Comments on: Tories mull minimum sentences for white-collar crime

By: Mac

Mac — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 04:39:49 +0000

I suspect the shame would be enough. Most judges are all but anonymous until they made an error so egregious the media picks up the story. Back when journalists actually looked for stories, they used to hang around the courthouse to see who was being charged and how things play out. Nowadays, unless it’s a high-profile case, journalists don’t bother.

I’ve had defence lawyers tell me that they set the court dates for their clients after checking the judge schedules since they know which judges are soft on which crimes, which are most likely to convict or acquit, etc.

By: Cynapse

Cynapse — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 04:25:01 +0000

Mac: Do you think doing something similar to this would cause judges to hand out tougher sentences … or would we have to stipulate some sort of punishment for judges whose “rates” are too bad. Is mere shame enough?

By: Mac

Mac — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 04:20:07 +0000

Stats can be manipulated but I like the idea of publishing recidivism rates vs % of max sentences… perhaps we could also add the number of prisoners released who subsequently commit other crimes, all associated to the judge’s name? There are a number of other criteria which could be published… say criminals sentenced to parole only who subsequently “graduate” to more serious crimes… After all, it’s all a matter of pubic record.

By: Cynapse

Cynapse — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 15:59:40 +0000

If I ever got in office, stats would be cornerstone of most policies Yep, that’s pretty biased, but it would also work. Regardless, it would be a good exercise. My guess is once a criminal has committed a certain sequence of crimes within a certain time period, he’s a shoe-in for murder – thus the last crime should carry about a 10+ year sentence. Also, there will probably be crimes where only parole numbers are given, meaning if the prisoner never acts impressively he never gets out, and can’t try before x years.

A much cheaper and sneakier way to use statistics could be to publish recidivism rate vs % of maximum sentence given for each judge. Make these stats mandatory and for public download. Add just a hint of a forthcoming law to remove derelict judges and hearts will stop bleeding quickly, non? Best part is there is very little most activists could say against it since the law hasn’t infringed on anyone’s rights in any way

By: Mac

Mac — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 14:14:13 +0000

It might be a worthwhile exercise regardless, Cynapse…

By: Cynapse

Cynapse — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 02:42:37 +0000

3 eggheads and a copy of Enterprise Miner could figure out the proper sentencing for a host of crimes in a couple months, just using statistics. However, that would put a lot of judges out of business so don’t look for it.

By: RL

RL — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 02:37:11 +0000

If the judiciary took a long look in the mirror and asked themselves why all these minimum sentencing laws are being passed, maybe they wouldn’t be necessary. I’m not the biggest fan of them either, but I wonder, if the parliament were to pass a sentencing guideline bill, ‘ie. the first priority of sentencing is public safety’, would the judges listen?

By: Mac

Mac — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 02:09:50 +0000

I’m not a fan of minimum sentencing. It’s hard enough to get a conviction nowadays. Add in a minimum sentence and the judges will let everyone walk.

By: Jack

Jack — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:54:32 +0000

No interest in this so far. I guess people don’t worry about their investments.

My view — the sooner Harper pulls the plug the happier I will be. Not because I think he will lose. Rather, because I think he’ll catch everyone with their pants down.

I guess I’m impatient and I can’t see the government constantly sucking up to “socialists”.

Unlike the US Canada can do something about our situation (and rapidly).

I think Harper needs to make that a talking point in one of his “super secret” cabinet meetings.