A South Australian man with borderline intellectual capacity who robbed an elderly couple in the town of Port Pirie had his jail sentence reduced yesterday on the grounds of being an Aborigine.Did the American South in 1866 ever have such a naked racial preference in sentencing? The 14th Amendment's requirement of "equal protection" was aimed at this sort of this generally, but I think the Black Codes were more in terms of special laws (e.g., prohibiting blacks from moving geographically) than applying existing laws unequally.The South Australian Court of Criminal Appeal reduced Darren Clarke's non-parole period from 23 months to 17 months and cut his jail sentence by eight months to two years and three months because of his race. The judges found that while being an Aborigine on its own could not be used as a mitigating circumstance, it could be relevant in sentencing.
Notice that since this is something judges think is a good idea, a constitutional
provision wouldn't help anyway, at least for people who keep to the theory that judges
can do no wrong. A judge might say that equal protection requires lower sentences for
Aborigines because they have greater temptations-- which, indeed, was pretty much this
judge's reasoning.
... [permalink: 04.06.18e.htm]
[This page is
http://www.rasmusen.org/w/04.06.18e.htm]
To return to Eric Rasmusen's weblog, click http://www.rasmusen.org/w/0.htm. TrackBack test