Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Woman gets suspended sentence for assaulting child

Options
1246

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,516 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    The child's father didn't force this woman to attack the child. Even the child's father initially didn't believe his girlfriend was capable of such cruelty, to the point where he initially didn't believe the child. I can't imagine how guilty he must feel now for leaving his child in her... "care".

    It's probably next to impossible to trust your own judgement after something like that.


  • Options
    #93
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Yes we do - he didn't viciously beat a child.

    That is all.

    Is it?

    I think parenthood and parental responsibility encompasses more than "well, I didn't viciously beat them, I didn't commit any crime".


  • Options
    #94
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    zeffabelli wrote: »
    He chose not to believe his child. We've seen this before in sex abuse cases and how the child feels when not believed. Is there not even a teeny tiny bit of accountability there?

    He moved in with a woman two months into knowing her and gave her a step mother role.... naive at best......

    Silly and naive yes but only one person is responsible for the assault on this child. I'm sure the dad feels terrible enough without other people blaming him. He's a victim too.


  • Options
    #95
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,675 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Is it?

    I think parenthood and parental responsibility encompasses more than "well, I didn't viciously beat them, I didn't commit any crime".


    I think it does too, but that has fcukall to do with a woman who chose to drag a child out of bed and give the child a vicious beating. Do you honestly think if the father had an inkling of what this woman would do to his child that he would have left his child alone with her?


  • Options
    #96
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,516 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Silly and naive yes but only one person is responsible for the assault on this child. I'm sure the dad feels terrible enough without other people blaming him. He's a victim too.

    He is responsible for not believing the child though.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Chloris
    Closed Accounts Posts: 535 ✭✭✭Chloris


    Let's just say that if a woman left her child with a man she knew for a year, I doubt she would be blameless if he assaulted the child. Shameful sentence for a heinous crime.


  • Options
    #98
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,675 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    zeffabelli wrote: »
    He is responsible for not believing the child though.


    But that happened after the fact, not before, therefore he cannot be held responsible in any way, shape or form, for what this woman did to the child.


  • Options
    #99
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    I think it does too, but that has fcukall to do with a woman who chose to drag a child out of bed and give the child a vicious beating. Do you honestly think if the father had an inkling of what this woman would do to his child that he would have left his child alone with her?

    I'm not suggesting he knew.

    But again, I think parental responsibility is bigger than addressing something you know will happen, it's also about considering anything that may happen.

    We know that he left his child with a woman who had moved in very shortly after meeting him, that had suffered a miscarriage and was drinking heavily. Now none of this amounts to criminal liability, as I said we don't know enough to blame him for anything...or to absolve him from everything.


  • Options
    #100
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'm not suggesting he knew.

    But again, I think parental responsibility is bigger than addressing something you know will happen, it's also about considering anything that may happen.

    We know that he left his child with a woman who had moved in very shortly after meeting him, that had suffered a miscarriage and was drinking heavily. Now none of this amounts to criminal liability, as I said we don't know enough to blame him for anything...or to absolve him from everything.

    Her reaction was way over the top. Unless she had displayed behaviour that would have led him to believe she might act in that way he has no responsibility.


  • Options
    #101
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,516 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    But that happened after the fact, not before, therefore he cannot be held responsible in any way, shape or form, for what this woman did to the child.

    No of course not.

    But it is fluke that it was discovered.

    The father's disbelief was the cause for the child being taken into foster care, so clearly that disbelief put the child in danger until they could get a conviction.

    We don't know enough to judge his level of responsibility here at all, but we do know he was prepared to keep the child under the same roof as her because he did not believe it thereby continuing to put him in danger.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Her reaction was way over the top. Unless she had displayed behaviour that would have led him to believe she might act in that way he has no responsibility.

    Say if he knew she was blind drunk and she did something else, lit a cigarette with the gas on, fallen asleep with the door open, do you think he would bear no responsibility even though he left his child with a person in that state?

