Support NeoGAF

[CryptiK]

Seriously?

Yeah and you can bet they'd be out for blood if the roles were switched.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

It's still the same subject and discussion about white privilege. What about it makes it spam? Just because you don't give a shit about it?

Is it really surprising to anyone that white people don't like to keep hearing about the privilege their skin colour affords them?

As for class, there might be an argument that if she were a lower class white person she might be in jail, but the fact does remain that while the lower class might be in the jail, a person of colour would definitely be in jail. There'd be no second guessing, no maybe or if she were lower class...any person of colour, rich or poor would be destroyed in the press and given the harshest sentence possible.

 

[danthefan]

Is it really surprising to anyone that white people don't like to keep hearing about the privilege their skin colour affords them?

As for class, there might be an argument that if she were a lower class white person she might be in jail, but the fact does remain that while the lower class might be in the jail, a person of colour would definitely be in jail. There'd be no second guessing, no maybe or if she were lower class...any person of colour, rich or poor would be destroyed in the press and given the harshest sentence possible.

Citation needed.

 

[Yoshi]

Appreciate this and to add to this some do what yoshi is trying to do. Keeping it at this one case you can dispel race because they eliminate any way to compare it to statistics.

It is a logical error in general to compare single data points to statistical differences, as long as we are not talking 0-1 cases. So if someone smokes and dies of cancer, one might feel in the right to say "that person smoked itself to death", but just because smoking increases the likelihood of getting cancer, it is not clear for the individual case that this was the cause.

If you state that this specific case is a case of racial discrimination, you are not talking about statistics anymore, you are specifically accusing the judge of giving a mild sentence because she is white. While this certainly is a possibility, there is no information given (that I am aware of) that this is true. On the flipside however, we have solid data to suggest the sentence is helped by her class, education and her intelligence.

Still, even if those are the only reasons, we can deduce that her ethnicity has made her more likely to get those advantages (minus intelligence, but even then, since only perceived intelligence is important, it could still help, since an intelligent car mechanic would probably not be regarded because of his intelligence, so class plays a role in perceived intelligence too and ethnicity plays a role in class).

But since there is no indication of ethnicity directly influencing the sentence, it is unfair towards the judge to pin this - without any additional information I am not aware of - to a matter of racism.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Citation needed.

If you’re black, you’re treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you’re white.

Disproportional outcomes were particularly noticeable in certain categories of offences. For every 100 white women handed custodial sentences at crown courts for drug offences, the report found, 227 black women were sentenced to custody. For black men, the figure is 141 for every 100 white men.

You did the same thing a few pages back and you were answered, but here you are again...wasn't that evidence enough?

 

[Yoshi]

You did the same thing a few pages back and you were answered, but here you are again...wasn't that evidence enough?

It does not justify the absolute terms you used though, since your sources are talking about average experience, whereas you were taking a specific case and solely changing the variable of ethnicity.

 

[Kal]

It is a logical error in general to compare single data points to statistical differences, as long as we are not talking 0-1 cases. So if someone smokes and dies of cancer, one might feel in the right to say "that person smoked itself to death", but just because smoking increases the likelihood of getting cancer, it is not clear for the individual case that this was the cause.

If you state that this specific case is a case of racial discrimination, you are not talking about statistics anymore, you are specifically accusing the judge of giving a mild sentence because she is white. While this certainly is a possibility, there is no information given (that I am aware of) that this is true. On the flipside however, we have solid data to suggest the sentence is helped by her class, education and her intelligence.

Still, even if those are the only reasons, we can deduce that her ethnicity has made her more likely to get those advantages (minus intelligence, but even then, since only perceived intelligence is important, it could still help, since an intelligent car mechanic would probably not be regarded because of his intelligence, so class plays a role in perceived intelligence too and ethnicity plays a role in class).

But since there is no indication of ethnicity directly influencing the sentence, it is unfair towards the judge to pin this - without any additional information I am not aware of - to a matter of racism.

Sounds like you're going out of your way to deny white privilege. No one is saying the judge is being overtly racist (it hard to claim discrimination when the person being sentenced isn't a minority) however what myself and others are saying is that her race plays a huge role in the deal that she got. Statistically blacks and other minorities have been given harsher sentences in the UK - while it will be impossible to find a case that is very similar to this it isn't unreasonable to assume that if this violent woman was a minority the judge will not have shown this much leniency. Does the fact that she's a woman, pretty and intelligent play a factor? Absolutely. But definitely not on the same level as the colour of her skin.

 

[danthefan]

You did the same thing a few pages back and you were answered, but here you are again...wasn't that evidence enough?

There's no possible way to say all those things you mentioned would DEFINITELY have happened to a minority, in this instance. You just can't be sure about that, it isn't possible.

 

[Any Questions]

She looks like a soon to be serial killer. Something in the eyes gives me concern.

 

[Yeoman]

There's no possible way to say all those things you mentioned would DEFINITELY have happened to a minority, in this instance. You just can't be sure about that, it isn't possible.

I mean you can't prove that there isn't a teapot currently orbiting the sun right now.
What exactly do you wan? Statistically you're more likely to be jailed for the same crimes if you aren't white.

 

[Yoshi]

Sounds like you're going out of your way to deny white privilege. No one is saying the judge is being overtly racist (it hard to claim discrimination when the person being sentenced isn't a minority) however what myself and others are saying is that her race plays a huge role in the deal that she got. Statistically blacks and other minorities have been given harsher sentences in the UK - while it will be impossible to find a case that is very similar to this it isn't unreasonable to assume that if this violent woman was a minority the judge will not have shown this much leniency. Does the fact that she's a woman, pretty and intelligent play a factor? Absolutely. But definitely not on the same level as the colour of her skin.

Then tell me, what is the base for the claim that her ethnicity has been directly influencing the sentence she got? You yourself resorted back to "statistically minorities have been given harsher sentences", which I do not reject. But it is not OK to conclude from that (a) that she got a milder sentence specifically because she was white (b) that this is even a bigger factor in this specific case than her intelligence, education and class. Specifically her intellgence, education and age are mentioned as the reasons for this mild sentence and I don't see much reason to doubt these reasons are actual reasons for the sentence. Had she been the same person but less intelligent or less educated (or older) the same argument would be impossible, so it is quite obvious that these factors are a necessity for this specific sentence. Her being black (other things being constant: same age, education, intelligence, class, attractiveness, language) wouldn't have had any influence on the argument at all, so to state that she would have gotten a harsher sentence then is to state that this specific judge is acting racist. This is a strong and in my eyes unjustified claim.

I mean you can't prove that there isn't a teapot currently orbiting the sun right now.
What exactly do you wan? Statistically you're more likely to be jailed for the same crimes if you aren't white.

You are misusing the teapot analogy. The teapot argument says that a claim bears no merit, if it is deliberately stated in a way that it cannot be falsified and without any evidence supporting it. Like religious claims. And therefore argues why it is OK to say "the claim a god exists may not be treated any other way than any other wild phantasy and it is solely the obligation of the person claiming its existence to prove it, otherwise it is the correct reaction to assume it is wrong".

The problem with such claims based on statistics when applied to individuals is that you are projecting average behaviour of a group onto single persos within the group, which is, in general, a fallacy.

 

[Seiryoden]

Others have posted many of the statistics I was preparing for the previous thread. I haven't seen anyone yet note that Black and Minority Ethnic Britons are more likely to be be remanded to pre-trial custody than their white counterparts. The Institute of Race Relation maintains a list of B&ME deaths in custody.

The MoJ provides a yearly bulletin of statistics on race and the criminal justice system which can be found on the internet. Happy to see less contumelious posting in this thread.

 

[Principate]

She fucking lied about having cancer to hide coke action amongst now 3 assault charges and the Judge thinks she has chance of a career in Medicine? That's a fucking joke.

 

[Kal]

Then tell me, what is the base for the claim that her ethnicity has been directly influencing the sentence she got? You yourself resorted back to "statistically minorities have been given harsher sentences", which I do not reject. But it is not OK to conclude from that (a) that she got a milder sentence specifically because she was white (b) that this is even a bigger factor in this specific case than her intelligence, education and class. Specifically her intellgence, education and age are mentioned as the reasons for this mild sentence and I don't see much reason to doubt these reasons are actual reasons for the sentence. Had she been the same person but less intelligent or less educated (or older) the same argument would be impossible, so it is quite obvious that these factors are a necessity for this specific sentence. Her being black (other things being constant: same age, education, intelligence, class, attractiveness, language) wouldn't have had any influence on the argument at all, so to state that she would have gotten a harsher sentence then is to state that this specific judge is acting racist. This is a strong and in my eyes unjustified claim.

Did you expect the judge to mention her race as the reason she got a lighter sentence? lol.
What I'm deducing from your post is that until you see another case where the person's circumstances are exactly the same and the only variable is her race then we simply cannot state that race has a massive effect on sentencing. I beg to differ (statistics and my anecdotal evidence as a black man in the UK tell me otherwise).

Regardless of race the sentence is ludicrous. But I look forward to the next case where a minority stabs someone and is let off because it would jeopardise their career /s

 

[TatteredHat]

She should be in jail and that judge should be dismissed.

 

[Yoshi]

Did you expect the judge to mention her race as the reason she got a lighter sentence? lol.
What I'm deducing from your post is that until you see another case where the person's circumstances are exactly the same and the only variable is her race then we simply cannot state that race has a massive effect on sentencing. I beg to differ (statistics and my anecdotal evidence as a black man in the UK tell me otherwise).

Regardless of race the sentence is ludicrous. But I look forward to the next case where a minority stabs someone and is let off because it would jeopardise their career /s

No, we would have to analyse this specific judge's cases and if then we can establish a significantly harsher tendency in his (just his!) sentences towards black people, it could be justified to claim that this specific instance was a case where the defendant being white was of relevance. Statistics covering all judges in the UK or a similar enough case judged by someone else would not help in that regard. Your anecdotal evidence, when this case is concerned, is likely completely irrelevant, assuming your experience does not come from experiences with this specific judge.

Also, I am not claiming that ethnicity positively played no role at all, I am just saying that we have no basis to state it does (or does not) in this case. Of course, the judge will not say "I don't want to put you in jail because you have so nice white, rosy skin", but my point is not that it must be wrong that she got a lighter sentence because of her ethnicity, my point is that there is no reason to assume this in this specific case.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Told you guys. Judge got bribed.

 

[The Hamburglar]

I see you still don't believe white privilege is a thing. Keep it up.

please click on my profile and view my posts and show me where I denied white privilege was a thing.

I'll save you the time, I never have.

I said in this case it was the fact shes a woman and middle class that got her off.

 

[danthefan]

I mean you can't prove that there isn't a teapot currently orbiting the sun right now.
What exactly do you wan? Statistically you're more likely to be jailed for the same crimes if you aren't white.

Yeah, that's not an unreasonable position to take. She could be in jail now if she was a black poor person with no education. Might even be likely. But talking in absolutes like that is stupid. Nobody knows.

 

[chicko1983]

As someone who has spent a lot of time in England with the upper middle class (not the same as middle class in America), this story sounds more to me like class privilege than white privilege.

The grey area is that the middle class is pretty much only white, unless someone of colour has married into it.

 

[akira28]

Yeah, that's not an unreasonable position to take. She could be in jail now if she was a black poor person with no education. Might even be likely. But talking in absolutes like that is stupid. Nobody knows.

we wouldn't want him becoming a Sith, so his "talking in absolutes" as you say, is the most important factor in this.

 

[Shiggy]

White privilege, female privilege, class privilege, or Oxford privilege? The NeoGAF jury is still out on that question.

Every country probably has judges who are doing a bad job. Is this decision going to be appealed?

Also, I'm rather shocked that it's ok to publish photos and full names of victim and culprit in the UK. These people aren't public figures, and it's going to have lasting effects beyond what is decided in court.

