Sexual assault...but sure he's a nice lad..Mod Warning Post 275

pookie82 · 17-12-2009 11:40am

amacachi wrote: »

The "impaired consent" is where I'm fairly sure you and I disagree, I feel sick most nights I'm out and under that particular definition pretty much all my male and female mates have been sexually assaulted or raped. To me anyway feeling sick at some point in a night isn't enough to say that consent was impaired later on.

On this case though, like I said, there's a few things that really puzzle me about it. Though in fairness if I was the family of the victim I'd be annoyed he got as long a sentence as he did.

But rape sentences are notoriously argued as being too low in this system. So it's difficult to see people complain about the length of one when someone IS actually convicted. For me anyway.

fatmammycat · 17-12-2009 11:40am

Aye, Ash23, they'd think you assualted yourself. Also from a rural area and have seen for myself how 'blow ins' are considered.

amacachi · 17-12-2009 11:41am

pookie82 wrote: »

But rape sentences are notoriously argued as being too low in this system. So it's difficult to see people complain about the length of one when someone IS actually convicted. For me anyway.

Oh I think most rapes should mean 20 to life or no custodial sentence at the victim's family's request.

Danniboo · 17-12-2009 11:42am

AntiRip wrote: »

I know Danny very well and I know the victim also. If you lived in the area you'd know the full story that isn't been in the media. I am very shocked and upset with this story. It's very sad when you know the people involved.

Care to elaborate???

Wibbs · 17-12-2009 11:45am

Danniboo wrote: »

Care to elaborate???

Actually I would prefer if they didn't. Hearsay and conjecture are not on in cases like this. Plus if there is an issue of possible miscarriage of justice, then public supposition would harm such a case. So lets leave that alone please.

fatmammycat · 17-12-2009 11:45am

Danniboo wrote: »

Care to elaborate???

He won't, he's just happy to obfuscate the issue.

Sorry Wibbs, we crossed.

AntiRip · 17-12-2009 11:47am

Oryx wrote: »

So why this particular set of morons? Ive just never seen this done before, and it beggars belief, really. Usually its a quiet whispering campaign, which always casts a slur on the victim, but never so directly as this.

pm sent

AntiRip · 17-12-2009 11:48am

fatmammycat wrote: »

He won't, he's just happy to obfuscate the issue.

Sorry Wibbs, we crossed.

I'm not actually :rolleyes:

Osgoodisgood · 17-12-2009 11:52am

Zulu wrote: »

Fucking scumbag tbh.

And to anyone who thinks otherwise, just take one second to imagine your girlfriend/fiancé/wife/sister/mother out on a night with her friends. It incenses me beyond reason.

So it seems

Jood · 17-12-2009 11:55am

This is being discussed on Gerry Ryan now.

Ash.J.Williams · 17-12-2009 11:55am

A priest has insisted he did nothing wrong in joining a group of people who openly supported a convicted sex offender in court prior to the man being sentenced.
Fr Sean Sheehy joined 40 to 50 local men who queued up to shake hands and embrace Danny Foley in the Circuit Criminal Court in Tralee yesterday.
Foley, of of Meen, Listowel, Co Kerry, denied the sexual assault charges against him. CCTV footage showed the 35-year-old carrying a young women to the skip area in the town centre car park where she was later found semi-conscious, half-naked and covered in scratches and bruises. Foley told gardai that he “found your wan” in the skip area as he was going to relieve himself.
Two weeks ago a jury returned a unanimous guilty verdict. Yesterday Foley was sentenced to seven years jail and he will be placed on the sex offenders register for life.
Presiding judge Donagh McDonagh criticised Fr Sheehy’s character witness statement during sentencing.
Speaking to Claire Byrne on Newstalk, Fr Sheehy defended his support for the convicted man and described the sentence as “harsh”.
“To hand down a seven year sentence in that kind of situation, it seems to me is a miscarriage of justice,” Fr Sheehy said.
The Castlegregory parish priest says he backed Foley because he knew him to be an “even tempered, placid individual.”
“I just wanted to support him and let him know he wasn’t alone,” Fr Sheehy said. When asked how he felt about supporting a man found guilty of sexual assault, the priest said “the fact is, it was an alleged attack... but the jury convicted him.”
He added that had he known the victim, he would have shook her hand too. “My Christian responsibility was to the person I know,” he said.
Fr Sheehy denied claims that the hand-shaking and hugging of Foley by the group of men was organised. He said he’d been asked to say hello to the defendant by his mother .
“I was simply responding to her invitation, she (Foley’s mother) was completely broken-hearted,” he said.

Beruthiel · 17-12-2009 11:56am

AntiRip wrote: »

All I can say guys is that there is a lot more to this story.

He was convicted. There is no 'other' side to the story.

