Support NeoGAF

[Mael]

Boy, if you think racism is not highly prevalent in Europe, do I have a bridge to sell....
Of course Europeans don't view minorities the same way Europeans do.
For example Catholics are not viewed in the same way in France as they are in the US for obvious reasons.
In the same way, people of color suffer differently from their US counterparts.
They still get sent to jail way quicker but they don't go to fuel a private prison system.
They get shafted but differently.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I'm not discounting it. I'm simply saying that making a simplification of saying "it's just racial bias, nothing else" is wrong. There are further elements, further biases at play, for which Mammoth Jones and Miles Quaritch can only reply "you are defending white supremacy, I know ya kind FOH".

You are. Truth hurts.

I wish you cared half as much about Blacks and other minorities that have been absolutely fucked over and railroaded by the criminal "justice" system in the US and Europe as you are about someone who has the temerity to point out another example of a White person getting over in whole or in part due to their Whiteness.

 

[Shiggy]

You are. Truth hurts.

Learn how to engage in a discussion based on arguments, not just bold accusations and claims. I'm getting tired of this. We are not on Reddit here.

you cats have got shiggy all wrong. he doesn't want to downplay the race aspect of the decision, he just want to make sure that no one thinks the race aspect is more important than any of the other thousands of known and unknown variables involved here. Including what the judge had for breakfast that morning, the ambient temperature between the layers of fabric under his robes, any thing at all.

We literally can not ever know, and so it is misleading and possibly even dishonest to suggest that race was in any way a factor because there are so many other factors to take into account. AND ONE CAN NOT KNOW FOR SURE.

Ok, I give up. She only got that verdict because she was white. You enlightened me. There was nothing else at play. A white male would have got the same verdict, same is true for a white female with no education and no future.

 

[akira28]

you cats have got shiggy all wrong. he doesn't want to downplay the race aspect of the decision, he just want to make sure that no one thinks the race aspect is more important than any of the other thousands of known and unknown variables involved here. Including what the judge had for breakfast that morning, the ambient temperature between the layers of fabric under his robes, any thing at all.

We literally can not ever know, and so it is misleading and possibly even dishonest to suggest that race was in any way a factor because there are so many other factors to take into account. AND ONE CAN NOT KNOW FOR SURE.

Especially because this is not the United States, and we all know how racist that place is. It couldn't possibly compare. And even if it could, we still can't know because again, too many variables.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Learn how to engage in a discussion based on arguments, not just bold accusations and claims. I'm getting tired of this. We are not on Reddit here.

I did. It's just an argument you find offensive and do not like. Tough for you. I've stated why before. Go and re-read them if you're confused.

you cats have got shiggy all wrong. he doesn't want to downplay the race aspect of the decision, he just want to make sure that no one thinks the race aspect is more important than any of the other thousands of known and unknown variables involved here. Including what the judge had for breakfast that morning, the ambient temperature between the layers of fabric under his robes, any thing at all.

We literally can not ever know, and so it is misleading and possibly even dishonest to suggest that race was in any way a factor because there are so many other factors to take into account. AND ONE CAN NOT KNOW FOR SURE.

Especially because this is not the United States, and we all know how racist that place is. It couldn't possibly compare. And even if it could, we still can't know because again, too many variables.

Pretty much. When someone pulls that shit I kinda know what the game is. Some folks will defend the status quo no matter what.

 

[Shiggy]

I did. It's just an argument you find offensive and do not like. Tough for you. I've stated why before. Go and re-read them if you're confused.

No. I even agreed with your argument.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Ugh this argument. Race is obviously a part of class structure in the uk.

 

[uncelestial]

I'm not discounting it. I'm simply saying that making a simplification of saying "it's just racial bias, nothing else" is wrong. There are further elements, further biases at play, for which Mammoth Jones and Miles Quaritch can only reply "you are defending white supremacy, I know ya kind FOH".

