Gender, going to jail, male victims, etc.: the Caroline Brennan case, etc.

iptba · 01-03-2010 10:34pm

iptba wrote: »

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/DDebate...&Ex=All&Page=3

Quote:
Senator Ivana Bacik:
[..]
This week, we are fortunate to receive a visit from Baroness Jean Corston from the British House of Lords who produced a very radical report last year on women in prison and who recommended, after a very thorough review, that prison places for women should essentially be abolished and that there should just be a small number of small detention units for women. Otherwise, alternative sanctions should be used. We could very much learn from the lessons of that report.

I am happy to say that Baroness Corston will be visiting Leinster House on Thursday. Deputy Mary O’Rourke and I are hosting a meeting with her for all women Members of the Oireachtas. I am sorry that we cannot invite any male colleagues interested in this issue to the briefing with Baroness Corston.

Senator David Norris: Why not?

Senator Ivana Bacik: I would be happy to meet them to discuss the issues at another time.

Here's a quote I just came across when looking for something else:

The Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Irish Prison System(the Whitaker Report), published in 1985, identified women in prison as a particularly vulnerable group. It recommended that, in so far as possible, women offenders should be given non-custodial penalties and that of those imprisoned the majority should be accommodated in an open prison.1
1. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Penal System, Dublin: Stationery Office, 1985, p. 75.

This is one example that this idea that there should be different sentences for women has been around a while.

CDfm · 01-03-2010 10:39pm

the Whitaker Report), published in 1985, identified women in prison as a particularly vulnerable group. It recommended that, in so far as possible, women offenders should be given non-custodial penalties and that of those imprisoned the majority should be accommodated in an open prison.1

i cant understand this assertion as the prisons are same sex -so how can they be any more vulnerable then men in prison.

iptba · 01-03-2010 10:46pm

CDfm wrote: »

i cant understand this assertion as the prisons are same sex -so how can they be any more vulnerable then men in prison.

And I would think the rape risk is much lower.

Treora · 01-03-2010 11:24pm

Thaedydal wrote: »

I do think that it can often looks like that women get lighter sentences with it comes to minor offenses but also when a woman breaks the taboos she can face harsher sentences then a man in the same circumstances.

I'm hooked, can you give a single example with a supporting link.

CDfm · 01-03-2010 11:30pm

Treora wrote: »

I'm hooked, can you give a single example with a supporting link.

please dont let this be a middle east link -let it be ireland and a crime like for like

PopUp · 02-03-2010 2:11am

Treora wrote: »

I'm hooked, can you give a single example with a supporting link.

There has been a lot of research in this in Britain and this article goes into some cases in more depth. Myra Hindley is the most prominent case usually referred to - essentially she has become the face of crimes she was not primarily responsible for. Her two life sentences were much harsher than a man convicted of the same would have expected - and she was denied release for good behaviour for decades, when another prisoner with a similar record and behaviour could have expected it. (Not saying she deserved it - just that a man in her position could have expected it).

I don't think anybody can say with a straight face that we don't have an appetite for punishing female killers in Ireland. Just in recent years, when you look at the likes of the so-called 'Scissor Sisters'. And Catherine Nevin - there has literally never been such a circus in Ireland as that which surrounded her public lynching. Why was she tried and convicted in the media when there have been many, many other crimes that were much more appalling (and where the criminal had much more damning evidence against them - not saying Nevin was innocent but the certainty of her guilt prior to her conviction was shocking)?

The most prominent false rape case in Ireland was pursued against a woman who turned out to be innocent as well - Nora Wall. She was vigorously prosecuted, convicted in the public mind, and demonised.

But there's a lot of problems inherent in discussing this stuff. Here's some choice quotes from the article:

While some British studies have suggested that women are much more likely to receive harsher sentences for violent crimes, the Irish barrister says it is hard to make any concrete deductions here, based on the small number of such cases in Ireland.

That the upper echelons of the judiciary are typically white and male has repeatedly been highlighted. That roughly 90 per cent of all crime - and 95 per cent of all violent crime - is committed by men, cannot be ignored, say critics.

The fact is that despite what the more irate callers to the likes of Joe Duffy would have you believe, we have a pretty low crime rate here in Ireland relative to many similar countries. And crime rates are falling. We send a lot of people to prison but our prison population as a percentage of our total population (78 per 100,000 of national population) far less than, for example, the UK (148 people in every 100,000) and the US(738). And women commit only about 10% of our crime and even less of our violent crime.

