ChatterBank1 min ago
Met Police Commissioner Accused Of Calling For 'more Black Boys To Be Locked Up'
32 Answers
Where does Cressida Dick actually say this?
http://
http://
Answers
She doesn’t – in so many words. But Frances Crook, the chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform (at whose meeting Ms Dick was speaking) does. She said the Commissioner had “used the opportunity to call for more young children, in effect more black boys, to be sent to prison and for longer”. The issue of whether black people should be...
13:11 Sat 11th Nov 2017
She, sort of, said it in her comment “Ms Dick said young black men and boys were statistically more likely to be the victims and perpetrators of knife crime, making up 21 of 24 teenagers murdered so far this year.”
AOG, I would image you’re delighted to have Ms Dick back up you on your oft proclaimed claims regarding young black people and crime.
AOG, I would image you’re delighted to have Ms Dick back up you on your oft proclaimed claims regarding young black people and crime.
She doesn’t – in so many words. But Frances Crook, the chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform (at whose meeting Ms Dick was speaking) does. She said the Commissioner had “used the opportunity to call for more young children, in effect more black boys, to be sent to prison and for longer”.
The issue of whether black people should be specifically mentioned by the Met Commissioner is quite straightforward: black youths are responsible for (and are victims of) the overwhelming majority of killings and serious injuries involving knives across the Capital. But Ms Dick also argued this:
“…that an increasing number of young people do not fear state action and are not deterred by the threat of imprisonment because they do not believe they will be jailed, or that it would be for a short time.”
And in that respect she is absolutely correct. The youth justice system in the UK is a joke. It does nothing to help young criminals but, far more importantly, it does nothing to help the victims of youth crime feel that justice has been done on their behalf. By the time young criminals reach adulthood many of them have committed a large number of offences without proper sanction. In the main they receive a succession of “Referral Orders” which they treat with impunity. It’s part of their rite of passage into adult criminality. When they reach the “grown ups’” court at 18 they have no respect for the law or their victims because they have never had demonstrated to them the proper consequences of their behaviour.
Sending “more black boys” to prison will undoubtedly keep them off the streets for a while and prevent them stabbing anybody else. It will also demonstrate to the public that knife crime among young people is being addressed with proper sanctions. But I won’t hold my breath.
The issue of whether black people should be specifically mentioned by the Met Commissioner is quite straightforward: black youths are responsible for (and are victims of) the overwhelming majority of killings and serious injuries involving knives across the Capital. But Ms Dick also argued this:
“…that an increasing number of young people do not fear state action and are not deterred by the threat of imprisonment because they do not believe they will be jailed, or that it would be for a short time.”
And in that respect she is absolutely correct. The youth justice system in the UK is a joke. It does nothing to help young criminals but, far more importantly, it does nothing to help the victims of youth crime feel that justice has been done on their behalf. By the time young criminals reach adulthood many of them have committed a large number of offences without proper sanction. In the main they receive a succession of “Referral Orders” which they treat with impunity. It’s part of their rite of passage into adult criminality. When they reach the “grown ups’” court at 18 they have no respect for the law or their victims because they have never had demonstrated to them the proper consequences of their behaviour.
Sending “more black boys” to prison will undoubtedly keep them off the streets for a while and prevent them stabbing anybody else. It will also demonstrate to the public that knife crime among young people is being addressed with proper sanctions. But I won’t hold my breath.
AOG
Black defendants are more likely to receive custodial sentences compared to white people.
http://
https:/
Not only here, but also in the US:
https:/
This may go some way to explaining the disparity.
We should be careful not to draw inaccurate conclusions. for instance, the proportion of ex-servicemen and women in jail is substantially higher than their number should be, when you take them as a percentage of the population.
Black defendants are more likely to receive custodial sentences compared to white people.
http://
https:/
Not only here, but also in the US:
https:/
This may go some way to explaining the disparity.
We should be careful not to draw inaccurate conclusions. for instance, the proportion of ex-servicemen and women in jail is substantially higher than their number should be, when you take them as a percentage of the population.
I’ve read the Lammy Report (all 70 pages excluding Annexes). It is entitled “An independent review…” and that’s its first shortcoming. Mr Lammy cannot by any stretch of the imagination be termed independent on such issues. He is a black politician known for campaigning vociferously on BAME issues and I doubt his report would have been published if it showed that BAME criminals are treated more favourably than their white counterparts. The report has a number of other shortcomings and among other things takes a very simplistic view of a complex topic – that of criminal sentencing. However, those shortcomings are too numerous and involved to go into here. I’ll just pick one heading when Mr Lammy discusses the Youth Court system:
“Magistrates frequently report that they impose a sentence without having a real understanding of the needs of the child, and they rarely know whether it has been effective. It is possible for the bench to hear about breaches or further offences, but only if one of their number happens to be sitting on the day when that child is brought back to court.”
The needs of the “child” (as a defendant and who is often a six-foot tall 17-year old) are not and certainly should not be a paramount consideration for Magistrates in the Youth Court. Paramount is the administration of effective justice. The Youth Criminal Justice System is heavily weighted in favour of “child” defendants and pays scant regard for victims. Furthermore his contention that Magistrates are ignorant of breaches or further offences unless they happen by chance to be present for subsequent hearings is incorrect.
However, one of Mr Lammy’s references to the Youth Court is perfectly true. Youth Courts are held in secret and their findings are not in the public domain (except in the form of anonymous statistics). Victims would possibly have a greater trust in those courts if they were afforded the same privileges as defendants. That is to witness the proceedings and see that justice has been served on their behalf.
Mr Lammy recommends that the Judiciary must reflect the community it serves. I imagine, then, that means a smattering of convicted criminals should be appointed as judges or Magistrates. The main reason for a greater proportion of certain sections of the population to be convicted of crime is that in some areas of the country (London in respect to this question) they are far more prevalent in the population as a whole than elsewhere and are even more prone to committing crimes. It ain’t rocket science.
“….for instance, the proportion of ex-servicemen and women in jail is substantially higher than their number should be, when you take them as a percentage of the population.”
What do you mean by “higher than their number should be”. It is no use simply saying that, because ex-servicemen and women make up x% of the population, they should only make up x% of the prison population. If they commit more crimes that warrant custody than their civvy counterparts there will be more of them in jail.
If you really believe that “institutional racism” or “institutional ex-service-ism” is prevalent in the courts take a visit or two to your local courts (Crown or Magistrates) and take a look because you cannot rely on Mr Lammy’s “independent” report to draw proper conclusions.
“Magistrates frequently report that they impose a sentence without having a real understanding of the needs of the child, and they rarely know whether it has been effective. It is possible for the bench to hear about breaches or further offences, but only if one of their number happens to be sitting on the day when that child is brought back to court.”
The needs of the “child” (as a defendant and who is often a six-foot tall 17-year old) are not and certainly should not be a paramount consideration for Magistrates in the Youth Court. Paramount is the administration of effective justice. The Youth Criminal Justice System is heavily weighted in favour of “child” defendants and pays scant regard for victims. Furthermore his contention that Magistrates are ignorant of breaches or further offences unless they happen by chance to be present for subsequent hearings is incorrect.
However, one of Mr Lammy’s references to the Youth Court is perfectly true. Youth Courts are held in secret and their findings are not in the public domain (except in the form of anonymous statistics). Victims would possibly have a greater trust in those courts if they were afforded the same privileges as defendants. That is to witness the proceedings and see that justice has been served on their behalf.
Mr Lammy recommends that the Judiciary must reflect the community it serves. I imagine, then, that means a smattering of convicted criminals should be appointed as judges or Magistrates. The main reason for a greater proportion of certain sections of the population to be convicted of crime is that in some areas of the country (London in respect to this question) they are far more prevalent in the population as a whole than elsewhere and are even more prone to committing crimes. It ain’t rocket science.
“….for instance, the proportion of ex-servicemen and women in jail is substantially higher than their number should be, when you take them as a percentage of the population.”
What do you mean by “higher than their number should be”. It is no use simply saying that, because ex-servicemen and women make up x% of the population, they should only make up x% of the prison population. If they commit more crimes that warrant custody than their civvy counterparts there will be more of them in jail.
If you really believe that “institutional racism” or “institutional ex-service-ism” is prevalent in the courts take a visit or two to your local courts (Crown or Magistrates) and take a look because you cannot rely on Mr Lammy’s “independent” report to draw proper conclusions.
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV1 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
News3 mins ago
I Wonder Why This Number Is Rising So...
Politics10 mins ago
Starmer In Jobs Push.....right Oh!
News10 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.