Why is it wrong to say that there's also a gender bias in the legal system when it comes to sexual assault? Why is it offensive to some when it's not all about them and their own issues they face due to racial bias?

It's ridiculous being attacked for pointing out that the judgement is multi-facetted and not simply a question of "black and white".

"If she were black she would've caught jail time." I believe that could easily have happened. An elite student, a beautiful young black woman with a promising career attending Oxford, has mental issues and violently attacks someone. The justice system looks at her and says "well her true nature has finally revealed itself; just another violent black person whose anger is out of control" and locks her up. That isn't some kind of fantasy -- that happens to black women every day. 1 in 100 African American women are in prison right now.

We can acknowledge the gender bias, the wealth bias, etc and still have "if she were black she would have caught jail time" be true. Those things don't conflict. And all I've seen people saying to you -- only to watch you talk over them, and protest very condescendingly -- is "if she were black she would've caught jail time."

 

[Barzul]

I would not be surprised if the judges decision was influenced in small part by sexual attraction. The problem with discussing white privilege is that folks are way too insistent on waving it off to some broad level and don't try to distinguish it at the individual level. How do you think these statistics are generated in the first place? You think cases where the defendants race influenced the judges decision did not have other nuances involved? I've been monitoring this thread and responses in it and I feel like I'd have trouble having the level of discourse I'd want because if you can't accept that white privilege affects individual cases and are eager to find some "other reason", especially in a case this egregious....there's probably no going forward. I'd also agree that her gender influenced the decision here because in our societies, women are constantly thought of to be incapable of serious violence and so will receive more benefits of the doubt.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

No. I even agreed with your argument.

No you didn't. You:

So you believe that the legal system would not favour a black girl who studies in Oxford and who is the daughter of a billionaire/CEO over a white girl with jobless parents and no future? Or would the "biases" even out and both would not be getting a jail sentence but still a tougher sentence than the girl in this case?

And when I refused to take the "class over race" argument and pointed out that you can't even look at class without looking at how race historically has helped to make up who gets access to what class you and I butted heads.

 

[akira28]

Ok, I give up. She only got that verdict because she was white. You enlightened me. There was nothing else at play. A white male would have got the same verdict, same is true for a white female with no education and no future.

now you're disappointing the entire thread shigs, you're reversing your entire argument to spite the discussion. you want to ignore one pretty reactionary catalyst for the sake of all the others. I'm willing to take everything into account, but you seem to want to throw that one particular one out. As if it doesn't matter at all. For whatever reason.

 

[Shiggy]

"If she were black she would've caught jail time." I believe that could easily have happened. An elite student, a beautiful young black woman with a promising career attending Oxford, has mental issues and violently attacks someone. The justice system looks at her and says "well her true nature has finally revealed itself; just another violent black person whose anger is out of control" and locks her up. That isn't some kind of fantasy -- that happens to black women every day. 1 in 100 African American women are in prison right now.

We can acknowledge the gender bias, the wealth bias, etc and still have "if she were black she would have caught jail time" be true. It's a huge, huge factor.

And I never disputed that, I even agreed with that. But, I still don't see what advantage it has to simply ignore all other factors, and then reply "there's nothing else, racial bias it is, you white supremacy defender FOH".

And when I refused to take the "class over race" argument and pointed out that you can't even look at class without looking at how race historically has helped to make up who gets access to what class you and I butted heads.

In that example I didn't say she would not be locked up. Instead, I questioned that a black girl who studies in Oxford and who is the daughter of a billionaire/CEO would not get a preferable verdict over a white girl with jobless parents and no future. With that example I questioned the notion that race is all. Again, I questioned that notion, I did not even say it's necessarily the case.

And when I refused to take the "class over race" argument and pointed out that you can't even look at class without looking at how race historically has helped to make up who gets access to what class you and I butted heads.

And there I said that this discussion is not relevant to the discussion of this specific example and the point made because it's a far wider-reaching issue. That point is certainly true though.

now you're disappointing the entire thread shigs, you're reversing your entire argument to spite the discussion. you want to ignore one pretty reactionary catalyst for the sake of all the others. I'm willing to take everything into account, but you seem to want to throw that one particular one out. As if it doesn't matter at all.

Damn.

 

[Zaph]

If she were an incredibly gifted black student, the judge would have hit her with the "it's important to demonstrate the law applies to us all equally" lecture. No doubt about it.

 

[akira28]

Damn.

ikr

 

[Mammoth Jones]

If she were an incredibly gifted black student, the judge would have hit her with the "it's important to demonstrate the law applies to us all equally" lecture. No doubt about it.

Agreed.

 

[Dynasty]

You're fucking up when you're comparing a case in the UK to a case in the US. But let's pretend they're the same.

Nothing in that link changes the fact that there's a distinct racial disparity in the US justice system. But hey, that chicken ain't gonna fuck itself.

Missed your edit, just saw it now.
This is the link I'm referring to. This crime happened in the UK so not sure what link you looked at.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...-prison-because-his-wife-was-too-intelligent/

My main arguement for why White privilege wasnt the main reason for the Judges decision as this man had got away with a suspened sentence for the same reason as the women in the OP. The sentence was later changed and given prison time because it was revealed that he had lied about the proffesional cricket contract.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Missed your edit, just saw it now.
This is the link I'm referring to. This crime happened in the UK so not sure what link you looked at.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2017...-prison-because-his-wife-was-too-intelligent/

My main arguement for why White privilege wasnt the main reason for the Judges decision as this man had got away with a suspened sentence for the same reason as the women in the OP. The sentence was later changed and given prison time because it was revealed that he had lied about the proffesional cricket contract.

I get it. But the fact she's had previous violence in her past and no one still wants to hold her to account speaks to a systemic bias beyond one example of one fake cricket player. (I said fake because the deception in the contract not you're making him up)

 

[Bubba T]

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

lol

 

[Yoshi]

I would not be surprised if the judges decision was influenced in small part by sexual attraction. The problem with discussing white privilege is that folks are way too insistent on waving it off to some broad level and don't try to distinguish it at the individual level. How do you think these statistics are generated in the first place? You think cases where the defendants race influenced the judges decision did not have other nuances involved? I've been monitoring this thread and responses in it and I feel like I'd have trouble having the level of discourse I'd want because if you can't accept that white privilege affects individual cases and are eager to find some "other reason", especially in a case this egregious....there's probably no going forward. I'd also agree that her gender influenced the decision here because in our societies, women are constantly thought of to be incapable of serious violence and so will receive more benefits of the doubt.

My argument was not that racial discrimination does not affect singular cases, just that it is very hard to know for sure if it happened in any particular case. Statistics help with showing that there are many cases where this is at play, but they do not help with arguing about singular cases. Thus, the claims "had she been black she would be jailed" or "this is white privilege" are imprecise, whereas "I deem it unlikely that she would have got such a light sentence had she been white" or "she was more likely to get such a light sentence due to white privilege" are fine and I would not object to those claims. However, there are other factors at play here which are not only probably or possibly influencing the case, but absolutely obviously do, i.e. intelligence, education and age.

 

[Messofanego]

As long as we can all agree race was one of the factors, it's all good.

 

[Any Questions]

IMO... It had everything to do with freemasonry. No way she should of got off.

BTW am not engaging in the race debate.

However this lady IMO should as a minimum be doing 100's of hours of community service. And should also have to compete an anger management course. That or jail. To get her old life back with a smack to her hands and told not to be a naughty girl again stinks of connections being pulled.

A totally disagreeable situation all round. I have little tolerance for folks who don't pay their dues when they are owed.

 

[IrishNinja]

#freemamamothjones

tried of camp asking questions staying while good folks get booted

 

[Yoshi]

As long as we can all agree race was one of the factors, it's all good.

Well, I don't agree with this claim in its generality. Her ethnicity was a factor making it more likely for her to get such a result, her ethnicity may (or may not) have directly influencedthe specific sentence, but we have insufficient data to determine if her ethnicity actually has been influencing the specific ruling. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, but so far I see no indication that points to this in this specific case.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

As long as we can all agree race was one of the factors, it's all good.

Well, I don't agree with this claim in its generality. Her ethnicity was a factor making it more likely for her to get such a result, her ethnicity may (or may not) have directly influencedthe specific sentence, but we have insufficient data to determine if her ethnicity actually has been influencing the specific ruling. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, but so far I see no indication that points to this in this specific case.

Lol

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Contortionists everywhere hate him....

 

[Yoshi]

Contortionists everywhere hate him....

Please point out to me what makes you think this. I am quite certain that my position on that matter hasn't changed significantly throughout the discussion, except for the distinction between racial bias and racism, which I much appreciate because I think rhetoric precision is of utmost importance.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Where's the white privilege for the guy that got stabbed? There's nothing that suggests this was racial motivated for anyone to be mentioning race.

No one is calling the crime racially motivated. The discussion is about bias in the justice system.

 

[Yoshi]

Where's the white privilege for the guy that got stabbed?

What kind of white privilege do you expect in this regard? Being white does not protect you from being victim of a crime (other than racially motivated crimes, which overall just make up a small percentage of crimes). Since being stabbed does not make you a defendent in the court, the stabbed guy couldn't be spared a harsh sentence in any way in this case.

 

[Timbuktu]

It's not a done deal yet, is it? I remember reading that she is to be sentenced in September.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Where's the white privilege for the guy that got stabbed? There's nothing that suggests this was racial motivated for anyone to be mentioning race.

Be honest, you barely know what this thread is about, do you? Because not a single person even so much as implied this was racially motivated. You don't even seem to know why people are mentioning race. Hint: It's because the attacker got off

 

[Gearless]

It's not a done deal yet, is it? I remember reading that she is to be sentenced in September.

True, but it depends on what judge she gets on hear at the next hearing. If it's judge Ian Pringle who thinks she's too talented to go to jail, she may get off with a warning and some community service just to keep up with appearances. Now if she does get a new judge, she may face some jail time and her DBS and enhanced checks will be forever ruined. She could still go free, even with a new judge at the hearing.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Is there a scarcity of hate crimes in the UK that people have to cling to any case to prove that there's racial bias in the justice system? It's a ridiculous discussion given the details of the crime and the sentence give.





Apparently I'm one of the few who actually read the news in this thread.


Some updates:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-stabbing-boyfriend-faces-possible-expulsion/

What are you talking about?! It's like you're responding to claims no one even made. You keep bringing up hate crimes when it's completely irrelevant to the discussion.

And your link doesn't show anything, unless a possible expulsion is a justified punishment for STABBING SOMEONE

 

[Shiggy]

Looks like some folks went missing overnight.
Kudos to the mods.

And your link doesn't show anything, unless a possible expulsion is a justified punishment for STABBING SOMEONE

It's news related to the case we are discussing in this thread, an update to the original news story. What's wrong with that now?


(Copying it in here for reference)

The judge said: "To prevent this extraordinary, able young lady from following her long held desire to enter the profession she wishes to, would be too severe."

His comments led to speculation that she would be able to continue her studies at Christ Church college.

But it has now emerged that Woodward had already been warned about drug taking by the college and had been told she would be expelled if there was any further incidents.

Woodward will be sentenced for the knife attack in September, but could still be expelled from the college once the legal case has concluded.

A university spokesman said comments suggesting Woodward would be permitted to continue her degree "were the judge's not the college's".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-stabbing-boyfriend-faces-possible-expulsion/

 

[Beefy]

Where's the white privilege for the guy that got stabbed? There's nothing that suggests this was racial motivated for anyone to be mentioning race.

You don't have a clue what you're on about. You know what white privilege means right?



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


As for the update news , she deserves it if it happens.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

But it has now emerged that Woodward had already been warned about drug taking by the college and had been told she would be expelled if there was any further incidents.

Hah...but I do have to wonder what would happen if she were black. Would they even bother to warn her or just expel her for bringing the uni into disrepute.

 

[WeirdoStalkerJr]

If someone fucking stabbed me, I would want that ass in jail.

 

[Curt Baboon]

I bet you guys won't be as judgemental in a few years when she finally discovers the cure for stabbings.

 

[CarpeDeezNutz]

When you are a star, you can stab anyone!

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I bet you guys won't be as judgemental in a few years when she finally discovers the cure for stabbings.

She's more likely to discover how low someone can go to fund a spiralling drug habit.

 

[entremet]

As long as we can all agree race was one of the factors, it's all good.

I would say it's the biggest. Sure, but the other factors added to this recipe of a shitshow meal lol.

 

[PtM]

And your link doesn't show anything, unless a possible expulsion is a justified punishment for STABBING SOMEONE

This thread is the worst.

Starting with the false thread title that has everybody barging in throwing around irrelevant talking points. Up to now dismissing critical details to the case.

This thing with the expulsion would mean the same outcome as with that cricketer. If she's getting expulsion, the grounds for a suspended sentence are gone, and she's going to jail. Hell, she'd probably get that timeout taken back, too.

 

[Messofanego]

Is there any confirmation she's going to jail? Is that what "being sentenced for the knife attack" means? If not, justice hasn't been served.

 

[PtM]

Is there any confirmation she's going to jail? Is that what "being sentenced for the knife attack" means? If not, justice hasn't been served.

Her sentence has been deferred. That's what I'm calling the timeout.

 

[Timbuktu]

Not sure if posts yet, but her college at Oxford said the suggestion Woodward would return to her studies was "the judge's not the college's". A spokesperson said there was "no guarantee" Woodward would be allowed back.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-39999312

 

[Shotgun Kiss]

Not sure if posts yet, but her college at Oxford said the suggestion Woodward would return to her studies was "the judge's not the college's". A spokesperson said there was "no guarantee" Woodward would be allowed back.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-39999312

Frankly, I find it appalling that they haven't immediately publicly stated she would not be returning under any circumstances.

"No guarantee she'll be allowed back"... What bullshit.

 

[Messofanego]

Like I'm surprised you leave a decision to reinstate a student who has an ongoing heavy drug habit and has assaulted people multiple times to the judge rather than take the matter into your own hands.

 

[PtM]

Like I'm surprised you leave a decision to reinstate a student who has an ongoing heavy drug habit and has assaulted people multiple times to the judge rather than take the matter into your own hands.

Maybe.
Maybe that's not what is being implied.
Maybe the spokesperson just doesn't have the authority to decide the matter on their own.

There were people on GAF actually defending her? Wow.

I'm sure if it was a black female she would have gone to prison and the GAF members defending her, would have thought differently. That white privilege at work.

Wow, calm your horses, omg.

 

[Unreal Champ]

There were people on GAF actually defending her? Wow.

I'm sure if it was a black female she would have gone to prison and the GAF members defending her, would have thought differently. That white privilege at work.

 

[SKINNER!]

Frankly, I find it appalling that they haven't immediately publicly stated she would not be returning under any circumstances.

"No guarantee she'll be allowed back"... What bullshit.

Dat Oxford tuition money though...

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Maybe.
Maybe that's not what is being implied.
Maybe the spokesperson just doesn't have the authority to decide the matter on their own.

Wow, calm your horses, omg.

The university spokesperson said: "A decision on continuing study will always take full account of the health, wellbeing and best interests of both the student and the wider student community.

"No-one outside of the college and university can guarantee the right of a return to study. No final decision has been reached or guarantee made."

Maybe, maybe, maybe...