 

[Kal]

No, we would have to analyse this specific judge's cases and if then we can establish a significantly harsher tendency in his (just his!) sentences towards black people, it could be justified to claim that this specific instance was a case where the defendant being white was of relevance. Statistics covering all judges in the UK or a similar enough case judged by someone else would not help in that regard. Your anecdotal evidence, when this case is concerned, is likely completely irrelevant, assuming your experience does not come from experiences with this specific judge.

Also, I am not claiming that ethnicity positively played no role at all, I am just saying that we have no basis to state it does (or does not) in this case. Of course, the judge will not say "I don't want to put you in jail because you have so nice white, rosy skin", but my point is not that it must be wrong that she got a lighter sentence because of her ethnicity, my point is that there is no reason to assume this in this specific case.

Seems we're going around in circles; you're quick to state we have no basis to say her race played a role in her sentencing however you're also inclined to believe her age, intelligence, and class had a part in it. Why should I believe the judge? And yet you haven't analysed this specific judge's cases to see if he has historically given lighter sentences purely based on the aforementioned reasons. Unless you think the sentencing is fair? When it comes to white privilege I do not have the luxury of giving him the benefit of the doubt when the statistics show you are more likely to get a harsher sentence if you are a minority. And yes, these statistics don't specific cover this judge's cases. The bottom line is by being white the odds are simply in her favour. Which is white privilege. Therefore I believe race (along with other factors) had a part to play in her sentencing.

 

[Transhuman]

She looks like a soon to be serial killer. Something in the eyes gives me concern.

Even Google's AI wants this chick locked up.

 

[Jumeira]

This is some bullshit, the law is the law, no matter how good your aspirations and potential is, you cant absolve people based on what they may become, if you make a mistake completely on your own you need to be punished, if she had common sense shed know not to indulge in drugs and attack someone with a bloody knife, this really spits in the face of all physicians who hold restraint and walk the straight line during their schooling. So what if she's an Oxford student, it looks even worse because she shouldn't be in the situation because she's supposed to be smart.

 

[iceatcs]

As someone who has spent a lot of time in England with the upper middle class (not the same as middle class in America), this story sounds more to me like class privilege than white privilege.

The grey area is that the middle class is pretty much only white, unless someone of colour has married into it.

Same thing with Asian families (Pakistan), two Asian guys I know got caught for drug dealing. Both got the same charge but one goes to the full-time jail and the other just a part-time house arrest with the tag. Why because one is from a poor area (Slough) and other from better class (Gerrard Cross).

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Bu bu bu he's a man and he used a pole and she was pregnant...we can't compare unless it's an absolute 1:1 comparison

 

[harriet the spy]

Bu bu bu he's a man and he used a pole and she was pregnant...we can't compare unless it's an absolute 1:1 comparison

Given that she was female is literally the other proposed factor along with class in the leniency you indeed show nothing with this.

The truth is that all three most likely played a role and understanding which played a larger role is not easy given to which extent two of them are correlated

 

[Aureon]

I really don't think this is a good showcase of racism. In a (overwhelming) majority white country you won't see it manifest by white people being released with loads of too mild sentences, but minorities that are being discriminated against receiving too harsh sentences (and more sentences overall on a weaker basis). This sentence clearly is strongly influenced by her social standing / class, education and perceived worth for society. For her to get into such a position, it might possibly have been disadvantageous if she were not white, but white privilege is less of a privilege in the stricter sense but more the absence of discrimination.

Sex and ethnicity may play a role in the sentence, but it certainly is less clear than the class and perceived value being of importance here. Of course, if you have a statistic at hand showing that this judge gives more harsh sentences to non-white people on average, I could see it being a releavant example, but as it stands, I really don't see this as a primarily ethnical thing.

Indeed, in this case, it's probably class, then sex, then race - but juxtaposing this with the thread of a black man getting jailed for 10y for a crime he didn't commit can't help but get us to think about racism in the judiciary - even if it's very different cases in very different jurisdictions.

 

[Ashes]

If you're going to have a non-sun source for political and moral reasons, than you also ought not to have the Metro. The Metro is dmg owned.

 

[theWB27]

It is a logical error in general to compare single data points to statistical differences, as long as we are not talking 0-1 cases. So if someone smokes and dies of cancer, one might feel in the right to say "that person smoked itself to death", but just because smoking increases the likelihood of getting cancer, it is not clear for the individual case that this was the cause.

If you state that this specific case is a case of racial discrimination, you are not talking about statistics anymore, you are specifically accusing the judge of giving a mild sentence because she is white. While this certainly is a possibility, there is no information given (that I am aware of) that this is true. On the flipside however, we have solid data to suggest the sentence is helped by her class, education and her intelligence.

Still, even if those are the only reasons, we can deduce that her ethnicity has made her more likely to get those advantages (minus intelligence, but even then, since only perceived intelligence is important, it could still help, since an intelligent car mechanic would probably not be regarded because of his intelligence, so class plays a role in perceived intelligence too and ethnicity plays a role in class).

But since there is no indication of ethnicity directly influencing the sentence, it is unfair towards the judge to pin this - without any additional information I am not aware of - to a matter of racism.

Nothing but word salad.

 

[MonorailCat]

Given that she was female is literally the other proposed factor along with class in the leniency you indeed show nothing with this.

and her victim was male. female on male violence is still not really taken seriously (in court and in society)

 

[Peter Ian Staker]

Don't put your dick in crazy people.

 

[Beefy]

Bu bu bu he's a man and he used a pole and she was pregnant...we can't compare unless it's an absolute 1:1 comparison

No point in arguing man. I gave up trying to get some people to see that white privilege is part of why she got off lightly.

 

[Rubenov]

Also, I'm rather shocked that it's ok to publish photos and full names of victim and culprit in the UK. These people aren't public figures, and it's going to have lasting effects beyond what is decided in court.

Good. May help other men not date her and avoid a potential disaster.

 

[DeathyBoy]

Don't put your dick in crazy people.

Now hang on a sec, let's not say anything crazy...

 

[Spaced Harrier]

I'd still date her.

Just gotta keep my reflect sharp.

 

[MatrixMan.EXE]

If the two incidents were even in the same country there might be a point here.

So what you're saying is, white privilege doesn't exist in the UK justice system?

 

[Lagamorph]

So what you're saying is, white privilege doesn't exist in the UK justice system?

Not to anywhere near the extent it does in America at least.

 

[wumster3000]

I care about both of them. I don't immediately write people off based on Sun.co.uk articles.

I'm sure the guy's alright. Do we even know how severe the wound was? I doubt she'd be free if she had crippled the guy for life. Or should I be suing my sister for that time we were in a fight, and she pushed me, and I fell on the back of my head, which left me with a gash?

This dude...

Everyone knows this is some BS. The girl had a record and they still let her off? Oxford wants a proven criminal in their system? Such BS.

 

[Beefy]

Not to anywhere near the extent it does in America at least.

Look at the OP and say that again. We just don't have racist as fuck that shoot,kill,beat up brothers like the US. But the legal system is still heavily racist.

 

[Loose Cannon]

I recommend having a look at the somewhat similar case from March where Mustafa Bashir, aged 34, (who you might note is both a man and not white) was given a suspended sentence for assaulting his wife with a cricket bat.

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...-prison-because-his-wife-was-too-intelligent/

And then having a look at the post written about this case:
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...read-knife-so-why-is-she-not-going-to-prison/

 

[Beefy]

I recommend having a look at the somewhat similar case from March where Mustafa Bashir, aged 34, (who you might note is both a man and not white) was given a suspended sentence for assaulting his wife with a cricket bat.

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...-prison-because-his-wife-was-too-intelligent/

And then having a look at the article written about this case:
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...read-knife-so-why-is-she-not-going-to-prison/

I recommend you read the report I posted in the OP. POC are far more likely to get jail time then a white person and that is a fact and this is what many are saying. Add that to she is well off, decent looking, has a promising career it all adds up.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I recommend having a look at the somewhat similar case from March where Mustafa Bashir, aged 34, (who you might note is both a man and not white) was given a suspended sentence for assaulting his wife with a cricket bat.

