Female Judge spares serial drunk driver jail time... twice... because she’s also female

[shiadoa]

• “In ancient times cats were worshipped as gods; they have not forgotten this.” – Terry Pratchett
  I also remember your long tentacled debates . Your laser is probably bigger than mine
  
  
  
  
  
  conference

[Andrew0409]

@yyy

but the longer article explains that the judge saw the defendant as a woman in an abusive relationship , not simply as a woman . The implication – which we could probably read about in detail if we saw the actual sentencing decision – is that there was a mitigating circumstance because she wasn’t entirely in her right state of mind, and so on. That in no way precludes a man in an abusive relationship and not entirely in his right state of mind being treated more or less the same way, or a primary breadwinner (of whatever gender) being treated leniently, like I said before.

The judges quote responding to the woman being in an abusive relationship,

If Miss Parry was a man, there is no question it would have been straight down the stairs, because this is a shocking case of dangerous driving against a background of two previous convictions for excess alcohol.

Seems to either suggest

A. If a man was in an abusive relationship, the judge would not have been as lenient
B. She is assuming a man can’t be a victim/ equal participant of an abusive relationship or one that would cause this sort of mental despair .

Or possibly

C. What she meant by “man” was a man who is not in an abusive relationship.

But if C is true, why didn’t she say "if you (defendant) were not in an abusive relationship.

Is there another option i’m not seeing? Because A and C seems kind of unfair. We do only have the quotes and some information to go by so. But it seems we have enough to make some determination.

[yyy]

Why not a conversation along the lines I suggested earlier?

It’s possible the judge is biased, but I don’t think what little context we have is sufficient to presume that.

I’m not familiar with how drunk driving (or “drink driving”) is handled is England, so I won’t presume to know how much power the judge even has in a case like this compared to the police/prosecutor. Both articles use headlines that put words in the judge’s mouth, but if she were a man, she would have gone to jail is not the same as if you were a man, I would have sent you to jail.

[shiadoa]

@yyy

I’m not familiar with how drunk driving (or “drink driving”) is handled is England, so I won’t presume to know how much power the judge even has in a case like this compared to the police/prosecutor.

This judgement appears to be lenient …unless there was more than we are reading about

Being in charge of a vehicle while above the legal limit or unfit through drink

You may get:

• 3 months’ imprisonment
• up to £2,500 fine
• a possible driving ban

Driving or attempting to drive while above the legal limit or unfit through drink

You may get:

• 6 months’ imprisonment
• an unlimited fine
• a driving ban for at least 1 year (3 years if convicted twice in 10 years)

Refusing to provide a specimen of breath, blood or urine for analysis

You may get:

• 6 months’ imprisonment
• an unlimited fine
• a ban from driving for at least 1 year

Causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink

You may get:

• 14 years’ imprisonment
• an unlimited fine
• a ban from driving for at least 2 years
• an extended driving test before your licence is returned

You won’t automatically get your licence back if you’re a high risk offender.

[Andrew0409]

@yyy

Why not a conversation along the lines I suggested earlier?

It’s possible the judge is biased, but I don’t think what little context we have is sufficient to presume that.

I’m not familiar with how drunk driving (or “drink driving”) is handled is England, so I won’t presume to know how much power the judge even has in a case like this compared to the police/prosecutor.

In the article I found, my interpretation is that is was a direct response to her being in an abusive relationship. But I do not have the exact transcript so I can see the possibility of something else said before and her response was in another context.

Regardless, to me it’s a pretty bad decision in leniency. Considering I also got from the article the woman is still drinking, possibly still heavy but not 2 bottles a day. You don’t need 2 bottles to be drunk driving. Assuming it’s not bottles of beer depending on the BA limits of her jurisdiction.