Wibbs · 17-12-2009 11:56am

OK folks. We keep this debate civil and measured or it gets locked and bans handed out.

Kimia · 17-12-2009 11:58am

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

So it seems

What does this mean?

molloyjh · 17-12-2009 11:58am

AntiRip wrote: »

Guys, been from the area I would love to tell you the thoughts in these peoples heads but afraid to say it on a public forum. All I can say guys is that there is a lot more to this story. Really there is. I'm sure the full story or understanding why this has happened will come out.

It may sound like a silly question, but if you know something that we don't, but you can't tell us, why are you advertising the fact? If you can't say what it is then just say nothing at all. It saves you hassle you're getting and us the frustration of having to listen to "Well I know something you don't know but I'm not saying".

At the end of the day these cases can sometimes get more complicated than this one is being made out to be. Whether that is the case here or not we don't know, yet at least.

What we do know is that the girl was very drunk. We know that there was sexual contact and we know that he dumped her semi-concious body next to a skip. Now the sexaul contact thing could potentially be understandable. Guy gets drunk, meets drunk girl, they start chatting and one thing leads to another. He could be so drunk that he himself doesn't realise how bad she is and mistakes her inability to say no as being consent. I don't know for a fact that this is or is not what happened, but it is possible. So at best the sexual contact could be a horrible misunderstanding (not to say that excuses it, it most certainly doesn't).

However the most important point in the night is what he did after. He dumped her half conscious and half dressed body by a skip. There is never in any way anything understandable about this. There is no combination of facts that could ever mitigate that action. No amount of "other information" that anyone has could ever forgive that. He made a conscious decision to literally throw her away. And the fact that he was able to make such a conscious decision would at the very least suggest he wasn't too drunk to realise how bad she was in the first place.

And then he made the concious decision to lie about it. Rather than relate a story about how he was really drunk and didn't realise what he was doing he said it never happened. That's a second conscious act that would lead any right minded person to thinking that he knew he had done something wrong.

And finally, he never showed any remorse. He never apologised. Nothing. A final conscious act that would lead me to believe he knew full well what he was doing at the time, he tried to hide it, tried to cover it up and didn't care about the impact on the woman involved. Hardly "respectful of women" as the priest claimed.

Even if there were mitigating circumstances surrounding the sexual contact what followed was a shameful and disgusting display of disrespect and cruelty. And no amount of additional information can change that. And as a result, in my mind at least, there is no excuse for the behaviour of those 50 men shaking his hand.

Zulu · 17-12-2009 12:00pm

Thaedydal wrote: »

Bottom line is if someone has had too much to drink so that they can not properly consent and someone is aware of this and takes advantage then they are committing non consensual sexual acts ranging from groping to rape.

I'm not happy with this defination tbh. Whats "properly consent"?

[edit] Sorry, the reason I ask is that, all things considered in our society, we tend to have intimate dealings with each other while heavily inebriated. Most of these dealing shouldn’t be considered unwelcome, or unwanted, hence I wouldn’t feel it’s either fair or accurate to consider them sexual assault. Just a thought.

[second edit] on second thoughs, it's always been clear to me when someone was too "out of it". Hummm, I guess what I'm thinking is we'd need to have a clear and consise defination of what "proper consent" is, and take drunken decisions into account. Quite the impossible task I figure!

Soeey about all the edits Thaedydal - I'm thinking about it as I go!

AntiRip · 17-12-2009 12:02pm

molloyjh wrote: »

It may sound like a silly question, but if you know something that we don't, but you can't tell us, why are you advertising the fact? If you can't say what it is then just say nothing at all. It saves you hassle you're getting and us the frustration of having to listen to "Well I know something you don't know but I'm not saying".

I totally agree with you. Sorry to everyone. I just thought I could build up the confidence and say whats been said but at the end of the day a judgment has been made. I just really hope this sort of thing doesn't put off anyone in reporting such crimes. I really hope this doesn't happen.

Sorry again guys

Beruthiel · 17-12-2009 12:04pm

I've just dropped Fr Sean Sheehy an e mail to let him know my thoughts on his involvement.

dearg lady · 17-12-2009 12:04pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Secondly and more worryingly, it may be a more dangerous revolt against the notion that no one ever asks for it. A bit of "enoughs enough, will you look at what they're wearing and how these women are acting? If you walked around the town at night covered in gold chains drunk out of your head, sure you would expect to be mugged" idea.

I've heard this idea with some cases of sexual assualt/rape been spoken privately by both men and women. We're not talking the usual eejits either. I can number one law type among that number. It cant be just dismissed as the rantings of morons, even if that's the cosy idea. It seems to be an age thing too. I know one woman who would have been very reactionary with regard to any sort of sexual violation in the past, who now will say date rape is complete nonsense. This stuff going public where "upstanding members of the community" are not afraid to show support for this notion is worrying in the larger world.

It's very difficult to know where to draw the line isn't it. I do think it's important for everyone(both male and female) to protect themselves and not put themselves in dangerous situations. However, imho, the caveat to this is that if a person were to put themselves in a vulnerable situation and an assault happened, it's still not the victims fault.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Not a comfortable idea is it?
That you know people who had sex with people who could not consent or could only give impaired consent due to being that 'out of it'.

It happens a lot more then people ever want to think about as it's not comfortable thing to contemplate esp in this country were drink is abused so much.

Bottom line is if someone has had too much to drink so that they can not properly consent and someone is aware of this and takes advantage then they are committing non consensual sexual acts ranging from groping to rape.

This guy was a bouncer, I am sure he's seen women in various states of intoxication over the years to know better, or maybe this was the first time he'd be caught, that is something I find uncomfortable to think about.

amacachi wrote: »

The "impaired consent" is where I'm fairly sure you and I disagree, I feel sick most nights I'm out and under that particular definition pretty much all my male and female mates have been sexually assaulted or raped. To me anyway feeling sick at some point in a night isn't enough to say that consent was impaired later on.

On this case though, like I said, there's a few things that really puzzle me about it. Though in fairness if I was the family of the victim I'd be annoyed he got as long a sentence as he did.

I'd like to think most people could recognise when a person is too 'out of it' to give consent, but I do sometimes see very drunk girls at clubs or festivals on their own and worry. I know people who have escorted girls back to their tents in such situations, cos they were worried about them wandering out alone, and it's nice to know there are blokes out there who'll go out of their way to bring a stranger to safety.

I'm slightly confused amacachi by your comment about feeling sick most nights you're out, seriously, most nights??! That doesn't sound fun!

ash23 wrote: »

This has actually given me huge food for thought.
I live in a rural town but I'm not from here originally. Not many people would know me. I'm a single mum, have been with a few guys here casually enough, I'm a wee bit of a party animal as in I'm out drinking most weekends.
I rarely drink so much that I can't remember what has happened or pass out but it has happened to me once or twice.

I just know that if I were in this position, where I drank so much I pretty much passed out in a club, was carried out by some local bloke who proceeded to strip me and assault me out beside a skip, I would feel violated and I would want this person to be prosecuted.

But I can also see that I would be the one portrayed as the bad guy. Sure, I'm out drinking every weekend with a child at home. I've been with him and him, what a slut I am. And sure, young Johnny down the road is well known and plays GAA for the local team, works with his daddy on the farm, is a credit to his mammy and is a good looking guy to boot. He wouldn't need to assualt someone. That I should be lucky that someone like him wants me........

Jesus, it makes my skin crawl to think of it. But thats exactly how it would be :mad::(

Ash it is very scary isn't it, but it's true, people would judge you for going out, for 'sleeping around' and this could be used against you

pookie82 · 17-12-2009 12:08pm

I'm actually finding it difficult to come to terms with the fact that in this day and age, and especially in light of recent damning reports, the parish priest is called home to testify to the general loveliness of a young local lad. It's as if people still revere his word above all others in a way. I know that people are character witnesses all the time but the priest couldn't have known him that well if he's been abroad for years so he was clearly called because it may have been felt that as a priest he had some sort of authority or "sway" in the matter.

Something tells me he also won't be replying to your email or any others, B.

Danniboo · 17-12-2009 12:11pm

Antirip, you shouldn't have come on here saying that. If I knew someone well and this happened and there was information that could prove they were genuinely innocent i'd be shouting it from the rooftops. You're obviously not that convinced yourself.

Zulu · 17-12-2009 12:13pm

Beruthiel wrote: »

I've just dropped Fr Sean Sheehy an e mail to let him know my thoughts on his involvement.

Care to publish the letter? I'm intregued....

Osgoodisgood · 17-12-2009 12:13pm

Kimia wrote: »

What does this mean?

It means that people seem to be losing their ability to think clearly.

There are so many things that we should be worried about with this case that simply adopting the double teapot position and calling for a lynch mob seems inadequate.

Raiser · 17-12-2009 12:13pm

The carrying to a secluded area, the semi-conscious state, the semi-clothed state, the scratches, the bruises, the sexual assault, the blatant lies in custody all led somehow to the Parish Priest vouching for his, I don't know, piousness? Then ~50 of his Community found it appropriate to queue in public to express their sorrow and support on his conviction by a Court of Law.*

I guarantee you that there will at some point in the future be plans, schemes and initiatives put in place to influence, petition, lobby, coerce and otherwise try and secure the early release of this individual.

- Being rural County Kerry the task will be shouldered almost equally by the Gardaí, Parish Priests, Social Workers, GAA Board, Prison Services and Local TDs - Seemingly if they had their way he would serve 7 weeks.