From a mathematical perspective, it's in many ways useless to talk about what 'usually' happens to women murderers in Ireland. There are so few of them that what 'usually' happens is statistically almost meaningless.

My view of things - with all the caveats in the above paragraph that facts and statistics are very important to this question but for practical reasons quite hard to get - is that women probably do get a lighter time of it in the courts for non-violent crimes. But I think that once a woman crosses the violent line, what Professor Heidensohn called the 'double deviance' principle kicks in. A violent woman isn't just being punished for her violence - she's also being punished for having crossed the line of acceptable female behaviour.

It's also very important to remember that the people sentencing women lightly and men harshly (if they are doing so, and we really have no evidence beyond the anecdotal for saying so) are mostly men themselves. 89% of High Court judges are male. And judges aren't known for being on the front line of social change. They are basically mostly old dudes of a generation who still cleave to traditional gender roles. So they are maybe more predisposed to think that a non-violent female offender selling drugs is a poor victim herself with little babbies who need her, while a female killer is an unfeminine Gorgon who needs to be punished like the Unwoman she is.

When a woman starts to act unwomanly - hiring hitmen like Tony Soprano or cutting off a man's head and penis - the social approbation that descends on them (though arguably fully deserved in many or most cases) is disproportionate. Men can stir up a media circus too, of course - but really the likes of Nevin and the 'Scissor Sisters' occupy a plane of their own.

Because we love nothing more than Burning The Witch, when the opportunity presents itself.

Raze_them_all · 02-03-2010 2:45am

rer34 wrote: »

i was actually at caroline brennans trial as part of a college assignment. there is no way she should have gone to jail. she was barely 18 when this happend ... her brother had physically and emotionally abused her for years..including kidnapping her and tring to smother her in her sleep. she bought that knife with her in case her tried to hurt her and never ment to use it. he would not leave out of the house and she ran out with the knife in her hand and accidenlty stabbed him. anyone who was at the court felt sorry 4 her and hoped she would not get jail. my heart really went out to her.

You went there for a college thing? You can hardly judge the publics reaction to her as yer not from the kip that is castlecomer and have no interaction with them before the court case.

iptba · 02-03-2010 3:21am

PopUp wrote: »

There has been a lot of research in this in Britain and this article goes into some cases in more depth. Myra Hindley is the most prominent case usually referred to - essentially she has become the face of crimes she was not primarily responsible for. Her two life sentences were much harsher than a man convicted of the same would have expected - and she was denied release for good behaviour for decades, when another prisoner with a similar record and behaviour could have expected it. (Not saying she deserved it - just that a man in her position could have expected it).

I think what one might need to consider in that case is the association with a horrific crime. Also the victims here were children. One of the issues appears to be who are the victims.

PopUp wrote: »

I don't think anybody can say with a straight face that we don't have an appetite for punishing female killers in Ireland.

Something like 75% of the public also would like the death penalty re-introduced (not sure if those are UK figures or also Irish figures). What the "public" want and the actual sentence are not necessarily the same thing.

With regard the Mulhall case, the mother seems to have got a token sentence.

PopUp wrote: »

The most prominent false rape case in Ireland was pursued against a woman who turned out to be innocent as well - Nora Wall. She was vigorously prosecuted, convicted in the public mind, and demonised.

One of the issues highlighted in studies in the States was the gender of the victim appears to be an issue. In the Nora Wall case, that was a female.

PopUp wrote: »

From a mathematical perspective, it's in many ways useless to talk about what 'usually' happens to women murderers in Ireland. There are so few of them that what 'usually' happens is statistically almost meaningless.

I have heard it suggested that women are more likely to get a manslaughter convinction than a murder conviction which can make things a bit more difficult to analyse figures (i.e. might hide lower sentences for women).

PopUp wrote: »

But I think that once a woman crosses the violent line, what Professor Heidensohn called the 'double deviance' principle kicks in. A violent woman isn't just being punished for her violence - she's also being punished for having crossed the line of acceptable female behaviour.