    I appreciate he may not have known she would do that specific act.


  • Options
    #103
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Say if he knew she was blind drunk and she did something else, lit a cigarette with the gas on, fallen asleep with the door open, do you think he would bear no responsibility even though he left his child with a person in that state?

    I appreciate he may not have known she would do that specific act.

    Did he know she was pissed when he left the child with her?


  • Options
    #104
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,675 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I'm not suggesting he knew.

    But again, I think parental responsibility is bigger than addressing something you know will happen, it's also about considering anything that may happen.

    We know that he left his child with a woman who had moved in very shortly after meeting him, that had suffered a miscarriage and was drinking heavily. Now none of this amounts to criminal liability, as I said we don't know enough to blame him for anything...or to absolve him from everything.


    We do know enough not to blame him for anything. He did not beat his own child. He was not there when this woman chose to beat his child. This completely absolves him of any responsibility for this woman's actions. The woman herself, in case you need to read it again, took full responsibility for her actions, and the father was in no way held accountable for her actions.

    The child was taken into foster care because the father refused to believe the woman was capable of such cruelty, but the child was then returned to the father. It's unheard of for a child to be taken into foster care and then returned to the parent if there are any concerns for the child's safety, and the father has since broken up with this woman.


  • Options
    #105
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Did he know she was pissed when he left the child with her?

    As I said a few posts back, we don't know enough to analyse his role.

    That's why I don't absolve him from all responsibility, or blame him for anything.


  • Options
    #106
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    As I said a few posts back, we don't know enough to analyse his role.

    That's why I don't absolve him from all responsibility, or blame him for anything.

    If he knew he is responsible but as you say we don't know so why mention it :confused:


  • Options
    #107
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,675 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Say if he knew she was blind drunk and she did something else, lit a cigarette with the gas on, fallen asleep with the door open, do you think he would bear no responsibility even though he left his child with a person in that state?

    I appreciate he may not have known she would do that specific act.


    Now you're just making stuff up, you can't possibly expect anyone here to be a fortune teller of some sort. You're chomping at the bit to hold the father responsible in some way, when the facts of the case directly contradict your assertions.


  • Options
    #108
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    zeffabelli wrote: »
    He is responsible for not believing the child though.
    zeffabelli wrote: »
    No of course not.

    But it is fluke that it was discovered.

    The father's disbelief was the cause for the child being taken into foster care, so clearly that disbelief put the child in danger until they could get a conviction.

    We don't know enough to judge his level of responsibility here at all, but we do know he was prepared to keep the child under the same roof as her because he did not believe it thereby continuing to put him in danger.

    This woman must have denied it down to the ground when confronted, though. It's only obvious because I doubt it was only the father who asked her for her account, if child protection services were involved. He undoubtably will carry the guilt of that decision for a long time.


  • Options
    #109
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    eviltwin wrote: »
    If he knew he is responsible but as you say we don't know so why mention it :confused:

    Because a few posters have suggested he has no responsibility at all.

    Which is wrong IMO. Very simply, we don't know enough to form a judgement either way. A very simple issue would be whether he knew his partner was drinking when she was babysitting.


  • Options
    #110
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,516 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    pablo128 wrote: »
    This woman must have denied it down to the ground when confronted, though. It's only obvious because I doubt it was only the father who asked her for her account, if child protection services were involved. He undoubtably will carry the guilt of that decision for a long time.

    She initially claimed she didn't remember any of it. I guess that's possible with all that wine in you????

    And then she was able to take responsibility so I guess she remembered? ???

    There was a lot of bruising and he thought it was spider bites, adn then the doctors and the police clarified it and he still didn't put two and two together, how else could it have happenned?

    I'm utterly confused by this story.


  • Options
    #111
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Now you're just making stuff up, you can't possibly expect anyone here to be a fortune teller of some sort. You're chomping at the bit to hold the father responsible in some way, when the facts of the case directly contradict your assertions.

    Could you point to one thing I have made up or asserted that happened in this case?