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...-prison-because-his-wife-was-too-intelligent/

And then having a look at the post written about this case:
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...read-knife-so-why-is-she-not-going-to-prison/

Is this your blog? Need updating...

A man who admitted attacking his wife with a cricket bat and forcing her to drink bleach has been jailed after a judge said the court was "misled" over a cricket contract.

Mustafa Bashir, 33, was spared a custodial term in March as the judge heard he would lose out on a cricket contract with Leicestershire.

Judge Richard Mansell QC, reviewing the sentence at Manchester Crown Court, said he was "fundamentally misled".

He sentenced Bashir to 18 months.

 

[Loose Cannon]

I recommend you read the report I posted in the OP. POC are far more likely to get jail time then a white person and that is a fact and this is what many are saying. Add that to she is well off, decent looking, has a promising career it all adds up.

All adds up to what though? She hasn't even been sentenced yet! If she does get a suspended sentence that is perfectly within the guidelines given to the judge, is not an atypical thing to happen (see Bashir) and is not her getting off scot free.

I'm not denying the figures in the report you posted or that racial bias occurs in our justice system. It certainly does. What I'm saying is that suggesting she is getting special treatment is incorrect. This case is unusual only in that it reached the national media.

 

[Beefy]

All adds up to what though? She hasn't even been sentenced yet! If she does get a suspended sentence that is perfectly within the guidelines given to the judge, is not an atypical thing to happen (see Bashir) and is not her getting off scot free.

I'm not denying the figures in the report you posted or that racial bias occurs in our justice system. It certainly does. What I'm saying is that suggesting she is getting special treatment is incorrect. This case is unusual only in that it reached the national media.

But she is getting special treatment, even the judge said that. You add her having a promising career to ,being white, well off and decent looking girl. It all adds up to her having a advantage over many people.




Also Bashir was locked up...

 

[Yoshi]

This is some bullshit, the law is the law, no matter how good your aspirations and potential is, you cant absolve people based on what they may become, if you make a mistake completely on your own you need to be punished, if she had common sense shed know not to indulge in drugs and attack someone with a bloody knife, this really spits in the face of all physicians who hold restraint and walk the straight line during their schooling. So what if she's an Oxford student, it looks even worse because she shouldn't be in the situation because she's supposed to be smart.

Let me first note that I don't think the sentence, from what I have heard about it, is just, but the outlook of the accused does play a role in jurisdication and should do so as well. The goal of a good law system (i.e. not the U.S. one) should be to make people valuable members of the society, to see their mistakes and to not repeat them. So "what one may become" does and should play a role. But of course, it should only do so when it concerns the case directly, not "the greater good".

Nothing but word salad.

I appreciate your classy discussion style.

Seems we're going around in circles; you're quick to state we have no basis to say her race played a role in her sentencing however you're also inclined to believe her age, intelligence, and class had a part in it. Why should I believe the judge? And yet you haven't analysed this specific judge's cases to see if he has historically given lighter sentences purely based on the aforementioned reasons. Unless you think the sentencing is fair? When it comes to white privilege I do not have the luxury of giving him the benefit of the doubt when the statistics show you are more likely to get a harsher sentence if you are a minority. And yes, these statistics don't specific cover this judge's cases. The bottom line is by being white the odds are simply in her favour. Which is white privilege. Therefore I believe race (along with other factors) had a part to play in her sentencing.

Why should you not believe the judge? Yes, I haven't analysed the history of this judge, but I also do not make claims about him being a racist or not. As far as I am concerned, ethnicity may or may not have played a role in this sentence, I do not know. You, however, are directly calling this judge a racist, based on a single case and some statistics that say nothing about the judge himself. What I am arguing is, that to make such a claim, one has to investigate the specific judge (and even then it can be hard to come to a conclusion, based on how many cases he ruled on and how ethnicity distributes). Giving someone, in the absence of any evidence pointing to the contrary, the benfit of a doubt when it comes to discriminating people for their sex, ethnicity or religion should be the norm. Unfounded (even if maybe correct) accusations should never be the norm.

