Like/Tweet/+1
Latest topics
» Alarming decline in flying insects
by Sary Today at 1:44

» Monty Python Scenes & Sketches
by Sary Today at 0:21

» Old Film Trailers (to 2009)
by Neon Knight Yesterday at 22:44

» Finland, Luxembourg & Ireland worst for anti-black harassment
by Neon Knight Fri 15 Feb - 22:04

» Financial incentives for Hungarian women to have more children
by Neon Knight Wed 13 Feb - 0:18

» Classic TV Theme Music
by Neon Knight Sun 10 Feb - 22:48

» Liberals lecture and conservatives communicate
by Neon Knight Sat 9 Feb - 8:00

» Song Cover-Versions & Originals
by Neon Knight Wed 6 Feb - 23:09

» Personality Differences in Twitter and Facebook Users
by Neon Knight Wed 6 Feb - 0:21

» Germany's AfD Party
by Neon Knight Sun 3 Feb - 23:17

» 23andMe update
by Sary Fri 1 Feb - 0:36

» Genes for staying slim do exist
by OsricPearl Wed 30 Jan - 4:14

» Popular music has become more emotionally negative
by Neon Knight Mon 28 Jan - 0:38

» Pronouncing ö and ü in German
by Neon Knight Thu 24 Jan - 22:31

» Now listening to . . .
by Neon Knight Wed 23 Jan - 23:14

» Government Shutdown over Border Wall
by OsricPearl Mon 21 Jan - 18:28

» Historical European Martial Arts, Arms & Armour
by Neon Knight Sun 20 Jan - 18:34

» Brexit Saga Update
by Neon Knight Sat 19 Jan - 21:49

» How Poisons Kill
by Sary Fri 18 Jan - 0:27

» Blond hair has more genetic variants
by OsricPearl Tue 15 Jan - 3:25

» Reincarnation
by Sary Tue 15 Jan - 0:35

» Political Systems
by Neon Knight Sat 22 Dec - 22:57

» British Attitudes to Racism
by Neon Knight Sat 22 Dec - 19:46

» Twitter's dangerous approach to hate speech
by Neon Knight Fri 21 Dec - 18:04

» The Marrakesh Migration Declaration / Pact
by Neon Knight Wed 19 Dec - 23:39

» Psychopaths & Sociopaths
by Neon Knight Wed 19 Dec - 23:29

» When is the brain fully developed?
by Sary Wed 19 Dec - 20:51

» Distribution of EU Funding
by Sary Mon 17 Dec - 21:41

» Over-consumption of earth's resources continues
by Neon Knight Sat 15 Dec - 20:18

» Tommy Robinson
by Neon Knight Sun 9 Dec - 23:01

» Paris is Burning
by Sary Sat 8 Dec - 19:14

» Accounts of Apparitions
by Neon Knight Sat 8 Dec - 18:32

» The tallest statue in Europe
by Neon Knight Sun 2 Dec - 23:57

» UK Migration Issues
by Neon Knight Sun 2 Dec - 23:42

» How populist are you?
by Neon Knight Wed 28 Nov - 21:46

» Attitudes to flag flying in Britain
by Neon Knight Mon 26 Nov - 20:42

» Global Cooling Upon us?
by Sary Sat 24 Nov - 13:02

» What do the Irish think of the English?
by OsricPearl Fri 23 Nov - 0:23

» Are Scots still against independence?
by Neon Knight Tue 20 Nov - 19:40

» dNA.Land
by OsricPearl Tue 20 Nov - 18:43


Racially aggravated crime - does it make sense?

Reply to topic

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Racially aggravated crime - does it make sense?

Post Neon Knight on Sun 15 Oct - 1:57

Imagine the following scenario:


Two half drunk white men cross the street and begin an unprovoked attack on a black man. White Man A shouts several racial insults during the attack. White Man B, though just as physically aggressive, says nothing.

The crime is reported, the two white men are tried and found guilty of Actual Bodily Harm. Both are sent to prison but Man A is also found guilty of a racially aggravated offence:

"The offender demonstrating towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim's membership (or presumed membership) of a racial or religious group"

And so he is given a longer prison sentence than Man A . . .

"In addition to the specific offences created by the Act, the law imposes a general duty on criminal courts, when sentencing an offender, to treat more seriously any offence which can be shown to be racially or religiously aggravated (Section 145 Criminal Justice Act 2003)"


Is the longer sentence for Man A logical or should his racial insults at the victim have made no difference to the seriousness of his crime?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Between the velvet lies, there's a truth that's hard as steel
The vision never dies, life's a never ending wheel
- R.J.Dio
Neon Knight
Neon Knight
The Castellan

Male Posts : 1280
Join date : 2017-03-05

http://castle-europa.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

.

Post Guest on Sun 15 Oct - 22:00

@Neon Knight wrote:Imagine the following scenario:


Two half drunk white men cross the street and begin an unprovoked attack on a black man. White Man A shouts several racial insults during the attack. White Man B, though just as physically aggressive, says nothing.

The crime is reported, the two white men are tried and found guilty of Actual Bodily Harm. Both are sent to prison but Man A is also found guilty of a racially aggravated offence:

"The offender demonstrating towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim's membership (or presumed membership) of a racial or religious group"

And so he is given a longer prison sentence than Man A . . .

"In addition to the specific offences created by the Act, the law imposes a general duty on criminal courts, when sentencing an offender, to treat more seriously any offence which can be shown to be racially or religiously aggravated (Section 145 Criminal Justice Act 2003)"


Is the longer sentence for Man A logical or should his racial insults at the victim have made no difference to the seriousness of his crime?

Strange decision. White Man A offended the black guy's dignity, too, that's why it sounds logical.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You can reply to topics in this forum