Crime: Judiciary reluctant to tackle racism
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Government plans to force judges to hand out tougher sentences to people convicted of racially motivated crimes have received a boost from new evidence showing that the judiciary is reluctant to take on racism.
A study conducted by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) shows that judges only use their discretionary power to add time to sentences, where racism has been a motive, in 20 per cent of cases.
The paper shows that between April 1996 and March 1997 the CPS identified 937 cases of harassment or violence where the perpetrator was acting partially or wholly out of racist bigotry. But in only 181 of those cases did judges indicate that the sentence was increased as a result of this information.
The figures will add weight to the case for tougher sentences for racially motivated crimes to become obligatory. Government proposals, which are expected to form part of Home Secretary Jack Straw's Crime and Disorder Bill, will be published within weeks.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments