This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

A new academic study of criminal sentencing patterns in South Carolina has found that consistently harsher penalties are applied in the sentencing of African Americans than regarding their white counterparts.



One author of the study called its findings “troubling”, and added: “It is particularly concerning that this pattern of disparity appears to be affecting African American offenders with limited criminal histories or for less severe crimes.”

The study, published on Monday by the University of Sheffield, looked at 17,000 decisions from South Carolina courts. It identified clear patterns of racial bias in court sentencing decisions: petty criminals who are black, for example, are more likely to be jailed than their white counterparts and black offenders will likely serve longer sentences for low severity crimes.

Not only were black people with lower levels of criminal history more likely to be jailed, the study found, but the likelihood of custodial sentences increased by 43% for those with no past criminal history.

Analysis of the figures from 2000, the last year South Carolina released them, revealed that while the probability of incarceration may be relatively low for white and black offenders with no to moderate prior convictions, it is not the same.

Analysis showed disparities ranging from incarceration for 43% of defendants with no criminal history to 26% with minimal history and 10% for those with moderate histories. Career criminals were treated almost identically.

“We’re finding bias in the system at a point where race shouldn’t have anything to do with it,” said study co-author Todd Hartman. “We’re not saying it’s intentional, but there is a troubling disparity there.”

The study, by Hartman at Sheffield and Rhys Hester of the University of Minnesota, is published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology. Part of its focus is to test “liberation hypothesis” – a theory that suggests when the evidentiary case against a defendant is weak, jurors are more likely to use non-legal or circumstantial information in their decision-making.

The researchers chose to study data from South Carolina, where there are no sentencing guidelines and judges have greater discretion in sentencing offenders.

Especially where the evidence was ambiguous and did not concern extreme criminality, the study found that extra-legal characteristics such as race could come into play influencing sentencing decisions.

Hartman said the recent focus on excessive use of force by US police and racial disparities in its application was only part of the story.

“Whether intentional or not,” he said, “the fact that race appears to influence incarceration and criminal sentencing decisions is troubling.

“It is particularly concerning that this pattern of disparity appears to be affecting African American offenders with limited criminal histories or for less severe crimes.

“We know that in the criminal justice system African Americans are disproportionately affected and we’ve seen it in respect to shootings by police officers but we wanted to look at something further along in the process.

“It’s astonishing to find that the likelihood that someone will go to prison for a minor crime can be almost 50% increased for a black offender.”

Hartman said he hoped the findings would “raise awareness of this potential bias in sentencing decisions”.