Perhaps there are cases that has an issue (cases from Ireland would be of interest?) but there seems to be cases where female gender may be a help - e.g. perhaps the Caroline Brennan case to take one example - I am not convinced a man who said his sister had threatened him etc but who no longer lived with her would have got no jail time. Or in general a spouse who suffered domestic violence - I think there would it would be seen as more excusable for a woman. I think in the Comerford case, if the genders had been reversed (it was not disputed that when her husband slept, she went downstairs got a knife, went upstairs and stabbed him to death) the DPP would have brought back for another trial when there was a mistrial the first time. Maybe who the victim is an issue as the statistics from the US suggest (e.g. if you kill a woman you got a longer sentence on average than when you killed a man).

Here's an article that questions this in the past (Late-Victorian and Edwardian Period) http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/45/5/696

Explaining Gendered Sentencing Patterns for Violent Men and Women in the Late-Victorian and Edwardian Period

[..]

The findings reveal a differentiated pattern of sentences that questions the assumption that ‘doubly deviant’ women were more often convicted, and received higher penalties, throughout the Victorian period. The results show that the contextual factors of the offence affected judicial decision-making to the extent that they virtually account for gender differences in conviction rates, but do not, on their own, account for the different penalties handed out to men and women. Women who committed similar assaults to men were likely to receive a lighter punishment.

PopUp wrote: »

It's also very important to remember that the people sentencing women lightly and men harshly (if they are doing so, and we really have no evidence beyond the anecdotal for saying so) are mostly men themselves. 89% of High Court judges are male.

Yes, there is a term "chivalry justice"

But Ivana Bacik and Mary O'Rourke organising a meeting only for female members of the Oireachtas for a presentation by somebody who doesn't think prison is suitable for most female offenders sends a very mixed signal on this issue especially when Ivana Bacik also has this view.

PopUp wrote: »

Because we love nothing more than Burning The Witch, when the opportunity presents itself.

If one looks at the imbalance in the genders of those who are executed in the US (despite there being plenty of murderers), it does not seem to be literally true there.

CDfm · 02-03-2010 3:32am

@pop up Myra Hindley was deeply involved in the kidnap of the children and as I understand it would not have been arrested except for her brother in law.Myra was cought on tape Rose West was deeply involved in Freds activities.

The people they had a responsibility to were the victims. No doubt about their guilt in my mind.

Maxine Carr was jailered for several reasons. She was guilty.

iptba · 02-03-2010 4:02am

iptba wrote: »

[Quote=CDfm]
There is also the issue that there is a limit on the prison space available cause further early release.

Perhaps there are more recent figures somewhere.

1/3 Mountjoy female inmates freed

Thursday, 20 November 2008 10:09

One third of women sent to jail in Mountjoy are being freed because the prison is overcrowded.

New figures show almost every female prisoner serving a sentence of less than 20 months has been released early.

In recent weeks Ireland's prison population has exceeded 4,000 for the first time.

More inmates than ever are female and serving long sentences for serious crimes, including murder.

As a result of this pressure on the system, beds for women serving shorter sentences are no longer available.

Figures released by the Department of Justice to Sinn Féin TD Aengus Ó'Snodaigh, show that a third of women at the women's jail in Mountjoy have been released because of overcrowding.

The women are officially on temporary release, but it is unlikely they will be recommitted to the jail, which is still operating 30% over capacity despite the early releases.

[/quote]
In the men's prison, of course, they appear to put extra men in cells.

Women are also let out early for a lack of prison capacity in California - they even have a policy on it. Here's one article that mentions this.:
http://www.amherstdaily.com/Justice/2008-01-11/article-380260/Actress-Michelle-Rodriguez-released-from-LA-jail-after-probation-violation/1

Actress Michelle Rodriguez released from LA jail after probation violation Published on January 11th, 2008
Published on January 3rd, 2010

The Associated Press LOS ANGELES Former Lost star Michelle Rodriguez has found her way out of jail.

Rodriguez was released from a Los Angeles County womens jail Wednesday after serving 18 days of a 180-day sentence for violating probation in a drunken driving case, authorities said.

Rodriguez was released from a Los Angeles County womens jail Wednesday after serving 18 days of a 180-day sentence for violating probation in a drunken driving case, authorities said.

She was released early under a program that deals with jail overcrowding by allowing nonviolent female inmates to serve as little as 10 per cent of their sentence.

The same thing happened two years ago when Rodriguez served just one day of a 60-day jail sentence for probation violation.

As many as 50 women a day are released early, sheriffs spokesman Steve Whitmore said.

She was treated the same way we do with all females because of the extent of overcrowding, he said.

Rodriguez was sentenced in October for failing to prove she had done community service and for drinking while wearing an alcohol monitoring device.

The judge who sentenced Rodriguez ordered that she serve the entire sentence. The judge was consulted about the early release but the Sheriffs Department had the final say when jail safety was involved, Whitmore said.

Some advocates and at least one pressure groups are actually complaining that prison capacity for women will be doubled in Ireland in the coming years as I previously alluded to http://www.cfj.ie/images/stories/pdf/leaflet_optimised_2.pdf.

Women in Prison: the Need for a Critical Review Public Seminar hosted by the Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice

Thursday 22 May 2008 5:00 to 7:30pm
Law Library, Distillery Building,
145 - 151 Church Street, Dublin 7

The Irish Government is planning to build two new prisons for women, thereby doubling the current capacity.

Should we not instead look to limiting the number of women coming into prison and exploring the expansion of non-custodial alternatives?

Is it now time for a national review of the use of imprisonment for women in Ireland?
Women in Prison: the Need for a Critical Review Public Seminar hosted by the Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice

Thursday 22 May 2008 5:00 to 7:30pm
Law Library, Distillery Building,
145 - 151 Church Street, Dublin 7

The Irish Government is planning to build two new prisons for women, thereby doubling the current capacity.

Should we not instead look to limiting the number of women coming into prison and exploring the expansion of non-custodial alternatives?

Is it now time for a national review of the use of imprisonment for women in Ireland?

What about a national review of the use of imprisonment for *people* in Ireland.

iptba · 02-03-2010 4:31am

Here is an explicit point on the issue of different sentences based on the gender of the victim from another country (Chile):
http://www.santiagotimes.cl/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=18229:chiles-womens-ministry-calls-for-harsher-measures-against-femicide&catid=43:human-rights&Itemid=39

Chile’s Women’s Ministry Calls for Harsher Measures against Femicide

Written by Paul Herbert Wednesday, 10 February 2010 23:26

[..]

In 2007, under growing pressure from activists and Chilean legislators, President Michelle Bachelet submitted a women's rights bill to Congress. It identified femicide as a separate crime, distinct from homicide, but the legislation has yet to become law.

iptba · 02-03-2010 4:56am

For people interested at more stats, just came across the following:
http://www.friendsfw.org/PA_Courts/Race_Gender_Report.pdf

"SYNOPSIS OF FINDINGS

After controlling for legally prescribed factors and mode of conviction, the study found that the defendant status characteristics of race, ethnicity, gender, and age definitely affect sentencing outcomes of all kinds.

—Kramer/Ulmer

CDfm · 02-03-2010 1:05pm

The more I read this the more I wonder what kind of nuts come up with this stuff.

It absolutely Catch 22 mindblowing stuff.

Myra Hindley was not a victim and for that matter - the only person who thought that was doddering old Lord Longford. If you want to find a modern day Myra google Karla Homolka in Canada. A real sweet that one was and amongst her other murders drugged her sister for her husband to rape and sis overdosed. She is free today. Maxine Carr covered up a murder of two girls Holly and Jessica.

Are Ivana Bacik and Mary O'Rourke are on drugs. What planet does Baroness Courson live on ?

Now get this people don't commit crimes because they are afraid of the punishment that follows. People who commit crimes don't want to get caught and when they do -do not want to be punished. Why do you think criminal detection rates are so low.

You get bad men and bad women. Women who lie and cheat and steal and kill. Women as well as men will lie to escape punishment.

I have posted before (tongue in cheek) that if feminists want real equality they should be out there campaigning for more women on death row in the USA. There is a logic to it.

Thats the reality - part of the gel that holds society together is punishment for crimes which is society taking revenge and seeking retribution.Remove this from the justice system and you remove a lot.

This BS from Bacik and O'Rourke is sanctimonious sociological psychobabble -and women as well as men suffer for the crimes of women.

Lets get real here - is this the deal - the womens movement do not want women punished for crimes or what? Bacik and O'Rourke tough on crime -haha. If they were they would be reopening Spike Island for Women or looking for the state to buy up some of those unoccupied convents and boarding schools or army barracks that are no longer used as prisons.

S.L.F · 02-03-2010 1:53pm

iptba wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhgbcwsngbid/

Advocacy like that may mean there is not sufficient prison size for female prisoners. Also, it appears that if you're a woman, only crimes of violence should mean you should go to jail. I've no problem if people are consistent and say only certain crimes should result in jail. I have a problem with the gender of defendant being a significant factor in sentencing.

Some people might think Ivana Bacik doesn't have much power. But she organised the following meeting in 2008 (from Seanad records)

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/DDebate.aspx?F=SEN20080520.XML&Dail=30&Ex=All&Page=3
[/LEFT][/QUOTE]

I'm astonished Bacik could organise a meeting like this (probably at tax payers expense) if a man tried it there would be war to me it is just another case of gender bias.

CDfm wrote: »

Are Ivana Bacik and Mary O'Rourke are on drugs. What planet does Baroness Courson live on?

They would both do well to remember that when the Apache indians captured people they used to give them to the women to torture.

Some of the worst torturers in history were women.

Further to the FBI bit-When anti terrorism police officers storm a building they are under instructions to kill the women terrorists.

PopUp · 02-03-2010 2:55pm

I do wonder what is the point of replying when nobody bothers to read posts, let alone reports. You see the words 'Myra Hindley' and assume I'm defending her?! And Bacik is the one on drugs?

The point isn't that Hindley's crimes weren't awful. Of course they were. The point is she was singled out and punished beyond what other offenders could expect. The point is she became the face of the crimes even when Bradley was proven the mastermind and ringleader.

The point isn't that Carr's crimes weren't awful. Of course they were. But they were not even close to Hindley's. She had no part whatsoever in the murders and the police were satisfied that she lied to them because she was convinced Huntley was innocent - totally different to the horrendous stuff Hindley did for Bradley. Yet she became a modern-day Hindley in the press. Living proof we don't 'go easy' on female criminals.

This whole debate is pointless tbh. There's no facts here, no statistics. We have nothing but people's 'gut feelings' that there's any disparity in the sentencing of women in Ireland. But people have their preconceptions already and they are only interested in giving them an airing. And per my previous post I include myself in that. Well great. :rolleyes:

Incidentally - the idea that Bacik is unusual or in the wrong organising a special interests meeting with a British expert - check this out for just one example of a male TD doing the exact same thing right now and there's not a peep about it. Meetings like this are par for the course and suggesting they aren't is conspiracy theory stuff. At least Bacik's expert actually was an expert.

CDfm · 02-03-2010 2:57pm

S.L.F wrote: »

I'm astonished Bacik could organise a meeting like this (probably at tax payers expense) if a man tried it there would be war to me it is just another case of gender bias.

LOL S.L.F.

Its shamefaced electioneering.Ya dont think she would let principles get in the way of politics.

Last year you had a young lady Una Hardester come forward publically and admit that her false allegations years earlier meant an innocent man Michael Hannon was jailed. She went public to clear his name. a great woman IMHO.

Where are the women political leaders when she does that?? Not a squeak.

I always wonder how some of these women, the ones with sons, reconcile the system they are putting in place.

PopUp · 02-03-2010 3:06pm

CDfm wrote: »

Last year you had a young lady Una Hardester come forward publically and admit that her false allegations years earlier meant an innocent man Michael Hannon was jailed. She went public to clear his name. a great woman IMHO.

Hate to let facts get in the way of the preconceptions, but:

The man wasn't jailed. He was given a suspended sentence. Never spent a day in jail. He was convicted because the girl's father was feuding with his family and Gardai with no training and experience interviewing child victims mishandled the interview with leading questions and led the girl to accuse him. (You're a Law and Order SVU fan CDf, you know what's meant by questioning children appropriately - they can be led to say whatever you want because they are eager to please, so questioning them you have to be very careful not to lead one to what you 'want' them to say).

Why should the 'women political leaders' say anything about this? It wasn't a false rape accusation - it wasn't even a case of false child abuse, she said he exposed himself to her and she passed out in fear. What do women's organisations have to do with it? You should be asking Barnardos and One In Four about it. Women's groups aren't responsible for children lying.

CDfm · 02-03-2010 3:11pm

@popup

These people Carr and Hindley were guilty of terrible crimes. The body counts were 2 and 5 respectively.

Not that Carr was guilty of murder none the less she did cause untold heardache and trauma.It was her callous behaviour after the crimes that got her a conviction.

