Remove Ads Get VIP
Similar Worlds
Log In


Notifications: · Newest First
Yes. I did indeed mean more equality
Women were less likely to be detained before trial. They were 46 percent less likely than men to held in jail prior to a trial.
Women who were released on bond were given lower bond amounts. Their bonds were set at amounts that were 54 percent lower than what men were required to pay.
Women were 58 percent less likely to be sentenced to prison.
For defendants who were sentenced to prison, there generally was no gender disparity in the length of the sentence. There were disparities in sentencing for some individual types of crime, however. For example, female defendants convicted of theft received longer prison sentences than male defendants convicted of theft. Women convicted of “other property offenses” – a category of crimes that includes arson, receiving stolen property and breaking and entering — received shorter prison sentences.
Black female defendants were, in some ways, treated differently than white female defendants. Black women were assigned higher bond amounts and were more likely to be sent to prison than white women. Women of both races were equally likely to be released prior to trial.
31-35, M
15 replies
Dec 7, 2018
Post Comment  
Greenbare · 70-79, M
Among the few women who finally get sent to prison for (shorter) sentences they serve a significantly shorter portion of their sentences before being released on parole.

There really is NO equal justice under law.

Women who murder husbands are hardly ever even investigated. The police work really hard to look the other way.

Black women are much less likely to go to prison for any crime than black or white men.
Got any stats on comparative flight risks, recidivism, or rehabilitation?

Seems like those statistics might be significant in explaining the ones you presented.

Or they might back up your point.
BlackMotion · 31-35, M
[@479686,MistyCee] Hi Misty.

Here's what I did find. The following for the possible reasons why this may taking place. The quotes are taken from different studies/articles and separated by paragraphs:

Some justify lenient sentencing because women’s rates of recidivism (re-offending) are lower. This is true, but older people, white people, and more educated people also have lower recidivism rates. Should we sentence them more leniently? Perhaps not send whites or college educated people to jail at all? Also, as noted by a report from the United States Sentencing Commission (“Recidivism Among Federal Offenders: A Comprehensive Overview”—the source of the image below), these rates don’t take into account crime severity. If women or white people on average commit less serious crimes then it’s not unexpected that their recidivism rates would be lower. It doesn’t mean they should get more lenient sentences for the same crimes (and same criminal history, etc.).

After estimating the amount of disparity left unexplained by the arrest offense and other control variables, the paper explores "why these gaps exist—and, in particular, whether unobserved differences between men and women might justify them." Prof. Starr explores several potential mitigating factors, such as the "girlfriend theory" (that "[w]omen might be viewed as…mere accessories of their male romantic partners"), the role of women as primary caregivers to their children, and the "theory that female defendants receive leniency because they are more cooperative with the government." Although each of these theories found some support in the data, they did not appear capable of explaining anything close to the total disparity that Prof. Starr found.

A 2009 study suggested the difference in sentencing might arise because "judges treat women more leniently for practical reasons, such as their greater caretaking responsibility."

Gertner said that judges might be particularly sensitive to the consideration that sending parents away is bad for public safety: “We know as a public-safety measure that (in) families that have been fractured by imprisonment, there’s actually a risk to the next generation.” Gertner and Berman said they believe judges are taking into account women’s family obligations despite the guidelines’ opposition to doing so — and that helps explain women’s shorter sentences. 2

A 1997 study in the UK interviewed 200 magistrates (judges), finding that they tended to see offenders either as troubled (needing help) or troublesome (needing punishment). It was exceptional for women to be seen as the latter. Some of their explanations might be justified by the individual cases (e.g. they reported that women more often shoplift to feed their children), but much of the categorization was clearly based on assumptions, stereotypes, or emotional responses rather than the facts of the case.

For example, multiple magistrates reported assuming that, with multiple offenders, the man was the leader and the woman was vulnerable and more like a victim herself. And some of the female magistrates accused their male colleagues of too quickly believing female defendants, with the implication that it was because of attractiveness. Many magistrates also brought up that solicitors (lawyers) often emphasized old-fashioned cultural stereotypes of women to gain sympathy. One magistrate commented “you really wonder how the innocent-looking young lady in front of you, who’s obviously been told by her solicitor to look as helpless as possible, could possibly have undertaken the violent elements that are there”. In addition, female defendants more often appeared in court as nervous or tearful, which often elicited sympathy.
Study: “Magistrates’ explanations of sentencing decisions” by Loraine Gelsthorpe and Nancy Loucks (Part 2 of “Understanding the sentencing of women”)

This is what i found on recidivism stats.
Adaydreambeliever · 51-55, F
Lots of grumpy men not seeing the circumstances here :P Circumstances are everything.. the law recognises this.. you may choose to see it as men vs women.. that says more about you than the reality.. but you need to reflect that within men committing exactly the same crime, sentences will vary.. they do so because of circumstances..

Women and men are different.. whether it's biology or conditioning.. the fact remains that generally speaking women commit less violent crimes and are seen as less of a danger while waiting for trial. it does depend on the crime.. and I strongly suspect no one is comparing like for like here..

In terms of race.. that's not to say that there is not still horrendous racism within our systems. but even there there are circumstances that contribute.. such as poor educational opportunity, poorer background, more disadvantage, less choice etc etc etc..

CIrcummstances matter and we cannot gloss over them with statistics. WHY someone commits a crime and what influenced it as well as how much control they had over the circumstances that led to the crime will always be taken into account.. one can take an uninformed glance at stats or one can look into and try to understand why.

People are not the same.
suzie1960 · 56-60, F
[@7167,Adaydreambeliever] [quote]that you don't understand the reasons and maybe I don't know enough to either.. doesn't mean that there aren't reasons..[/quote]
The court can only go by what was presented to it. I was there so I heard exactly what the court heard.

[quote]but we see from even your example.. the man of good character got a lighter sentence.. [/quote]
Yes, he got a lighter sentence than the man with previous convictions but a [b]much harsher sentence than the woman with previous convictions[/b].

[quote]There would have been reasons the woman was probated..[/quote]
None that were presented to the court. I was there, remember.

[quote]It's over-simplistic to believe it's just that she was a woman.[/quote]
That was [b]the only difference[/b] between her and the man with previous convictions.

That was just one case where I knew the circumstances. There are many other example where, almost invariably, women receive lesser sentences than men for the same offences with similar aggravating and mitigating factors and antecedents.
Adaydreambeliever · 51-55, F
[@342594,suzie1960] So you knew all the circumstances of the three individuals? whether their father/mother was an alcoholic, whether they had past mental health issues or trauma, there wasn't one person who was egging the others on.. all three came up with the idea together and all were equally responsible for planning and carrying it out. there wasn't one who was the ringleader and there wasn't one who organised it more or was more active?? And they all have the same caring responsibilities? and same health? None of them was reluctant and pushed into it? Realistically, unless they were your brothers and sister it would be pretty hard for you to REALLY know the level of information necessary to make a fully informed judgement.. but you made it anyways...

And you are well trained in the law aren't you? You know all the relevant statistics on offending and reoffending... you knew how likely each would reoffend? You heard many days evidence and you read the background reports which would have been prepared didnt you? I truly want to be kind.. I really do.. it doesn't please me to have to be specific on this..
But your assertation is simplistic.. you aren't aware of what you aren't aware of.. and that puts you at a disadvantage that you seem unable to comprehend...

WOmen generally receive less harsh sentences.. but to take that simplistic statement and use it to bleat, (not saying you are) is overly simplistic, it's unrealistic, it's dangerous.. and worse, it fuels a ridiculous them and us mentality which is unbelievably detrimental to men and women.. we should be working together, supporting each other, understanding and celebrating difference not taking pot shots at each other just because of gender..

There *are* reasons why women receive less harsh sentences, starting with factors like that women tend to commit less serious crimes, that they have often come from extremely disadvantaged backgrounds including often abuse and substance misuse, they have been victims well before the act... and women tend to repeat offend less often, they tend to get out early for good behaviour - BECAUSE they, let's see, behave well, keep their heads down in prison.. and many have caring responsibilities and kids.. the list is endless.. but with black and white mentality some just cannot see or understand why people are NOT all the same.. even in similar circs.. You and I are of similar age, possibly similar culture, we grew up in the same era... we may have had similar upbringing.. but clearly we are very different and there are a whole host of factors that affect and have affected me that you haven't experienced.. and vice versa.. but you cannot see this?

PS.. I see you quite often post anti women things.. I am sure there's a reason why.. but it is definitely a trait you display, along with anti-christianism (I'm with you on that one!) There are more than a few anti-women women out there.. I would love to study some of them to work out what's going on with them.. I have even wondered if they believe that by sticking up for men, and being anti women, they think they will have more success with men... just a theory.. of course they wouldn't as the trouble with supporting men in hating women is.. that those women would still be women... and of the species that are considered bad. mad, selfish, shallow etc.. so it would include them.. Interesting tho!

Here's a link...
suzie1960 · 56-60, F
[@7167,Adaydreambeliever] As I said, I know the people involved very well and I sat though the trial so I heard all the evidence presented to the court.

[quote]all three came up with the idea together and all were equally responsible for planning and carrying it out. there wasn't one who was the ringleader and there wasn't one who organised it more or was more active??[/quote]
Actually, the woman was although that was glossed over in court so isn't really relevant. They all had the same caring responsibilities and similar health.

I have some legal training as I'm called upon to write forensic reports and give expert evidence on occasion. Again, that isn't relevant to the instant case.

[quote]You know all the relevant statistics on offending and reoffending... you knew how likely each would reoffend? [/quote]
The statistics are irrelevant. As I said, the woman had previous convictions, she was an habitual offender. Not surprising really as she tended to be let off lightly when was prosecuted so there was a high probability she would reoffend. As it happened, as soon as her probation was over she did.

[quote]There *are* reasons why women receive less harsh sentences, starting with factors like that women tend to commit less serious crimes,[/quote]
In the instant case all three had committed the same crime but she still got the most lenient sentence despite her antecedence.

[quote]and women tend to repeat offend less often, they tend to get out early for good behaviour - BECAUSE they, let's see, behave well, keep their heads down in prison[/quote]
Actually, women's behaviour in prison is worse than men's. It's sometimes claimed that women are treated unfairly in prison because they are up on disciplinary charges more than men are.

[quote] I see you quite often post anti women things..[/quote]
That's untrue. I believe in equality and recognize that men often get a raw deal. Not hating men doesn't make a person anti-women, except in the eyes of misandrists.

Equality is a two way thing, that means men must have the same rights as we have, we can't have equality any other way. We can't expect men to support us unless we support them.
Write a comment...
Post Comment  
16518 people say
Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
Ask a Question
Updated: 39 secs ago
Content Rating: Non-Adult
Group Members
Yes. I did indeed mean more equality | Community | Similar Worlds