\nThe reason I ended up writing about this is the headline about the defeat of a bill in Parliament that would make violence against a pregnant woman an aggravating factor.<\/a><\/p>\n \nI realized, reading the article, that I needed some clarification on what “aggravating” means from a legal perspective.<\/p>\n \nAggravating<\/em> means it’s a factor that makes the crime worse, so may cause the punishment to be more severe. For example, any crime done for the benefit of a criminal organization is seen as worse than that same crime done by (and benefitting) an individual. Therefore, if a crime is done to benefit a criminal organization, that’s an aggravating factor. As a result, said crime may be punished more severely than if the perpetrator had done it independently.<\/p>\n \nMitigating<\/em>, on the other hand, describes a factor that will potentially make the crime less severe in the eyes of the judge. Correspondingly, its sentence may be lighter than the same crime without that mitigating circumstance.<\/p>\n\n Such is my understanding, anyway.<\/p>\n Interesting, eh?<\/p>\n Source:<\/p>\n laws-lois.justice.gc.ca<\/a><\/p>\nJack of Oracle Tutoring by Jack and Diane,<\/a> Campbell River, BC.\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Self-tutoring about Canadian law: the tutor mentions the ideas of aggravating vs mitigating. The reason I ended up writing about this is the headline about the defeat of a bill in Parliament that would make violence against a pregnant woman …<\/p>\n