It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BAME defendants are more likely to go to prison for certain types of crimes in England and Wales.

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) defendants are more likely to go to prison for certain types of crimes. These are the emergent findings of an ongoing independent review, led by David Lammy MP, at the request of David Cameron in January 2016. The review was to investigate evidence of possible bias against BAME defendents in the Criminal Justice System of England and Wales

One finding was that for every 100 white women handed custodial sentences at Crown Courts for drug offences, 227 black women were sentenced to custody. For black men, this figure is 141 for every 100 white men.



Of those convicted at Magistrates’ Court for sexual offences, 208 black men and 193 Asian men received custodial sentences for every 100 white men.

BAME defendants are more likely than their white counterparts to be tried at Crown Court – with young black men around 56% more likely than their white counterparts;

BAME men were more than 16% more likely than white men to be remanded in custody;

BAME men were 52% percent more likely than white men to plead ‘not guilty’ at crown court;

In prisons, BAME males are almost five times more likely to be housed in high security for public order offences than white men, and

Mixed ethnic men and women were more likely than white men and women to have adjudications for breaching prison discipline brought against them – but less likely to have those adjudications proven when reviewed.

51% of the UK-born BAME population agree that ‘the criminal justice system discriminates against particular groups’, compared to 35% of the UK-born white population;

41% of youth prisoners are from minorities backgrounds, compared with 25% ten years ago, despite prisoner numbers falling by some 66% in that time;

The number of Muslim prisoners has almost doubled in the last decade


I am not sure as to why they published the Muslim statistic. There is no breakdown of religious belief in the actual review as it stands so far.

David Lammy MP said:


“These emerging findings raise difficult questions about whether ethnic minority communities are getting a fair deal in our justice system.
“We need to fully understand why, for example, ethnic minority defendants are more likely to receive prison sentences than white defendants.
“These are complex issues and I will dig deeper to in the coming months to establish whether bias is a factor.
“I look forward to presenting my final report and recommendations to the Prime Minister next year.”


In relation to judicial ethnic diversity, the review highlighted that only 6% of court judges are currently from BAME backgrounds (both criminal courts and tribunals). Personally I am not convinced this has any bearing on the statistics. I agree with David Lammy, this issue is complex although I believe poverty will feature quite highly. Whether the review touches on this in the future is another topic.

The Institute for Race Relations has some interesting stats in relation to inequality, housing and employment statistics.

Poverty

Throughout the UK, people from BAME groups are much more likely to be in poverty (ie an income of less than 60 per cent of the median household income) than white British people. In 2015, Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities were the most likely to be in ‘persistent poverty’, followed by Black African and Black Caribbean communities.

Housing


The Race Equality Foundation showed in 2013 that overcrowding is most commonly experienced by Black African and Bangladeshi groups (with just over a third of households living in overcrowded accommodation). In 2014 the Runnymede Trust examined overcrowding in three areas of London: Redbridge, Croydon and Kingston. In Redbridge, 13 per cent of BAME groups lived in overcrowded accommodation compared to 4 per cent of White households; Croydon 14 per cent compared to 4 per cent; Kingston 14 per cent compared to 5 per cent.

Drawing on 2011 census data, the Race Equality Foundation shows that Bangladeshi households are 63 per cent and Black African households 75 per cent more likely than white British households to suffer ‘housing deprivation’ (indicators of which include overcrowding and an absence of central heating). White Gypsy and Irish Traveller households are seven and-a-half times more likely to experience deprivation in this way.

Homelessness


According to BMENational and the Human City Institute, 28 per cent of statutory homeless households were from a ‘BME background’ in 2001; by 2011 this had increased to 33 per cent and by 2013 this had increased to 37 per cent.

Homelessness is further disproportionally experienced by migrant groups. The Combined Homelessness and Information Network (Chain), in its annual bulletin for 2014/15, said that 57 per cent of those rough-sleeping in London were not from the UK. 36 per cent of those rough-sleeping were from Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, with Romanians making up 19 per cent of this figure. Five per cent were from African countries, and 4 per cent were of Asian nationality.


Employment

As of March 2015, 5 per cent of White people, 13 per cent of Black (African or Caribbean) people and 9 per cent of Asian people, of working age and eligibility (16-64), were unemployed.

In March 2015, figures showed that the proportion of 16-24 year olds from BAME communities unemployed for over a year had increased by almost 50 per cent (to 41,000 people) since 2010. For their white counterparts, there had been a decrease of 2 per cent. In March 2015, 15 per cent of white 16-24 year olds were unemployed, compared to 29 per cent of their black counterparts, 24 per cent of their Asian counterparts and 23 per cent of those from ‘other ethnic backgrounds’.

In 2011, about one in four black Caribbean and Bangladeshi households did not have a family member in employment. This figure was slightly less for black African and Pakistani households. Of white British households, roughly 15 per cent did not have a family member in employment.

