Letter: Insulation against the justice system
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.Sir: The Government's attempt to distribute fairly the impact of court fines on defendants with diverse
incomes has produced some odd sentences, as your reports (4 May)
illustrate.
Some opponents of the 'unit fine' system, including magistrates, have taken the opportunity, while the arithmetical structure of the current system is under debate, to dissent from the principle of differential fining. It has been said that the policy is inimical to the hallowed British doctrine of equality before the law, that justice is blind to the personal characteristics of all citizens, and that there should be a standard punishment for each offence irrespective of the offender's status.
That view is highly questionable in two respects. First, the doctrine of 'equality before the law' is itself scarcely manifest in practice. In the criminal jurisdiction the system of policing and prosecution is largely focused on working-class offenders, and even when directed elsewhere, is often faced with defendants who can afford a quality of researched defence argument beyond the means of most of the accused in magistrates' courts.
In civil law, the recent exclusion of more than 10 million people from the legal aid system adds poignancy to the old observation of Mr Justice Darling that 'the law courts of England are open to all men, like the doors of the Ritz Hotel'.
Second, the law frequently does take account of the defendant's status in regard to his or her age, state of mind, medical condition and several possible extrinsic factors, such as whether he or she was under duress.
It would seem perverse to allow wealthier citizens to cushion themselves against the impact of the law: but then, if wealthier people are able to insulate themselves better than poor people against insurable loss, cold weather, being harmed in a car crash, and so on, then why not against the criminal justice system?
Yours faithfully,
GARY SLAPPER
The Law School
Staffordshire University
Stoke-on-Trent
4 May
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments