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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Serious bodily harm: 18 months. Sexual Assault: Probation Act.

  • 18-07-2004 12:11am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭


    Now a few people will come in here and say hang 'em all, after all thats what the media did to the driver in this case. But read the whole article and tink about how you would feel if you were one of those involved.

    While on the face of it, the driver in this case definitely deserves a prison sentence - dangerous driving causing serious bodily harm, drink driving and no insurance. Certainly, her victim has received a life sentence "it is hoped that she will one day be able to walk with the assistance of just one person." However, the driver does appear to have difficult personal circumstances and was "running" from taunting about having been raped ("Sexual Assault" is the legal euphamism for rape). It does however seem awfully lenient for a rapist to get the Probation Act.

    Now I realise that the rapist might have "difficult personal circumstances", but where does one stop in giving leniency?

    http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/3610305?view=Eircomnet
    18-month sentence for drunk driver in accident
    From:ireland.com
    Saturday, 17th July, 2004

    A drunk driver who broke a red light and smashed into another car, leaving a Zimbabwean refugee needing 24-hour supervision for the rest of her life, has been jailed for 18 months by Judge Michael White at the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.

    Faye Sherlock, a single mother, had no insurance and was more than three times over the legal alcohol limit when she crashed into the car on August 31st, 2002, causing Ms Yvonne Nutuhle to be flung out the rear side window. She ended up 26 feet away on the opposite side of a dual carriageway at Blackrock.

    The 23-year-old Zimbabwean, who was an asylum seeker at the time but has since been granted refugee status, remains in hospital after suffering severe brain injuries in the accident. According to medical reports she will require 24-hour supervision for the rest of her life.

    Sherlock (24), originally from Highland Grove, The Park, Cabinteely, but living in Bray, pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing serious bodily harm to Ms Nutuhle, and drink driving. A count of having no insurance was taken into consideration.

    Judge White disqualified Sherlock from driving for 10 years but ordered that the prison warrant not be issued until August 3rd so she could make arrangements for her seven-year-old son, who, the court was told, has behavioural difficulties.

    He said, "This was a seriously aggravating case of dangerous driving and despite the defence's long plea for a non-custodial sentence, the court must impose a custodial sentence.

    "The sentence would be far greater but for the difficulties surrounding Ms Sherlock's son... The aggravating factors far outweigh the mitigating circumstances."

    Sergeant John Burke told Mr Colm Ó Briain BL, prosecuting, witnesses described Sherlock's Daihatsu Charade driving erratically along Carysfort Avenue at 2 a.m. at the junction of Frascati Road after she had left a pub in Dalkey.

    As she approached the lights, which witnesses claimed were red, she kept driving and crashed straight into the Fiat Cinquecento containing Ms Nutuhle and two friends. Investigators also discovered that Sherlock would have been driving over the 30 m.p.h. speed limit at the time.

    Ms Nutuhle spent some weeks in St Vincent's Hospital before being moved to Beaumont. She was later transferred to the National Rehabilitation Hospital before returning to St Vincent's and is currently a patient in St Luke's Hospital.

    Doctors have reported that she has a limited understanding of her difficulties and it is hoped that she will one day be able to walk with the assistance of just one person.

    Sgt Burke agreed with Mr Adrian Mannering SC, for Sherlock, that she had been the victim of a sexual assault by a close friend three months before the accident. She had not told any of her friends, but on that night a friend of the offender had joined their group in the pub and told everybody about the incident.Sherlock had planned to stay in a friend's house that night, but she stormed out after this incident.

    Garda Derek Maguire told the court that the person involved in the sexual assault had since pleaded guilty to that offence in the District Court and was given the Probation Act and ordered to pay €1600 in compensation.

    Mr Mannering told the court that after the incident in the pub Sherlock "just snapped" and drove when she was in no fit state to do so.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Sexual assualt is an ambiguous term. It could refer to full-blown rape or slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept.
    I'm in no position to comment, but I would hope that the leniency of his sentence indicates how minor an "assualt" it was - it could however be an indication of our messed-up legal system.

    Either way, she was uninsured, and she knew it, and she had already been driving uninsured, before any excuses of emotional distress.

    She's a scumbag.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 93,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Out of curioisity was M. Nutuhle wearing a seat belt ?

    Just a complete waste all round.

    Re: "the rapist" - have to agree with seamus, it could be either especially since it was "a close friend".
    She had not told any of her friends, but on that night a friend of the offender had joined their group in the pub and told everybody about the incident.
    scumbag - hope that person can't sleep.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
    Out of curioisity was M. Nutuhle wearing a seat belt ?
    No relevant in this case, whatever about a civil case for damages.
    Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
    Re: "the rapist" - have to agree with seamus, it could be either especially since it was "a close friend".
    Sexual assualt is a specific legal term - "slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept" is probably common battery at most.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Originally posted by Victor
    No relevant in this case, whatever about a civil case for damages. Sexual assualt is a specific legal term - "slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept" is probably common battery at most.
    I'm no "law talking guy" ;), but it's very easy to dress up mutton as lamb. Apart from that, the media aren't exactly known for their legal accuracy.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 93,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Originally posted by Victor
    No relevant in this case, whatever about a civil case for damages.
    It was out of curiousity, but in some criminal cases in the UK the sentence can depend on how well the victim copes afterward, if you mug someone who adjusts well you can end up with a lesser sentence than if you mugged someone whose life falls apart because of it. The reason for asking was general road safety - 26 feet is two width of two lanes and just shy of the length of a double decker bus.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,479 ✭✭✭Kell


    I did have a serious think about this case when I heard it on the radio. Personally, I think the driver should have received a suspended sentence in this case given the extremely unusual circumstances that lead to the accident.

    Yes, people can shout about how much of an a-hole she was getting into the car in the first place given the fact that she was plastered, however those people cant treat her actions as those of a rational adult aware of the implications of driving along twisted. What was clearly the case, is that some príck had caused her severe emotional upset to the degree where she obviously lost the run of herself and took flight. Before making a decision on the actions of Sherlock, put yourself in the same position and wonder what the outcome of such a situation on yourself would be.

    As for her assailant receiving probation and a fine, the workings of the judicial system in cases of sexual assault in this country are beyond my belief. I was under the impression that there was supposed to some sort of a crackdown on sexual offenders given the church scandals and subsequent high profile cases, however as yet I havn't seen a sentence handed down to fit the severity of any rape case.

    There was an article in the sunday times some time ago from a judge who said he is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to judgements on rape cases. For some reason, a lot of rape cases are presented to him and if he hands down say a 10 year sentence for a multiple rape, the court of criminal appeals will reduce the sentence or suspend the remainder or plead for a more leniant sentence. I mean, what the fúck is wrong with this country? Rapists are the worst scum on the face of the planet and deserve to be treated as such and the offenders sentence in this case, should definitely have been less leniant.

    As for the Ms. Nuthule not wearing a seat-belt, I think it is a perfectly valid point in this discussion. Without doubt, her injuries would have been far less severe should she have worn one, and it was the responsibility of the driver of the Cinquincento to make sure that she had one and he/she should be done by the DPP for negligence.

    K-


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,367 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    To be perfecctly frank, that's just a downright tragic story for all concerned bar the prick in the pub. It must've been an excruciatingly difficult case for any judge to rule on.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,105 ✭✭✭Tommy Vercetti


    Originally posted by Sleepy
    To be perfecctly frank, that's just a downright tragic story for all concerned bar the prick in the pub. It must've been an excruciatingly difficult case for any judge to rule on.

    Would it have been as difficult if a drunk, uninsured black women hit a south Dublin woman? I doubt it...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭vibe666


    the fact still remains that the victim wouldn't have been thrown across a dual carriageway if she'd been obeying the law herself and wearing a seatbelt.

    if she had have been, this would have been a simple case of driving under the influence and a bit of a smash.

    she'd have got 6 months probation at most and a decent fine.

    it's tragic that someone was that badly hurt at all, but the woman has to take some of the blame for the seriousness of her injuries. it's just more proof that you need to be wearing a seatbelt in the front or back of a car.

    I'm in no way saying that the drunk wasn't in the wrong, but there is definately blame to be laid on both sides.

    I think it was a bit harsh myself. even if she wasn't insured.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,105 ✭✭✭Tommy Vercetti


    Has it been stated that she wasn't wearing a seat-belt?

    I don't see it as being relevant anyway, if she hit a pedestrian she would have killed them.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33 TOMSIE


    tragic case but the seat belt thing even thought your right her injuries would be less if she wore one hindsight how many of us now and again dont wear a seat belt breaking that little law shouldnt excuse someone of half the blame of while drunk crashing a car past a red light speeding and while uninsured into another car


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 33 TOMSIE


    i forgot to say wear a seat belt in the back seat


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Have any of us seen pictures?

    Who's to say that she wouldn't be dead now if she has been wearing a setabelt and stayed in the car.

    There have been plenty of instances, where someone's being thrown from a car actually prevented more serious injury from taking place.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,064 ✭✭✭Gurgle


    my 2 cents:
    She went out & got drunk, planning to stay at a friends house.
    While out with her friends, the story of her being sexually assaulted is getting bandied about, of course she's going to storm off.

    Doesn't excuse drunk driving but it is different to those who drive to the pub with every intention of driving home afterwards.

    Under the circumstances, she should have got a suspended sentence.

    Uninsured -> big fine. Insurance neither prevents or causes accidents.
    Originally posted by seamus:Who's to say that she wouldn't be dead now if she has been wearing a setabelt and stayed in the car. There have been plenty of instances, where someone's being thrown from a car actually prevented more serious injury from taking place.
    :confused:
    Under what possible circumstances would that be true ?
    Originally posted by TOMSIE:how many of us now and again dont wear a seat belt
    Only the stupidist ones of us.
    Dying in a car accident is tragic.
    Dying in a car accident while not wearing a seatbelt is a Darwin award.

    My opinion on seatbelts is that anyone not wearing one shouldn't be allowed to claim compensation at all. There is no excuse, its just stupid.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Originally posted by Victor
    Sexual assualt is a specific legal term - "slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept" is probably common battery at most.
    Sexual assault legally denotes any overtly sexual physical attack, short of penetration. As such "slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept" would be considered sexual assault, while rape is not.
    Originally posted by Kell
    I did have a serious think about this case when I heard it on the radio. Personally, I think the driver should have received a suspended sentence in this case given the extremely unusual circumstances that lead to the accident.
    I had a rather liberal friend explain, the other day, to me that junkies were essentially justified in their criminal behaviour due to the deprived upbringing they suffer. While this may be a reason, it is not an excuse or justification was my retort. The same applies here.

    The ‘extremely unusual circumstances’ do not either justify or excuse her behaviour. Neither can a civilised society mitigate that such behaviour is acceptable is any way due to any such circumstances. Should a businessman who’s experiencing financial difficulties be excused for drunk driving? Perhaps a woman who’s just miscarried is justified for having one too many. I take it it’s also all right for me to go up a bell tower with a sniper rifle if I have a bad day? No. Thought not.

    Additionally people are jumping to conclusions as to the nature of the ‘sexual assault’ - that, incidentally, seems to have materialised as a case only after she was arrested. As has been pointed out, the term could have denoted "slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept", yet it seems to be assumed that she was subjected to the most profane sexual perversions imaginable - says a lot about peoples’ imaginations here, TBH.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,479 ✭✭✭Kell


    Originally posted by The Corinthian

    The ‘extremely unusual circumstances’ do not either justify or excuse her behaviour.

    I did not state that they should, however I do feel that they should have been considered when making a verdict.

    K-


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,064 ✭✭✭Gurgle


    Originally posted by The Corinthian:
    yet it seems to be assumed that she was subjected to the most profane sexual perversions imaginable - says a lot about peoples’ imaginations here, TBH.

    So your assuming she was just sexually assaulted a little bit ?

    Sexual assault is a very serious criminal record. Do you think "slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept" would get a conviction ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Originally posted by Gurgle
    So your assuming she was just sexually assaulted a little bit ?
    No, I never said that. I'm just pointing out that others are making the opposite assumption.
    Sexual assault is a very serious criminal record. Do you think "slapping her on the head with his penis while she slept" would get a conviction ?
    Actually, yes it can.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,479 ✭✭✭Kell


    Originally posted by The Corinthian
    No, I never said that. I'm just pointing out that others are making the opposite assumption.

    Actually, yes it can.

    From experience?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Originally posted by Kell
    From experience?
    No. And if you had any assets, I'd sue you for libel.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by The Corinthian
    No. And if you had any assets, I'd sue you for libel.
    Oh, come on, suggesting someone slapped you on the head with their penis while taking photos is the stuff of many a Mastercard joke on the internet. Not worth a libel suit.

    Put away the handbags.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Originally posted by Victor
    Oh, come on, suggesting someone slapped you on the head their penis while taking photos is the stuff of many a Mastercard joke on the internet. Not worth a lible suit.

    Put away the handbags.
    I think he was making the subtle point that even the most innocuous and minor of actions can land you in hot water not befitting of the offence.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Gurgle wrote:
    :confused:
    Under what possible circumstances would that be true ?

    That actually happens in a few cases. A person in a car crash normally dies from either the other car crashing through their car into them, or from the crash impact throwing them against the inside of their own car. If the person is thrown outside of the car, then they can, if lucky, hit the ground at an angle and roll away from the accident. Of course that doesn't happen a lot (like this case) and I wouldn't suggest people stop wearing seat belts anytime soon.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement