Should Padraig Nally be in jail?

Funkstard

Does no one else know the background story to this? The farmer lived in fear basically, he was told his house was going to get burgled, and he was being continously intimidated by the tinker family for ages, he was supposed to be absolutely shattered emotionally because of the torment he was going through.

Fair enough, he shot him the second time, but he obviously just flipped and went on a mini-rampage. I'm sure many people here would have done the same.

With that said, he still broke the law and it's right that he's in jail. I too agree somewhat with the sentence, I'd like to see him not in jail because he won't do anything like it again, but a message must be sent out. He didn't deserve anything near life, which is why I can see where the judge is coming from in giving him 6 years

junkyard

It wasn't the travellers first time on Mr. Nallys premises and you can be sure it wouldn't be his last if he was still alive. The law should be changed as regards protecting your own property, anyone found in your house without your permission should be fair game.

caesar

Blackjack wrote:

On the other hand, had he not done so, he would have either been killed by Ward's family, or sued for the injuries caused.

Very true.

Does anyone think that maybe he is better off in jail for awhile. I mean he will be safer there, chances are that the family of the man who was killed will try to get revenge.

I voted that he shouldnt be in jail because the man was living in fear of those travellers. He did take the law into his own hands but only when the law let him down in that he had reported them about previous threats but nothing was done about it. The situation then arose when, he had had enough, he was in a situation where one of them was going to leave the world(as he said himself), he wasnt thinking straight, he was defending himself, he shot once, he reloaded and shot a second time, a man died. These travellers were well known to the gardaí for other crimes so it wasn't as if they had just been commiting a crime in threatning Mr. Nally, but where was the law then?

As for reloading and shooting a second time, well that didn't help his case but he was in fear and trying to defend himself. Could you imagine yourself in this situation, what would you do?(this Q is for those who voted yes because you may think he should be in jail but you may also think that you would have done the same as Mr.Nally did). He probably reloaded because he wanted to make sure the traveller didnt come back to get him with his son or maybe the second shot was not ment to hit him but to scare him off(remember he was a fair distance away when the 2nd shot was fired). Rant over.

lostexpectation

Madge wrote:

Reading that the traveller "had 12 previous convictions for burglary, possession of stolen goods and other offences, and had been facing charges of attacking garda officers with a slash hook at the time of his death", then imo, he deserved everything he got. Padraig Nally should be commended for doing society a favour and ridding us of the scum.

This sort of comment by alot of people on the boards really makes me question their sanity. If you really think this you should get yourself seen too.

junkyard

What would you do lostexpectation, if you were in Padraig Nally's shoes?

Guy:Incognito

lostexpectation wrote:

This sort of comment by alot of people on the boards really makes me question their sanity. If you really think this you should get yourself seen too.

Why? It highlights tht the law failed to deal with him and the fact that he reapetedly offended meant this situation was going to arisesonner or later. If the pikey had broken into the guys house and murdered him, everyone in the country would have been up in arms with screams of "why was this guy allowed to threaten an old farmer and cause him misery , while having a string of offences, and then kill him"

Funkstard

/\/\Is that not a valid outcry? I mean, what you said is only one step away from being true

Guy:Incognito

Funkstard wrote:

/\/\Is that not a valid outcry? I mean, what you said is only one step away from being true

Yes it is. And it works both ways. The situation had to be sorted one way or another and pesonally I would always take the side of the householder over the scumbag burglar. These scumbags break into peoples houses so why should the people hve to show them any respect, I wouldnt.

Binka

I have to be honest, hand on heart, i think i would have done the same in his circumstances. Have any of you been robbed or burgled? even a one off by a total stranger? It does very strange things to you. Let alone a series of events by the same perpetrators.
So, yes, his actions were justified, and yes a custodial sentence should be applied to appease all those in favour of not taking the law into your own hands.
But you also have to weigh up what gives anyone the right to subject another human being to this type of mental torture, paranoia and sleep deprivation, to the point where you are willing to put an end to it by killing someone. If Ward had limped away injured you can be sure Nally would not be alive today.
Many of us applaud him for ridding us of this scum. Nally did not ask to be made a victim of Ward's crimimal lifestyle. That was Ward's choice, not Nally's.
Maybe 2 years, but 6, no.

silverside

i might have lost the head completely and shot someone in the back as they were limping away. this doesnt mean it's justified or deserves to go unpunished. at the end of the day he took someones life unnecesarily even if they were a no good cream cracker.

junkyard

I think a suspended sentence maybe, but nothing more.

Funkstard

Stekelly wrote:

Yes it is. And it works both ways. The situation had to be sorted one way or another and pesonally I would always take the side of the householder over the scumbag burglar. These scumbags break into peoples houses so why should the people hve to show them any respect, I wouldnt.

Hey I'm on your side here! The little tinker was going to meet his maker sooner or later, it's unfortunate that an otherwise innocent man got caught up in it and is in jail now because of it.

de5p0i1er

If some one breaks into your house and trys to rob you you should be allowed to fight back.

Binka

at the end of the day he took someones life unnecesarily even if they were a no good cream cracker.[/QUOTE]

I find it hard to agree with your sentiment "unnecesarily". I think you would rephrase that if you were the one living alone in a remote farmhouse.

silverside

no i dont think i would
if someone was limping away and was already seriously wounded i dont think finishing them off is ever justified. understandable maybe in a rage, but not justified.

Guy:Incognito

silverside wrote:

no i dont think i would
if someone was limping away and was already seriously wounded i dont think finishing them off is ever justified. understandable maybe in a rage, but not justified.

So you'd be willing to take a chance with your or your families lives, becaus etheres a good chance he'd be back?

silverside

if he comes back after he gets out of hospital (which is unlikely) i will still have my shotgun. who gave me the right to finish him off?

hardCopy

Under current laws I think it was a fair sentence, although I do not agree with the current laws. As far as I'm concerned if someone invades your most personal space, your home, then they waive all of their rights and you should be allowed do whatever is necessary to protect yourself. This should apply also to protecting yourself from a future threat as happened in this case.

If the Gardai/Judiciary cannot protect people's homes then people should be given the power to protect themselves.

In an ideal world I would not have Mr. Nally in jail, he is the real victim here.

Guy:Incognito

silverside wrote:

if he comes back after he gets out of hospital (which is unlikely) i will still have my shotgun. who gave me the right to finish him off?

He's hardly going to turn up empty handed (or alone) knowing you have a shotgun. Bottom line, I wouldnt take the risk.

He wasnt worth the price of two cartidges, he should have beaten him to death with the gun rather than fire the secondd shot

Binka

"if he comes back after he gets out of hospital (which is unlikely) i will still have my shotgun. who gave me the right to finish him off?"

Why would it be unlikely?

silverside

well if i got shot and half killed by a mad farmer i wouldnt be in a rush back. even if i had my clan and a few scythes and pitchforks with me. think that only happens in films.

maybe travellers think differently but i think they would steer clear.

Guy:Incognito

silverside wrote:

well if i got shot and half killed by a mad farmer i wouldnt be in a rush back. even if i had my clan and a few scythes and pitchforks with me. think that only happens in films.

maybe travellers think differently but i think they would steer clear.

Surely you cant be that naive?

They'd probably have just petrol bombed the house with him in it.

Binka

silverside wrote:

well if i got shot and half killed by a mad farmer i wouldnt be in a rush back. even if i had my clan and a few scythes and pitchforks with me. think that only happens in films.

maybe travellers think differently but i think they would steer clear.

i think you need a reality check! I Guess you haven't been there.

silverside

no i haven been there

have you ?

even if he might come back that still doesnt give him the right to shoot him again on the offchance.

Guy:Incognito

silverside wrote:

no i haven been there

have you ?

even if he might come back that still doesnt give him the right to shoot him again on the offchance.

Well if your willing to take risks with your/your families lives, thats your choice. I wont be doing so with mine.

HybridTech

the farmer was walking back through the fields towards his house when he found a teenager sitting in his car. As Mr Nally confronted him, Ward emerged from the back door of his house.

from http://www.galleryofguns.com/shootingtimes/Articles/DisplayArticles.asp?ID=6252

These people had no respect for anything, property, life, anything that anybody had worked for, saved for, sacrificed for. And as for finishing him off, the man was in fear for his life. He was driven to rage. He believed it was kill or be killed. Maybe not there and then but later on. As somebody pointed out earlier Mr. Nally was the victim here. He didn't ask to be constantly harassed by travellers!!!!!!!!!

As the judge said, it was probably the most socially divisive case he ever presided over. The reactions here prove that!

silverside

Stekelly -
fair enough that's your opinion & your entitled to it
i think you gotta draw the line somewhere though otherwise you'd be carrying a 9mm everywhere and popping everyone who looks at you sideways.

the_syco

KdjaC wrote:

he reloaded and fired again

Totally agree. He should have let the traveller go, so the traveller could have called all of his friends, and lynched the farmer.[/sarc]

Seriously: if someone shot a friend, I'd want revenge. And if I lived in a mobile house, in the firm knowledge that if me and a few friends killed someone, that we could dissappear, then sure, why not? And what can the cops do? Not much. If they accuse me of doing it, well, that'd be accusing a traveller, so the lefties would have a field day.

Binka

silverside wrote:

no i haven been there

have you ?

even if he might come back that still doesnt give him the right to shoot him again on the offchance.

Yes, Silverside, I have been there. I've been terrorised with out justification. 've had a gun in my hand and been driven to use it. Fortunatley i didn't, but it was only a split second thing. But i would lay down my life to protect my family, and i'm proud to say so,

Mr.Nice Guy

If you commit a crime you ought to lose your rights right there and then. I'm sick of society these days where more consideration is given to the perpetrators of crime than the victims.

If you obey the law there's no problem. If you decide to stick two fingers up to the law and break it - then you can have no complaints.