I agree on the bottom line argument that she had better chances of obtaining such a ruling over a black person and I know this is called white privilege (Though I would prefer racial discrimination here, because what is called white privilege should be the norm for all people, rather than the discriminatory reality of people of other ethnicities. So I would argue white privilege shouldn't be abolished, but instead be extended to all people; one should fight discrimination and unfair behaviour rather than the benefit of absence of it.).

But having a better chance of a more positive ruling is the advantage, not the outcome itself. I think a good analogue would be if you (who I now just assume to be black for this example) have a standard dice and I have a dice where the one is replaced by a six. If we both roll our dices and I roll a six, then I was more likely to get a six (which is my white dice privilege), but the event of rolling a six itself is not necessarily a result of having better odds at getting a six, it could just be the regular six. So in this case what I am saying is: She was more likely to get away with it, but the mere observation that she did says nothing about whether it is because she was lucky to be judged by a judge who values educations, intelligence and youth extraordinarily high (but would have done the same had she been black), or if she landed a judge who (in addition) judges white people more favourably.

 

[Beefy]

Let me first note that I don't think the sentence, from what I have heard about it, is just, but the outlook of the accused does play a role in jurisdication and should do so as well. The goal of a good law system (i.e. not the U.S. one) should be to make people valuable members of the society, to see their mistakes and to not repeat them. So "what one may become" does and should play a role. But of course, it should only do so when it concerns the case directly, not "the greater good".
I appreciate your classy discussion style.
Why should you not believe the judge? Yes, I haven't analysed the history of this judge, but I also do not make claims about him being a racist or not. As far as I am concerned, ethnicity may or may not have played a role in this sentence, I do not know. You, however, are directly calling this judge a racist, based on a single case and some statistics that say nothing about the judge himself. What I am arguing is, that to make such a claim, one has to investigate the specific judge (and even then it can be hard to come to a conclusion, based on how many cases he ruled on and how ethnicity distributes). Giving someone, in the absence of any evidence pointing to the contrary, the benfit of a doubt when it comes to discriminating people for their sex, ethnicity or religion should be the norm. Unfounded (even if maybe correct) accusations should never be the norm.

I agree on the bottom line argument that she had better chances of obtaining such a ruling over a black person and I know this is called white privilege (Though I would prefer racial discrimination here, because what is called white privilege should be the norm for all people, rather than the discriminatory reality of people of other ethnicities. So I would argue white privilege shouldn't be abolished, but instead be extended to all people; one should fight discrimination and unfair behaviour rather than the benefit of absence of it.).

But having a better chance of a more positive ruling is the advantage, not the outcome itself. I think a good analogue would be if you (who I now just assume to be black for this example) have a standard dice and I have a dice where the one is replaced by a six. If we both roll our dices and I roll a six, then I was more likely to get a six (which is my white dice privilege), but the event of rolling a six itself is not necessarily a result of having better odds at getting a six, it could just be the regular six. So in this case what I am saying is: She was more likely to get away with it, but the mere observation that she did says nothing about whether it is because she was lucky to be judged by a judge who values educations, intelligence and youth extraordinarily high (but would have done the same had she been black), or if she landed a judge who (in addition) judges white people more favourably.

A person doesn't have to be racist to be biased towards a race.

 

[Yoshi]

A person doesn't have to be racist to be biased towards a race.

Is there a preferred word I should use instead? I would have called it a light form of racism if someone just has a bias towards or against an ethnicity but does not proclaim superiority of a race.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Is there a preferred word I should use instead? I would have called it a light form of racism if someone just has a bias towards or against an ethnicity but does not proclaim superiority of a race.

Racial bias. Which turns into systemic racism the more it occurs as it places the non-white folks at a distinct disadvantage.

For example if my big black ass were in front of the same judge I'd be doing time. Believe it.

Edit: autocorrect changed my attempt to use the word "non-white" to "non-violent". My point stands.