UK - Two tier sentencing?

[BrightonCorgi]

I am reading articles about how the UK is implementing a two-tier justice system based upon the race, sex, and ethnicity of the perpetrator. Is this really the case? 

Can one of our UK members explain their support for this? Does the minimize justice for the victims? Is being victimized less of a deal if a certain category of people, do it?

New Sentencing Guideline: No, It’s Not “Two-Tier” Justice - Central Chambers Manchester

[VeguerosMAN]

If I am not mistaken, white men will receive harsher sentencing than other races and females starting in 2 days. Hopefully, the Prime Minister of the UK has the power to block it. 

[SirVantes]

5 hours ago, VeguerosMAN said:

If I am not mistaken, white men will receive harsher sentencing than other races and females starting in 2 days. Hopefully, the Prime Minister of the UK has the power to block it. 

That's a quite a leap from "white men" not being one of the (non-exhaustive) categories of offenders for whom a pre-sentencing report will now be, under the new guidelines, "normally required" to be considered by the judge before imposing the sentence. A judge is still free to require a PSR for anyone he deems appropriate. A judge is still free to exercise his sentencing discretion regardless of the contents of the PSR.

[TacoSauce]

What I took away from the article: 

In the past, judges could apply leniency as they saw fit given a defendant's circumstances. The new government decided that, collectively, the judges weren't applying leniency broadly enough for their liking. Therefore, they created new guidelines instructing judges to consider leniency for all defendants belonging to certain special classes. This clearly directs judges to treat certain groups of people differently from others and so is discriminatory and does not embody "equality before the law." 

The flip side is that all of this is being couched as being optional guidance, and not mandatory. Also, the status quo before these new guidelines was already discriminatory (albeit at the individual judge level, not the top level) -- so there isn't a huge change with the new guidelines. Lastly, the idea of "equality before the law" isn't a bedrock of the legal system in the UK as it might be elsewhere. Given the history of the country and the residue of monarchy, legal culture and expectations are quite different than outsiders might appreciate.

[SirVantes]

4 hours ago, TacoSauce said:

What I took away from the article: 

In the past, judges could apply leniency as they saw fit given a defendant's circumstances. The new government decided that, collectively, the judges weren't applying leniency broadly enough for their liking. Therefore, they created new guidelines instructing judges to consider leniency for all defendants belonging to certain special classes. This clearly directs judges to treat certain groups of people differently from others and so is discriminatory and does not embody "equality before the law." 

The flip side is that all of this is being couched as being optional guidance, and not mandatory. Also, the status quo before these new guidelines was already discriminatory (albeit at the individual judge level, not the top level) -- so there isn't a huge change with the new guidelines. Lastly, the idea of "equality before the law" isn't a bedrock of the legal system in the UK as it might be elsewhere. Given the history of the country and the residue of monarchy, legal culture and expectations are quite different than outsiders might appreciate.

Fair comments. I would only throw these into the mix:

1. PSRs, in addition to details of the background of the offender, also disclose any prior convictions and compliance with probations. Based on that, I do not read them as automatically leading to leniency.

2. This is not being imposed by the current/new govt. The guidelines are being issued by a body that is supposed to be independent. In fact, the current govt has expressed opposition to it. The party forming the previous govt has been, unsurprisingly, very vocally against it. Surprisingly (to me, at least), the proposal to re-look at the original guidance was commissioned by the previous govt, and the consultation process for the resultant change was completed during the term of that last govt.