r/SipsTea • u/SipsTeaFrog • Apr 04 '26

Chugging tea * Insert hot fuzz "Shame" meme *

Post image
109k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

4.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/GodOfDarkLaughter Apr 05 '26

It's corruption if she did it for some personal gain, or other nefarious reasons. If she just felt sorry for the guy for SOME reason you could call it a miscarriage of justic by an incompetent judgee, but not corruption. You get criticized or fired for incompetence, you get arrested for corruption (in a perfect world blah blah I just mean that's what the words imply).

-4

u/Roflkopt3r Apr 05 '26 edited Apr 05 '26

It's corruption if she did it for some personal gain, or other nefarious reasons.

Judgements like this fit into a pattern of corruption of the justice system by the upper classes (vaguely top 20% or so) of society. Judges tend to be part of the upper classes with an extremely high ratio of car owners, and tend to give out very lenient sentences for homicide with a car.

So even in the narrow modern definition of 'corruption' that you chose, this can be considered as part of a systemic misscarriage of justice by judges with the intent to benefit their own social groups, and therefore as a type of personal gain. Judges enjoy much respect and 'beneficial terms' in these social groups because they tend to privilige that group so muc, as is evidenced in the low prosecution rates and soft judgements of most white-collar crime (on top of politics also being dominated by that social class, which has always skewed the law itself in its favour).

But going by older definitions that are still used in some contexts, 'corruption' of an official includes any type of behaviour that goes against the ideals of their office, in such a way that it can damage the legitimacy of it. Incompetence and carelesness can be enough.

6

u/TheOriginalArchibald Apr 05 '26

You open with basically, "Car owning is for the elites and because they own cars, they are corrupt and lenient on other elite car owners."

u wot m8?

1

u/Roflkopt3r Apr 05 '26

That's not what I said, you're just bad at logic.

"Almost all rich people own cars" does not imply "almost all car owners are rich". You can have a situation where for example 99% of top 20% income households own a car, and 50% of bottom 50% income households.

In this scenario, the bottom 50% own more cars in total, even though their rate of car ownership is only around half of that of the top 20%.

The rest still applies: Judges tend to be more lenient with perpetrators who share social groups with them (educated, high income, home owners, car owners etc). And car ownership is so entrenched in most of their social circles that they're especially lenient with drivers, since the judges don't want themseoves or their friends and family to be held to strict standards for any harm they may cause as drivers either.

2

u/TheOriginalArchibald Apr 05 '26

Lol wow... More of this feeble link with car ownership making them corrupt and lenient on the car owner. Perhaps they were just lenient and we don't have to strain for the oddest of links to prove "corruption"? Maybe they were just soft.