General Discussion

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts) Mon Dec 15, 2014, 06:59 PM Dec 2014

An obvious way to make the judicial system fairer.

Once a month, write up a fictional criminal case - details of the crime, culprit, mitigating and aggravating factors, etc.

Send it to all judges, and require them to send back the sentence they would pass if it came before them in court.

Require any judge whose sentences are consistently significantly different to average to undergo retraining.

Obviously, this wouldn't be immune to judges deliberately gaming the system. But I suspect that just eliminating unintentional variation would make the courts a lot fairer.

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

An obvious way to make the judicial system fairer. (Original Post) Donald Ian Rankin Dec 2014 OP

There already are sentencing guidelines ... 1StrongBlackMan Dec 2014 #1

The difference between sentencing guidelines and this. Donald Ian Rankin Dec 2014 #2

Define signficantly different from average onenote Dec 2014 #3

Either would work. Donald Ian Rankin Dec 2014 #6

Outliers can be of two sorts. Igel Dec 2014 #4

You're confusing verdicts with sentences. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Dec 2014 #5

The TPP investor-state 3-member boards aspirant Dec 2014 #7

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)

1. There already are sentencing guidelines ...

Reply to Donald Ian Rankin (Original post)

Mon Dec 15, 2014, 07:14 PM

Dec 2014

I don't see how this differs.

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)

2. The difference between sentencing guidelines and this.

Reply to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 15, 2014, 07:29 PM

Dec 2014

Is the difference between speed limits and speed cameras.

Yes, there are sentencing guidelines. The question is, are they applied consistently, and I strongly suspect that the answer is "no".

onenote

(42,698 posts)

3. Define signficantly different from average

Reply to Donald Ian Rankin (Original post)

Mon Dec 15, 2014, 07:45 PM

Dec 2014

And do you mean mean or median?

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)

6. Either would work.

Reply to onenote (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 16, 2014, 05:01 AM

Dec 2014

And revealing a significant skew in sentences would be an interesting fact in itself.

In terms of "significantly different", the obvious measures include fraction of the mean, sigmage or centiles, and the former is probably the best - if judges are sentencing close together, you want them all to pass.

Igel

(35,300 posts)

4. Outliers can be of two sorts.

Reply to Donald Ian Rankin (Original post)

Mon Dec 15, 2014, 07:53 PM

Dec 2014

More harsh or more backwards thinking than the majority or mainstream.

Or more lenient or forward thinking than the majority.

The first judge to rule with a LGBT couple against the established laws was an outlier. His verdict was substantially different from the majority. You'd have had him punished for it.

Same for the few judges that ruled against miscegenation statutes in the '50s and '60s. They'd have been quickly punished and weeded out of the system, yet they were the thin wedge that split open public attitudes and compelled change.

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)

5. You're confusing verdicts with sentences. N.T.

Reply to Igel (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 16, 2014, 04:57 AM

Dec 2014

aspirant

(3,533 posts)

7. The TPP investor-state 3-member boards

Reply to Donald Ian Rankin (Original post)

Tue Dec 16, 2014, 05:21 AM

Dec 2014

are they constitutional?

How can 1 of the 3 governmental bodies(the legislature) enact a higher judicial power than our constitution created?

Reply to this discussion