You may want to read this article: https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/molester-nus-receives-probation-judge-says-minor-intrusions where it was reported that a 23 year old molester was sent on probation instead of the normal jail-time (for most cases) because "his academic results show he has the potential to excel in life". This is unlike most of the other convicted molesters.
This got me to think about a hypothetical scenario where:
- For all/most crimes determined by the country/state, the maximum penalties written differs in terms of your wealth and/or education level. Two classes of people when it comes to sentencing a criminal exist:
- Class A: Anyone who has a highly-accredited university degree, OR has above average grades (If he/she is still studying), OR has personal income significantly above national average.
- Class B: Everyone else.
- For a person who committed a crime for the first time. Whoever belonged in "Class A" has privilege of:
- Getting a more lenient sentence
- Gets bigger bulk of support from therapists (if needed) to ensure that he/she does not re-offend
- Is also allowed not to indicate that he/she was convicted of a crime if an employment questionnaire asks so
- HOWEVER for a repeat offender: Whoever belonged in the better "Class A" actually gets worse penalties so as to prevent people from "Class A" to abuse this privilege.
- To help the economy. If you doom a poor/uneducated person because of his/her crime, the impact to the person's productivity and contribution to the economy would be much lower as compared to dooming someone who is richer or more educated. The richer or more educated had higher potential to contribute to the nation and therefore should be given a "better" second chance.
- We should not let good talent go to waste. The highly educated and wealthy people had better capabilities and are in better shape to lead the country. In this world, it has been more or less proven that the elites often run the country better than any other class of people.
- Highly educated and wealthy people are statistically proven to be less likely to re-offend, and giving them a more lenient sentence is to take into account this correlation, which only makes such a way of sentencing fairer.
Do you think this hypothetical scenario would be good for the country where you are?