Do women receive lighter sentences than men for the same crime?
- Jessika Toothman, HowStuffWorks.com; Sarah Dowdey, Ed.
According to many researchers, the simple answer is "yes." What's not simple is why. Studies delving into this complicated legal arena often emerge with evidence that women generally do end up with shorter sentences than men, even though gender, along with race, nation of origin, religion and other inherent characteristics aren't supposed to be considered by the law. Lighter women's sentencing happens even when several factors are controlled for in an attempt to determine which variables affect sentence lengths and how they enter sentencing scenarios.
The 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act was created to standardize U.S. federal sentencing practices and promote certainty and fairness in the legal system. One of its components, the Sentencing Reform Act, provides a basic rubric based on the current criminal offense crossed with the offender's criminal history for judges to determine the appropriate sentencing range for a particular crime and offender. They can also depart from the mandatory guidelines, provided their rationale holds up in appellate court. Since 2005, the guidelines have been considered merely advisory, although judges must continue to consult them as a jumping-off point when deciding on an appropriate sentence. But even while the guidelines were mandatory, women still seemed to be receiving lighter-than-average sentences.
A comprehensive 2001 study by David Mustard of the University of Georgia examined more than 77,000 of the 120,000-odd serious federal offenders sentenced during the three-year window when sentencing guidelines were strict and mandatory. In order to discover the causes of sentencing discrepancies, he controlled for offense level and type, criminal history and the district in which the sentencing took place, but found that women received an average of 5.51 fewer months in jail than their male counterparts. When Mustard added in controls for education, income, citizenship, age and the number of dependents, females still received sentences averaging 5.47 fewer months than men in the same situations. However, it's important to note that in cases which conformed to the sentencing guidelines, and were not set outside their parameters, the gap fell to under two months. This suggests that the majority of favorable female sentencing was limited to a smaller set of cases representing departures from the norm.
So if Mustard is correct, it appears most female defendants shouldn't hope for more than a token benefit in terms of gender, although for some the boost is more substantial. But this is where things get complicated. Because while it's generally assumed that women do tend to receive lighter sentences than male convicts, the reason why -- or more likely, the complex combination of reasons why -- remains undiscovered.
Although the explanation could be based primarily on gender, a number of other potential variables beyond those already mentioned have been thrown into the ring for consideration, including victim and judicial demographics, judicial bias and accomplice status. Plus, the steps leading up to sentencing and the roles played by others in the legal arena, such as federal prosecutors, could help account for the discrepancy. Unfortunately, no conclusive reason or set of reasons has been firmly established.
And since it's so difficult to determine exactly what's happening to account for the sentencing inequities, it's doubly difficult to determine what to do about it, especially since such a cocktail of elements could be involved. For now, it appears people will just have to deal with the fact that the ladies get a little luckier when they stand for their sentencing.
The difference between a woman who steals and a man who steals is only the gender.They still commited a crime. Man-woman doesnt matter.