* Details as widely reported in the print media.

pookie82 · 17-12-2009 12:16pm

Danniboo wrote: »

Antirip, you shouldn't have come on here saying that. If I knew someone well and this happened and there was information that could prove they were genuinely innocent i'd be shouting it from the rooftops. You're obviously not that convinced yourself.

The guy/girl has apologised, let's leave it at that.

(P.S. not trying to mod, before i get a bold post from Wibbs

)

ash23 · 17-12-2009 12:21pm

I read a suggestion on another site that people write a note to the young lady who was attacked c/o Listowel Garda Station or Kerry Rape Crisis centre.

Just a few lines commending her courage and offering support.
I myself will be doing this. If word had gotten out about this "show of support" organised by the attackers mother, I would have been down there shaking the victims hand. I'd imagine there would have been more than 50 people with me.

I just rang the Kerry Rape Crisis Centre to express my support for the young woman and the woman on the phone said that if I would like to send a card to them that she would forward it to her. She said they had had many messages and calls of support.
So an alternative address is:
Kerry Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre
5 Greenview Terrace
Princes Quay
Tralee, Co. Kerry

This was taken from another poster on another forum. Hope it's ok to post.

Here is the email address for Kerry Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre

krcc@eircom.net

fatmammycat · 17-12-2009 12:23pm

Trying to imagine what when through her mind watching them 'comfort' Foley.

VERYinterested · 17-12-2009 12:24pm

I am glad this scumbag got 7 years, the priest had scant regard for the victim sitting alone in the dock, as did the other morons that embraced the attacker and shook his hand, it's a pity the judge did not see this public acceptance of a sex offender. I am sure the sex offender's defence would have left no stone unturned if there was a scintilla of doubt about the case.

The locals should have been queuing to shake the victim's hand for having the courage to pursue her case in spite of all the intimidation she has received. She has done them all a favour removing an opportunist predator from the streets and having him placed on the sex offenders register.

http://www.irishexaminer.ie/ireland/people-queued-to-shake-this-sex-attackers-hand-108061.html

Nevyn · 17-12-2009 12:28pm

http://www.irishexaminer.ie/ireland/people-queued-to-shake-this-sex-attackers-hand-108061.html

People queued to shake this sex attacker’s hand

By Donal Hickey Tralee

Thursday, December 17, 2009

IT was a scene that could have come from a John B Keane play – a bizarre gesture of support by some plain people of Kerry for a convicted sex offender.

Danny Foley, of Meen, Listowel, sat in the dock at the Circuit Criminal Court, in Tralee, yesterday, awaiting sentence for sexually assaulting a woman, having been found guilty by a jury almost two weeks ago.

A group of 50 people, mainly men and said to be neighbours and friends, trooped into the courtroom and marched up to the accused, in single file. Each man shook his hand – some hugged him warmly, with tears in their eyes. It was witnessed by the 24-year-old victim who cut a lonely figure in the front seat of the public gallery. Dressed in black, she sat with a female garda, a counsellor from the Kerry Rape Crisis Centre and a friend.

All the well-wishers then seated themselves in the public gallery. Judge Donagh McDonagh, who had not seen what happened, emerged from his chambers a few minutes later.

Foley, a 35-year-old bouncer who had been in custody since being convicted, then stood up.

Before handing down a seven-year prison sentence, with the last two years suspended, the judge told him he had lied about several things and there was something "particularly odious" about the allegation he and the victim had engaged in oral sex.

In the witness box, the victim calmly read from her victim impact statement in which she spoke of being judged in north Kerry for pursuing her case, but she was not sorry for telling the truth.

Parish priest, Fr Seán Sheehy, a character witness for Foley, said he had always struck him as having the highest respect for women, suggesting there wasn’t an abusive bone in Foley’s body.

The moment sentence was handed down, the accused’s mother began to scream loudly. The judge ordered she be removed from the courtroom.

Vera O’Leary, director of Kerry Rape Crisis Centre, called for a system to protect victims of sex offences from intimidation in a courtroom.

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.ie/ireland/people-queued-to-shake-this-sex-attackers-hand-108061.html#ixzz0Zwceq4Nx

Penn · 17-12-2009 12:32pm

From what I gather after reading the articles and most of this thread, the 50 people shook hands with the guy BEFORE the trial, before the judge entered the court. Innocent until proven guilty. At that point, he had not been convicted of the crime.

That said, I feel the correct decision was reached, and I only wish his sentence was longer. I don't know if people shook hands with or hugged him after the sentence was passed, but I know I certainly wouldn't have.

If a friend of mine was accued of the same crime and swore he didn't do it, and I believed him, I probably would have been in the court and shook hands with him. If after the trial he was found guilty, going by the same evidence noted in the articles, he'd never see me again and I'd curse him til the day I died.

Sexual assault...but sure he's a nice lad..Mod Warning Post 275

Comments