Throughout the UK, BAME communities are less likely than white people to be paid the living wage. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation showed in 2015 that the ethnic group least likely to be paid below the minimum wage was white males (15.7 per cent); and that which was most likely was Bangladeshi males (57.2 per cent). 38.7 per cent of Pakistani males were paid below the minimum wage, 37 per cent of Pakistani women, and 36.5 per cent of Bangladeshi women. Between 2011 and 2014, temporary working increased by 25.4 per cent for BME employees and 10.9 per cent, according to the TUC. By Autumn 2014, around one-in-ten BME workers were employed in some form of temporary employment.


I was quite surprised to read these stats although I appreciate that no causal statistical relevance can be inferred in relation to crime from these stats.

.gov.uk link: Lammy review: emerging findings published

David Lammy's letter to the Prime Minister

Minstry of Justice Review

Institue of Race Relations


edit on 8-12-2016 by Morrad because: Grammar correction




posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Morrad



One finding was that for every 100 white women handed custodial sentences at Crown Courts for drug offences, 227 black women were sentenced to custody. For black men, this figure is 141 for every 100 white men.


That sounds damming. But, how many white women were brought before court on these charges, and how many black women? What if 100 out of 100 whites were sentenced to custody, and 227 out of 227 blacks were sentenced to custody? If that were the case, both would be equal: 100% of people brought before the court on these charges were sentenced to custody. We need more information.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Ameilia


I was thinking the same thing.
Maybe black women committed more crimes than white women.
We don't have enough info.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Pretty damning and unfortunate for society if so. Yes, need more info.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Ameilia

You make a valid point. I will try to find related crime stats on the .uk.gov website. Up until recently the 'stop and search' policy was heavily biased towards BAME individuals. This may account for more drug convictions in this demographic.

In David Lammy's letter to the PM he wrote:


The analysis published today finds that arrest rates are generally higher for the BAME population in comparison to the White population. For example, Black boys were just under three times more likely than White boys to be arrested, while Black men were more than three times more likely to be arrested than White men. This affects the number of defendants proceeding through the courts system and ultimately into prison if convicted and sentenced



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Ameilia


I was thinking the same thing.
Maybe black women committed more crimes than white women.
We don't have enough info.


The SJWs try to make the same claims here in the US. However, once you dig into the data, it is usually because blacks particularly and Hispanics commit higher rates of crime. Just a fact.

Even when they try to claim we get longer sentences for the same crimes, they leave out prior records in determining said sentences. For example, a black kid will get sentenced to say five years for say selling a little dope on the corner. A white kid does the same and gets say 2 years. The first reaction is that there is inherent discrimination but they leave out the black kid had two prior gun charges or something while the white kid was a first time offender.

I'm not arguing the system is racially blind, but things aren't as dire or related to racism as SJWs would like people to believe.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

This is something I had not considered. In the UK, 65% of the prison population are repeat offenders.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ameilia
a reply to: Morrad



One finding was that for every 100 white women handed custodial sentences at Crown Courts for drug offences, 227 black women were sentenced to custody. For black men, this figure is 141 for every 100 white men.


That sounds damming. But, how many white women were brought before court on these charges, and how many black women? What if 100 out of 100 whites were sentenced to custody, and 227 out of 227 blacks were sentenced to custody? If that were the case, both would be equal: 100% of people brought before the court on these charges were sentenced to custody. We need more information.


This is exactly the problem with pieces like these. They are conflating numbers from at the base to manipulate and misinterpret the outcome which is all to easy to do before a casual reading crowd.

I can make a piece like that too:


"Bacon kills:

A thousand people died in the U.S merely hours after having eaten bacon this year.

In saudi arabia zero people died because of ingesting bacon.

conclusion, bacon kills."

The conclusion CAN be made ONLY of you ignore the number of people who actually eat bacon in both countries.
Packaging of wording is the only true power here because people stop reading and thinking after that point.



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Morrad
I would also be interested in past criminal history if possible. Usually that is one of the main points they look at when setting sentencing.



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 05:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Morrad

The real question is, if two identical sample sizes are examined, are the percentile chances of "white" British people going to jail, and the chances of persons of colour or from ethnic minority backgrounds besides going to jail different?

Let us establish some parameters for a fair and balanced look at this.

First, only like for like cases should be examined. And I do not just mean like for like in terms of which crime has been committed. I mean entirely like cases. For example, the crimes must differ only in the singular particular, of who committed them. Further to that, the only relevant samples here, are going to be ones drawn from the pool of people who absolutely did commit the crime of which they are accused, and for which there is significant physical and forensic evidence.

So, to give an example. A "white" fellow walks into a store, secretes a bottle of whiskey in his coat, and leaves without paying, all on camera. A person of colour does the same exact thing. Do their outcomes differ? If they do, why?

However, comparing simple numbers together is not going to work here, because crime is complicated. I very much doubt that two people, committing identical crimes, but having differing skin tone, have a markedly different percentile chance of being sent to prison, and I certainly do not believe they have a different chance of being convicted. Sentencing is perhaps the point where the most difference would be found, but there are variables that are not being taken into correct account by a simple analysis of the number of people of colour being sent down when compared with the number of "white" people...

Also, we need to come up with something other than "white". Its hideously inaccurate as a description for a skin tone that I allegedly possess. If I hold my hand up next to fresh copier paper, the stupidity of the description becomes clear.



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 06:04 AM
link   
Deeply flawed and lazy study, I'm sure it cost loads and a few quid was skimmed off the top.



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 06:11 AM
link   
It looks like the over-sentencing rates are way less than the disproportionate crime rates. So, it looks like the races are worse than the racism, to put succinctly.

EG -- isn't the black crime rate compared to the white crime rate like 5:1 and the over-sentencing rate here only like 1.4:1?

If your goal is to keep black people out of prison, you'll have a much greater effect by changing the behavior of black people than you will by changing the behavior of judges, for example.
edit on 12/9/16 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Thanks for the recent posts.

I looked at crime statistics on the .gov.uk website this morning. They are fairly comprehensive but do not include BAME data.

The review has further info which explains the methodology used.



A number of MoJ reports and bulletins highlight events or decision points where ethnic
minority representation was likely to be disproportionate, or where the experiences of ethnic minorities differed from those of the white-British population who were in contact with the CJS. For example, black people are almost 4 times more likely than white people in Britain to be in prison.

Although these figures highlight likely disproportional contact with the CJS, stark proportionality numbers using the general population as a comparator are limited. They do not pinpoint where ethnic biases may be particularly influential along the pathway through the system. For example, black individuals account for about 3% of the total population of England and Wales yet make up about 9% of defendants prosecuted for indictable offences.

However, the whole population are not ‘at risk’ of being prosecuted – only those individuals charged with a serious offence are ‘at risk’. Any disproportionality in being prosecuted could result from disproportionality occurring earlier in the criminal justice pipeline – for example, at arrest – with little additional disproportionality occurring at the point where the decision to prosecute was taken. The analysis carried out here sought to address this limitation.



The Relative Rate Index model
The aim of this paper was to identify the stages in the CJS where disproportionality increased or decreased for BAME individuals with a view to identifying where further explanatory investigation may be warranted. Drawing on existing management information data from England and Wales, the analysis in this paper replicated the US Department of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s Relative Rate Index (RRI) to locate disproportionate minority contact with the CJS, post CPS engagement.

The RRI allows for the identification of specific stages, decision points or junctures in the
CJS where disproportionality emerges. Simply put, the RRI is a means of comparing the rates of CJS contact experienced by different groups. A rate was defined as the count of persons experiencing an event or outcome out of the total number of people who were ‘at risk’ for experiencing the event or outcome. Rates for each ethnic group relative to the white ethnic group were compared to determine whether they were significantly different from one another.

The RRI has specific advantages over other methods of assessing disproportionality. First, the index is calculated for the specific people ‘at risk’ for particular outcomes at the system juncture rather than the general population as a whole. If one thinks of the CJS as a sequential set of individual decisions, the RRI concept could be used to assess the level of BAME disproportionality introduced at each decision point.
This is achieved through careful definition of the number of people experiencing an event or outcome and those ‘at risk’ for experiencing that outcome.


I will pull some of the charts with RRI data later today if I have time. Apologies in advance if I am missing something. I have a splitting headache and sinusitis.



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Morrad

The real question is, if two identical sample sizes are examined, are the percentile chances of "white" British people going to jail, and the chances of persons of colour or from ethnic minority backgrounds besides going to jail different?

Let us establish some parameters for a fair and balanced look at this.

First, only like for like cases should be examined. And I do not just mean like for like in terms of which crime has been committed. I mean entirely like cases. For example, the crimes must differ only in the singular particular, of who committed them. Further to that, the only relevant samples here, are going to be ones drawn from the pool of people who absolutely did commit the crime of which they are accused, and for which there is significant physical and forensic evidence.

So, to give an example. A "white" fellow walks into a store, secretes a bottle of whiskey in his coat, and leaves without paying, all on camera. A person of colour does the same exact thing. Do their outcomes differ? If they do, why?

However, comparing simple numbers together is not going to work here, because crime is complicated. I very much doubt that two people, committing identical crimes, but having differing skin tone, have a markedly different percentile chance of being sent to prison, and I certainly do not believe they have a different chance of being convicted. Sentencing is perhaps the point where the most difference would be found, but there are variables that are not being taken into correct account by a simple analysis of the number of people of colour being sent down when compared with the number of "white" people...

Also, we need to come up with something other than "white". Its hideously inaccurate as a description for a skin tone that I allegedly possess. If I hold my hand up next to fresh copier paper, the stupidity of the description becomes clear.


The other issue is that there really aren't ever two exactly the same cases. Every single case is unique.



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 09:22 AM
link   
"Black" is offensive...

Please say "African American"

Thanks!

-Chris



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone
"Black" is offensive...

Please say "African American"

Thanks!

-Chris


What if they aren't Americans?



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Christosterone
"Black" is offensive...

Please say "African American"

Thanks!

-Chris


What if they aren't Americans?


Tough crowd..
Is this thing on?
*tap *tap

-Chris



posted on Dec, 9 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: Christosterone
"Black" is offensive...

Please say "African American"

Thanks!

-Chris


What if they aren't Americans?


Tough crowd..
Is this thing on?
*tap *tap

-Chris


Yer not as good as the feller was here last week.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join