The details of this case turn the stomach. So do the details of the idiotic, incomprehensible legal system that produces this kind of result:

In the summer of 2019, a baby was born in Nova Scotia with "serious medical complications and significant developmental delays." Concerns by a medical geneticist led to police becoming involved. When the mother, 23, was discovered sexting her father during a visit to the neonatal intensive care unit, it all made sense.

You'd be forgiven for looking away. It's awful. The mind recoils even from thinking about it, let alone dwelling on it for any amount of time.

The correct response in this case would be to jail the father for this unspeakable crime. He's at fault. He should spend considerable time in prison.

But because it's Canada, and because it's 2023, and because nearly every major institution in the world has been infected by wokeism, authorities declined to do that. Why?

You know why.

At trial, the Crown had argued that the father should spend four to six years in jail, based on sentences that had been handed out in similar situations. ...

The trial court, and a majority of the appeal court, didn't buy the Crown's argument. Why? Because the offender was remorseful and was determined unlikely to re-offend.

Another reason was that he is Black.

I would imagine that the "other reason" was in fact the main reason. Pretty much every criminal will, if given the chance, express "remorse" and an intent to not "re-offend." Judges have a keen ability to see through that drivel. Likely the only reason the judge decided otherwise in this case is because, yes, the defendant is black.

"The moral culpability of an African Nova Scotian offender has to be assessed in the context of historic factors and systemic racism, as was done in this case," wrote the trial judge, with whom the majority of the appeal court agreed. "Sentencing judges should take into account the impact that social and economic deprivation, historical disadvantage, diminished and non-existent opportunities and restricted options may have had on the offender's moral responsibility."

The sheer infantilization of this criminal is something to behold. These kinds of policies are always implicitly patronizing, of course, because they assume that, say, black defendants are somehow operating at a lower level than white ones and thus deserve a break. But the judge in this case just stated it outright:

"The moral culpability of an African Nova Scotian offender has to be assessed in the context of historic factors and systemic racism, as was done in this case," wrote the trial judge, with whom the majority of the appeal court agreed.

Disgraceful stuff. As the Post notes, the offender in question had an abusive, at-times horrific upbringing in his own life; that sort of thing is always considered in ultimate sentencing guidelines. So is the fact that both the father and daughter are mentally handicapped. There's no need to bring his race into the question; it's irrelevant.

But of course they had to do it, because everything has to be about race these days.

This kind of drivel is a mind-virus that destroys justice.

P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