Hindley at the very least was guilty of lurring the children to their deaths knowing they would be killed. 5 children the youngest 10 and eldest 17. Brady could not have carried it off without her.

IMHO looking at crimes with gender goggles is a crock.

There is nothing to be ashamed of in punishing the guilty. The Kray Brothers had similar sentences for one conviction each and the Great Train Robbers lenghty sentences. They were her contemporaries.

A few years earlier Hindley would have been hanged.

There are many women who would have loved to see her hanged.

On the womens leaders -they should be vocal about it - Michael Hannon was some womans son and brother. Who is there to support them and they suffered to by association.

iptba · 02-03-2010 3:14pm

PopUp wrote: »

Incidentally - the idea that Bacik is unusual or in the wrong organising a special interests meeting with a British expert - check this out for just one example of a male TD doing the exact same thing right now and there's not a peep about it. Meetings like this are par for the course and suggesting they aren't is conspiracy theory stuff. At least Bacik's expert actually was an expert.

One key difference is men were excluded from this meeting. I think there would be a furore (from Ivana Bacik amongst others) if there were one or more meetings that sought special treatment for men in some way (e.g. in our justice system) where only male members of the Oireachtas were invited.

Indeed, Ivana Bacik has pushed the ideas that gender balance is so important that we need gender quotas. I'm not convinced she believes it and instead just wants to try to get more women into politics (including perhaps herself in the Dáil).

iptba · 02-03-2010 3:18pm

PopUp wrote: »

The point isn't that Carr's crimes weren't awful. Of course they were. But they were not even close to Hindley's. She had no part whatsoever in the murders and the police were satisfied that she lied to them because she was convinced Huntley was innocent - totally different to the horrendous stuff Hindley did for Bradley. Yet she became a modern-day Hindley in the press. Living proof we don't 'go easy' on female criminals.

But how she is portrayed in the press isn't the same as her sentence. She got a shorter sentence than him (which seems reasonable) (was it four years?). I think the lesson is not to be associated with crimes where children die.

PopUp · 02-03-2010 3:23pm

CDfm wrote: »

@popup

These people Carr and Hindley were guilty of terrible crimes. The body counts were 2 and 5 respectively.

Not that Carr was guilty of murder none the less she did cause untold heardache and trauma.It was her callous behaviour after the crimes that got her a conviction.

Hindley at the very least was guilty of lurring the children to their deaths knowing they would be killed. 5 children the youngest 10 and eldest 17. Brady could not have carried it off without her.

I don't disagree with any of this. I don't know what you're reading in my posts, I've said twice their crimes were terrible. But Carr =/ Hindley, not by a long shot and even mentioning her in the same sentence (no pun intended) is daft.

PopUp · 02-03-2010 3:26pm

iptba wrote: »

But how she is portrayed in the press isn't the same as her sentence. She got a shorter sentence than him (which seems reasonable) (was it four years?). I think the lesson is not to be associated with crimes where children die.

No children died in Catherine Nevin's case or in the 'Scissor Sisters' but they were still the most sensational trials we've had in Ireland. It is not that simple that 'women criminals get off easier' - sometimes, particularly with child victims but not neccessarily, they do considerably worse.

Look I am seriously uninterested in the back and forth on this. Like I said before we obviously have different preconceptions here and our views are informed by them. Not by facts. Show me one study that shows women offenders are sentenced differently in Ireland, all other things but gender being equal. Until then this is all a waste of time. Anecdotes =/ data.

S.L.F · 02-03-2010 3:27pm

PopUp wrote: »

Incidentally - the idea that Bacik is unusual or in the wrong organising a special interests meeting with a British expert - check this out for just one example of a male TD doing the exact same thing right now and there's not a peep about it. Meetings like this are par for the course and suggesting they aren't is conspiracy theory stuff. At least Bacik's expert actually was an expert.

Hold on there a second

I had a look through that link you provided and didn't see anything about women not being allowed in whereas Bacik made it quite plain that men weren't welcome.

As for the meetings like this are par of the course yes I agree but tax payers shouldn't have to pay for them and they certainly shouldn't be held in govenment buildings.

As for her expert she may be an expert but she's also a sexist and speaking as a man I object.

***starts to hum...we shall, we shall, we shall not be moved ***

CDfm wrote: »

LOL S.L.F

Its shamefaced electioneering.Ya dont think she would let principles get in the way of politics.

The phrase two-faced comes to mind.

