Quote Originally Posted by MadAmster View Post
Behind a paywall.

The Sentencing Council for England and Wales is not subservient to HMG. That is a fact. Lammy might have written a suggestion, I don't know as I can't access the URL you posted. The Sentencing Council for England and Wales is in no way bound to follow that suggestion. Nuance matters but, it seems, not to you. Context seems to be a stranger. That's probably why the more intelligent of people look further than the end of their nose before coming to a conclusion. Your rants, the URL's you post all seem to have one thing in common. They lack context, they lack nuance, they lack perspective.

Could you let us know, with context, what it is Lammy wrote? Was it a suggestion or an instruction? Was the Sentencing Council for England and Wales bound, in any way, to follow the content? Did the Sentencing Council for England and Wales merely come to a conclusion themselves?

The info requested is really necessary in order to ponder our own conclusion on this. TIA.
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/comment...122576.article

The above should clarify for you MA - its from the Law Society Gazzette, so in theory should be free from the right wing bias rA sees round every corner: but maybe not. Its free.

Its an odd one really - the pre sentencing process seems to be seen in different ways. The Lammy report (almost 10 years old now) unsurprisingly concluded that it worked against BAME (not sure of thats now politically correct phraseology) felons and meant such were more likely to receive longer sentences. It was contended that this was not appropriate, if true. The concern now seems to be that that "BAME" receive softer sentences because of that status. So its a double edged sword .

Note the PSR process is not just aimed at racial minoroties but all manner of convicted persons, including trans, pregnant women, thouse with mental health problems etc

Dont know if it helps but, for what its worth, I think politicians of whatever flavours should butt out of the operation of the legal process. Set the rules and then let the professionally qualified bodies wotk within that framework. Politicians, like most people, have their own inherent biases - usually associated with getting reelected. By all means establist review panels to oversee the effectiveness of the process but otherwise STFU