    Maybe link the post. Thanks.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Because a few posters have suggested he has no responsibility at all.

    Which is wrong IMO. Very simply, we don't know enough to form a judgement either way. A very simple issue would be whether he knew his partner was drinking when she was babysitting.

    Exactly, we don't know so it's unfair to cast aspersions on the father.


  • Options
    #113
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    I'm normally a loony lefty liberal set them all free type but this is a complete joke. That woman should be in prison for years and never let near children again.


  • Options
    #114
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Exactly, we don't know so it's unfair to cast aspersions on the father.

    Yes.

    Which is precisely why I didn't. I simply pointed out the flaw in asserting that he is blameless. As I will say for the 3rd or 4th time, we don't know enough either way, we can say he did not commit any crime. He may well be completely blameless, she may for example have bought the drink after he left for work.


  • Options
    #115
    DoYouEvenLift
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,188 ✭✭✭DoYouEvenLift


    Anyone who hurts kids or the elderly should receive the absolute maximum and harshest sentences possible. Judges like this are fuking stupid.


  • Options
    #116
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    zeffabelli wrote: »
    She initially claimed she didn't remember any of it. I guess that's possible with all that wine in you????

    And then she was able to take responsibility so I guess she remembered? ???

    I'm utterly confused by this story.

    Well put yourself in that situation. You come home from work and find your little child badly hurt. He tells you he took a beating off the girlfriend. You ask her if it's true, and she replies "I can't remember. I was buckled drunk last night."

    Who would you believe? I would believe the child.

    What she said in court and what she said on the morning and days after the attack could well be different things.


  • Options
    #117
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Yes.

    Which is precisely why I didn't. I simply pointed out the flaw in asserting that he is blameless. As I will say for the 3rd or 4th time, we don't know enough either way, we can say he did not commit any crime. He may well be completely blameless, she may for example have bought the drink after he left for work.

    Based on what we know he's blameless. There is no point in speculation.


  • Options
    #118
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    DoYouEvenLift wrote: »
    Anyone who hurts kids or the elderly should receive the absolute maximum and harshest sentences possible. Judges like this are fuking stupid.

    Just look at some of his other decisions... lunatic.

    http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/11/18/who-is-judge-nolan-jailing/


  • Options
    #119
    mikemac1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,395 ✭✭✭✭mikemac1


    Deleted User wrote: »
    As I will say for the 3rd or 4th time, we don't know enough either way, we can say he did not commit any crime. He may well be completely blameless, she may for example have bought the drink after he left for work.

    Even if there was drink in the house what does it matter? He was away working at the time and he didn't believe she could do such a thing even when informed what happened.

    Call him a bad judge of character if you want but yes, he is blameless


  • Options
    #120
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,675 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    zeffabelli wrote: »
    No of course not.

    But it is fluke that it was discovered.

    The father's disbelief was the cause for the child being taken into foster care, so clearly that disbelief put the child in danger until they could get a conviction.

    We don't know enough to judge his level of responsibility here at all, but we do know he was prepared to keep the child under the same roof as her because he did not believe it thereby continuing to put him in danger.


    It wasn't a fluke it was discovered at all. The medical staff at the hospital were doing their jobs properly and were able to spot the signs that the child had been beaten.

    That still doesn't make the father in any way responsible for what this woman did.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,516 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    It wasn't a fluke it was discovered at all. The medical staff at the hospital were doing their jobs properly and were able to spot the signs that the child had been beaten.

    That still doesn't make the father in any way responsible for what this woman did.

    The father thought it was spider bites after the child told him that this woman had hit him.

    That is WHY he took him to the hospital, because the rash and the bruising. Pure fluke.

    Had he not gone to the hospital, none of this would have been discovered.

    There are a couple of ways to think about responsibility, no he is not criminal responsible, but he is responsible parentally, psychologically, for choosing not to believe his son, even after presented with evidence from the doctors and the police.


Advertisement