Sentence Disparity In The Justice System

The criminal justice system is a set of organizations and procedures set up by governments to control wrongdoing and force punishments on the individuals who disregard the laws. The main frameworks are state and federal. The state criminal justice systems handle wrongdoings perpetrated inside their state limits and government, the federal criminal system handles violations carried out on federal property or in more than one state. This system is supposed to be equal yet the nature of offenses, differential policing policies and practices, sentencing laws and biases are possible contributors to disparities in the system. The severity of the offense, prior record, age and education level are also taking into account when a decision is being made. Our prison system today varies immensely with ascending numbers of minority groups jailed within the system. Racial and ethnic imbalances continue in the United States and no disparity is more evident than that found in the criminal justice system. Disparity usually refers to a difference that is unfair, disparity in the criminal justice system stems from racial disparity which concludes that the proportion of a racial ethnic group within the control of the system is greater than the population of that group outside that control.

Truth in sentencing laws are generally popular with victim’s right advocates because those laws make it so that the criminal serves almost their whole sentence they were originally given. With these laws in most states the prisoner has to serve 85% of their sentence ("Truth in Sentencing”).

Sentencing disparities as a result of an individual’s race or ethnic background, has been one of the most frequently investigated topics in criminological research. (Mitchell, Mackenzie 2004). Several studies have attempted to understand the impact of the offenders’ race on criminal sentencing but there has been variation in the results- some of studies concluded race does effect sentencing regardless of the legal variables; some studies revealed it does not; while other studies concluded that race does impact sentencing when coupled with other factors. (Pratt 1998).

A rising controversy surrounding our justice system is whether or not racial disparity exists when sentencing. Early studies concluded that racial disparity in sentencing was a result of discrimination (Spohn, Gruhl & Welch, 1981). For decades, these disparities in sentencing have led to considerable empirical research, and helped to shape major policy changes (Starr & Rehali, 2013). In this paper, existing research focused on whether there are sentencing disparities between Caucasians and minorities will be presented. This paper will also examine whether there is evidence of a biased justice system or are minorities simply just more involved in crime.

Inconsistency in sentencing is due to the lack of knowledge in which lay magistrates obtain and this creates a negative effect towards the court system. If sentences are inconsistent this means that the role of courts is not being completed effectively as they should be. Lay magistrates who are faced with offences may come to final decisions towards sentences which may not be acceptable, if an individual commits an offence they must receive a sentence which is a punishment towards their behaviour however with the lack of knowledge which the lay magistrate has, sentences may be inconsistent.

In the law a sentence is forms the final explicit act of judge rule process the sentence can generally involve a decree of imprisonment, a fine and or other punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime. We all have known this for years that this is that is how prison sentencing is done. Even though people should go away for the same crime, in reality prison sentencing is not fair because of people of different backgrounds, genders. and ethnicities face different sentences for the same crime. When it comes to society has high expectations for the criminal justice system. People expect a murderer, for example, to have the same sentence as another person. When a celebrity such as Bill Cosby gets put away for a rape he may go away for a shorter time than average Joe. The minimum sentencing for certain crimes, in this case, are longer than they should be. Why should people be sentenced to unlawful sentences and end up in jail until they are elderly and not a danger society?Unfair sentencing is a form of the unequal treatment often unexplained cause of why. We see a person go away for x amount of years and then someone else comes along and performs the same crime and gets less or longer than the other person.

In this paper I will illustrate racial disparity in sentencing in the criminal justice system. The causes of racial disparity and the reasons it is on the rise, the research statistics, and the proposed solutions are discussed.

“We are a nation that professes freedom, yet we have this mass incarceration, this hyper-incarceration, that is trawling into it, grinding into it, our most vulnerable citizenry, and is overwhelmingly biased towards people of color.” Booker’s quote serves to question the hypocrisy of our “democratic” government leaders. The American government has two faces: one for whites and the other for minorities. It comes out into the public and wears garments that portray freedom and equality for all. However, it reveals its bare self when it incarcerates and abuses minorities’ freedom to make rich white men more wealthy and powerful.

Judges are a lot like police officers in that they hold a great amount of discretionary power in their courtrooms and their judgments. Judges are required to ensure that the accused is given a fair trial, while also ensuring that the best interest of the public is maintained. There is a great amount of pressure placed on judges today with excessive case loads and pressures from the media and other outside sources.

Many years ago, before courts existed matters was handled in a privately or informally. This often led to violence and unjust treatment of innocent people. During the rise of the Greek City States and the Roman Empire law enforcement became a public affair instead of private. (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). Along with this movement became formalized courts and other criminal justice institutions. This allowed for law enforcement matters to be handled in a more civilized manner for resolving human conflict.

Judicial discretion was prevalent over the first half of the last three decades, but has been regulated by legislature since 1984. Discretion by definition is the authorization of deciding as one thinks fit, absolutely or within limits (Ntanda, 1999). Indeterminate sentencing, traditionally, has afforded judges considerable discretion over the resolve of criminal sentencing. “While such discretion theoretically allows judges to tailor sentences to the circumstances of individual crimes and criminals, thereby achieving a sort of ex post fairness, it also permits variation in sentences that may not be warranted by the observable facts of the case, reflecting instead the judge’s own preferences” (Miceli, 2008, p.207). The punishment

Even though the criminal justice system has guidelines to following when sentencing criminals, there are still sentencing issues. In other words, to make the sentencing more fair and equal, several issues have been addressed. These issues are proportionality, equity, social debt and truth in sentencing. Proportionality is a standard that deals with the punishment fitting the crime. The equity principle deals with ensuring that punishment for one crime is the same as punishment for a similar crime. Social debt is the next sentencing principle. With social debt, the judge reviews past behavior or criminal records in order to impose a fair sentence. Finally, the truth in sentencing ensures that inmates are not released from prison without serving the majority of his or her sentence. In other words, credit for good behavior or educational programs would not allow the inmate to be released if he or she only served a small portion of the sentence (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2011).

There are major differences in the sentencing within the sentences and this has lead to criticism. For

Just like what Beccaria had stated, in order for punishment to be fair and effective, the punishment should be proportioned depending on the severity of the crime. In other words, if the punishment is too lenient, for example, criminals would be encouraged to engage in more criminal activities knowing that the punishment is minimal. However, if the punishment is too

Judges are chosen to hold the fate of many individuals in the palm of their hands. The famous saying “with great power, comes great responsibility,” is true and practiced evermore in the court room. Whether a judge is appointed or elected, there are many factors that can influence a judge’s decision in pretrial and in sentencing. In this research paper, I will share some of the most common factors that influences a judge’s discretion, and also the ways the factors result sentencing of an offender. Furthermore, I will bring to attention some of the more controversial factors and ways they have influenced the outcome of the court process.