Now I have to say I'd have voted for Ivana that is before I found out she appears to be sexist and this is not the right for our leaders to be sexist.

iptba · 02-03-2010 3:33pm

PopUp wrote: »

Look I am seriously uninterested in the back and forth on this. Like I said before we obviously have different preconceptions here and our views are informed by them. Not by facts. Show me one study that shows women offenders are sentenced differently in Ireland, all other things but gender being equal.

Well we have the situation that women are being let out early from Mountjoy because of overcrowding which I think would suggest they are effectively getting shorter sentences.

And we have advocates saying that women should get shorter sentences.

We have advocates saying prison capacit shouldn't be increased for women which might effectively lead to shorter sentences.

We also have data from the US that women get shorter sentences and are less likely to be jailed.

Somebody mentioned there was a report in Ireland that women were treated less severely but I don't know if this is true or not but am hoping that somebody may know.

We know that domestic violence against men tends not to be taken that seriously.

And of course another issue is that what you face in prison is different depending on your gender - would people prefer to be in the women's or men's prison in Mountjoy? That is connected with how harsh a punishment one is getting.

So all in all, there is plenty there to mull over.

PopUp · 02-03-2010 3:42pm

The reasoning behind women-only meetings and discussions:

Men make up 87% of the Dail. In every debate, men's voices will dominate simply by numbers. Now those men will of course all be saying different things. But in the context of a women's issue, it's important to hear women's voices. So there's a women-only meeting to talk about what women think of an issue involving women. It doesn't make any decisions, nothing changes, and anything important is discussed and debated and decided upon as normal in the Dail.

In other countries with significant ethnic minorities, it's common practice for for example Asian MPs to discuss issues specific to them and there is a Black Caucus and so forth as well. So it's not just women.

And look I can see why people don't like it, I don't like it, but it's daft to say that 'men are being discriminated against' when they make up 87% of the Dail. It's a drop in the ocean.

OldGoat · 02-03-2010 4:05pm

/Wanders into the pigeon coup with a cat...
Examples have been asked for here so this is one that occured recently.
Example of Irish sentecing being different for the same crime.
Source The Irish Times reports on a couple due for sentencing.

A COUPLE who pleaded guilty to illegal distribution of steroids will be sentenced next week at the Central Circuit Criminal Court in Dublin.
The court heard evidence that the Irish Medicines Board suspected that anabolic steroids, sometimes used for body building, but also insulin and Viagra, were being posted from Thailand and Greece to a fictitious name at a hired mailbox.
Bernard Foy (38), a former soldier, and Anna Nawroka (27), who have a child together, face a possible maximum fine of €127,000 and/or 10 years in jail for their roles in breaking down and distributing steroid packages sourced abroad.

Source The Sentence...so far...

A man who distributed up to €144,000 of prescription steroids bought on the black market has been jailed for two years by Judge Katherine Delahunt at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.
His girlfriend had her sentence adjourned and Judge Delahunt indicated she would not go to prison if a probation report was positive.
She told Bernard Foy (38) and Anna Nawroka (27) the court “takes a very serious view of devastating effects the drugs can have on people”. She took into account Foy’s co-operation with gardaí and his “service to his country” in the Army before his honourable discharge, but said a custodial sentence was appropriate. Judge Delahunt told Nawroka that “a custodial sentence may not be appropriate”.

Now without knowing anythings about the background to this story there does seem to be an uneveness in the handling of the sentencing thus far.
One case (still ongoing as I've yet to find out her final sentence) is not proof but it does show precident.

S.L.F · 02-03-2010 4:12pm

PopUp wrote: »

The reasoning behind women-only meetings and discussions:

Men make up 87% of the Dail. In every debate, men's voices will dominate simply by numbers. Now those men will of course all be saying different things. But in the context of a women's issue, it's important to hear women's voices. So there's a women-only meeting to talk about what women think of an issue involving women. It doesn't make any decisions, nothing changes, and anything important is discussed and debated and decided upon as normal in the Dail.

In other countries with significant ethnic minorities, it's common practice for for example Asian MPs to discuss issues specific to them and there is a Black Caucus and so forth as well. So it's not just women.

And look I can see why people don't like it, I don't like it, but it's daft to say that 'men are being discriminated against' when they make up 87% of the Dail. It's a drop in the ocean.

This is IMHO quite frankly is a load of crap.

