) is saying is that there are not exact same sentences for the exact same charge. He's accurate on that. But judges do not rule exclusively on the charge alone. There are many other circumstances surrounding the judges decision.
If judges were to hand out sentences for the charge alone, there would be no need for a judge. A computer would just print out what the penalty was for the crime. But if a judge gives somebody a break, he or she wants to make sure that person won't be back in his courtroom two days after getting out.
I don't know about anywhere else, but from time to time, a judge hands down a lenient sentence, and then the accused goes out and commits another crime; sometimes a worse crime. Then the media digs into the suspects record and finds all kinds of crap; a criminal history going back to his juvenile years. Then they ask WTF made this judge let this guy off in the first place?
On the other hand, no judge wants to make a criminal out of somebody that just made a mistake in life. One mistake and a suspect showing remorse? Sure a judge can give that person a break. It won't come back and haunt him if the suspect does go out and commit a worse crime.
First of all I'm a man. If you were smart enough to click on my avatar that is clearly stated.
Second off, you are making assumptions that are not true in the least bit. Yes, obviously judges look into a person's background when making a decision for their punishment (when that is allowed of course, they can't if it is a crime with a mandatory sentence), but your idea that things are all played out correctly due to that, and that those who get harsher sentences deserved it, is completely asinine.
Just look at the Stanford swimmer rape case. Compare that to the woman that just got pardoned after being jailed for LIFE on a first time offense non-violent drug charge.
First of all, I thought at one time you had a female avatar. I always assume males will use male avatars and females will do the same, that's why I wasn't sure what you were.
Secondly, my point is that you just can't look at sentences, races, and draw a conclusive line. In our city alone, two people might face the same charge, with the same criminal history, with the same conduct while being arrested, and both might get different sentences because judges are just as different as suspects. One judge may be more conservative than another and under the belief that harsher sentences are needed. A more liberal judge may have more compassion and give a lighter sentence.
There are just too many variables to say sentences are given because of race.
It was a female avatar that read, "Doctors says staring at breasts helps prevent cancer."
Your second point is actually against you... because stats show, by a FAR margin, that Blacks are sentenced at a higher rate, and with harsher sentences, than any other group, even when using the same offense with the same situations and backgrounds.