The " Punishment Lottery " !

Magistrates and Judges have an amazing amount of " discretion " when it comes to deciding what punishment will apply in cases appearing before them.   Whatever the outcome, it will probably be subject to appeal to a higher court if it is considered too harsh by the person convicted, or by the prosecution if it falls short of the usual standard for that type of crime.

From time to time there are calls from the public for that discretion to be limited and fixed penalties to apply to categories of crime.  The lawmakers wisely choose not to apply that option. Different nuances and backgrounds make each case an individual puzzle to be teased apart and in the end the issue of rehabilitation is a major factor to be decided.

One case this week will certainly have tongues wagging in legal circles.   A very presentable thirty-one year old man appeared before a magistrate to face a charge of being in possession of Cocaine.  As often happens, he presented a character reference to be taken into consideration by the court.

That character reference was written by the magistrates former boss who is now a retired Federal court judge.   It seems that the defendant works in the legal profession and in fact holds the prestigious position of a " Judges Associate " - a job that entails assisting a judge with the examination and interpretation of the law in reaching a decision.

That magistrate faced a dilemma.   Of all people this young man should understand the impossible  legality of getting caught in possession of an illegal drug.   In fact, a conviction would probably kill his legal career - and waste years of time at university and climbing the rungs of the legal ladder.  Yet in most respects this was a " victimless crime ".  Those that imbibe in Cocaine usually only do damage to their own health.

Was it worth throwing someone who probably would achieve an illustrious legal career on the scrapheap for this one minor indiscretion ?   The option that exists for all those sitting in judgement was there - to give that person a " second chance ".    That was the verdict given and the young man walked free without a conviction recorded.

Unfortunately, events of this nature have a habit of coming back to haunt those who administer the law.  It is inevitable that this magistrate will face a similar case where someone has been caught with Cocaine - and that person does not have access to a highly placed person who will write a glowing character reference.   It may also be inevitable that conviction and sentencing will end some sort of low paying job and send this felon back onto the dole queue.  It is also possible that this person will appear unrepresented - and may not be impressive as a witness delivering an understandable defence.

It does tend to make a mockery of the maxim that we are " all equal before the law " !  A reference to Orwells " Animal Farm " comes to mind - that some are " more equal than others ".   Such is the nature of our system of the law and we change that at our peril.   We can only hope that the appeals system evens out the worst anomalies !