Are you actually comparing women to an ethnic minority?:rolleyes:

I'm quite frankly astonished at this post, you say it is women's issues well I thought they were part of society and we are all part of that.

The meeting about women getting jailed for crimes against society and that affects all of us, women and men, so why should men be excluded from the meeting.

Are our opinions worthless because we have the meat and 2 veg?:D

You can dress it up which ever way you want the reality is she excluded people on the basis of sex and that in a modern society is called sexist

PopUp · 02-03-2010 4:19pm

Not quite the same crime - they had very different roles:

Gardaí set up surveillance with board enforcement officers outside Charter House and saw Foy pulling up on a motorcycle, entering the building and returning with a parcel addressed to “Glen Ryan”.
Foy immediately handed over the parcel and admitted it contained steroids.
Joe Callan, an Irish Medicines Board enforcement officer, told Mr Kennedy that Foy’s parcel contained 4,000 steroid pills worth €2,200 as outlined on a printed price list also found on him.
....
Det Sgt Walsh told Mr Kennedy that gardaí found two mobile phones, a notebook of pill transactions, a printed drug price list, lists of steroids, mailbox agencies and names on Foy on his arrest.

Nawroka told gardaí and the Irish Medicines Board that she was being paid €300 a week for breaking down and repackaging the bulk pills to orders received in text messages from the main player. She would post these packages to their destinations using a false name.

These are different levels of involvement and planning - doesn't seem unreasonable that difference could be reflected in sentencing.

This is the problem with isolated anecdotes - in every case there are so many different circumstances that you can't generalise out from just it.

SLF I never said I agreed with it, I said it was established practice and completely unimportant in the grand scheme of Dail decisionmaking. One meeting that decides nothing does not mean that men suddenly have no voice and no power. And I think the comparison to the black and Asian groups is perfectly legitimate, if that meeting is sexist then their meetings for Asian or black people only are surely racist? And the Iona Institute's private event with a TD who actually DOES make decisions and influence public policy in this arena is discriminating against those of us who aren't super-conservative Catholics.

Still waiting on any facts about sentencing in Ireland. Without them this discussion is just everybody rehashing their own preconceptions.

S.L.F · 02-03-2010 4:52pm

PopUp wrote: »

SLF I never said I agreed with it, I said it was established practice and completely unimportant in the grand scheme of Dail decisionmaking. One meeting that decides nothing does not mean that men suddenly have no voice and no power.

If it was so unimportant what was the point of it then?

The way decisions are made is in little rooms where unimportant meetings are held then they go to a different room where important meetings are held.

I don't agree that it is established practise to target people on the basis of their sex and exclude them, especially with government business (which BTW we all pay for).

PopUp wrote: »

And I think the comparison to the black and Asian groups is perfectly legitimate, if that meeting is sexist then their meetings for Asian or black people only are surely racist? And the Iona Institute's private event with a TD who actually DOES make decisions and influence public policy in this arena is discriminating against those of us who aren't super-conservative Catholics.

Is the Iona Institute paid for in full by tax payers?

If not then it isn't the same thing at all.

As to women being a minority in this country I believe there are more women than men here now, so why if we have equality were men excluded.

(all this is off topic but it is an interesting debate maybe a MOD could transfer these posts to a new thread)

PopUp wrote: »

Still waiting on any facts about sentencing in Ireland. Without them this discussion is just everybody rehashing their own preconceptions.

I have to say I believe women get an easier time of it when it comes to sentencing.

PopUp · 02-03-2010 5:03pm

S.L.F wrote: »

The way decisions are made is in little rooms where unimportant meetings are held then they go to a different room where important meetings are held.

Sure, yeah, sometimes. And the Iona private event with the TD in charge of health and children is a prime example of that. Ivana Bacik is a Senator. She has no power, none. The Queen of England has more influence than her. She isn't even a member of a political party. The idea that her meeting for women TDs to talk to a British expert on women prisoners was facilitating some kind of backroom deal is laughable. I'm just saying, lets be realistic and not get carried away with ourselves. Saying that people with the meat and two veg have no say in women's issues is silly - they make up 87% of the Dail, they are the ones who decide all women's issues and all political issues for that matter. Women are not an ethnic minority but they are a tiny minority in the Dail.

Gender, going to jail, male victims, etc.: the Caroline Brennan case, etc.

Comments