Irish Judges-soft touches for immigrants

Delboy05

I see again from todays papers that the Irish Judicial systme has shown it's prejudice towards the natives of this country...
A nigerian caught selling on 500k worth of heroin in limerick to an undercover grada had his madatory 10 year sentence reduced by 2 years as he pleaded guilty (thats bad enough but it gets better), and had a further year taken off the sentence because,according to todays Irish Times, the Judge 'acknowledged that it was difficult for a foreign man and "in particular a black man" to be incarcerated in an Irish prison and reduced Ashibougwu's sentence by a further year because he was a "black Nigerian man".

As usual being a minority gets you all the sympathy in this country. it's not bad enough that McDoweel brought in the 10 year mandatory sentence for supplying drugs and judges have chosen to ignore it, but now they give out reduced sentences 'cos your coloured!!!!! Where is the equality tribunal on this one.....

Add in the recent not guilty verdict in the case againat a nigerian who killed a child he circumscribed, after the Judge told the jury that 'we should'nt impose our western cultural values on immigrants and their practices' (i'm paraphrasing that here), and you can see the direction this country is headed.

Or take the case of the Equality tribunal fining An Post 2 years ago after a scam was uncovered in the An Post Savings Accounts. Deposit books were being forged and the company lost over 50k. Security footage showed that all the people involved were black males. An Post issued an internal notice alerting staff of this fact and it got fined for highlighting a minority group in its memorandum....depsite the evidence it had!!!!!!!!!

We're on a downward spiral.....the liberal soft touches are going to ruin this country

seamus

Moved to Politics for muppet control. OK it's not quite politics, but problems with the justice system are essentially political issues.

Freelancer

Can I ask you to provide links for all of the above?

I notice in the second case a not guilty verdict was recorded which would mean the jury reached this conclusion not the judge.

The final one doesn't even pass by the judical system. So you've only offered evidence of one case of;

that the Irish Judicial systme has shown it's prejudice towards the natives of this country...

Tha Gopher

Sounds like a smokescreen to me. Guy probably co-operated with the cops and ratted out his supplier or customers, so for that reason he received a reduced sentence. In addition, if he co-operated, possibly naming Irish people, part of any intelligent deal would be to spend as little time as possible in this country.

Seeing as deportees are frequently held in prison before their deportation i doubt the majority of judges really hold his view.


I agree partly with what Delboy is saying. You may often see reports in the local newspapers about an incident, say a burglary or con trick, being carried out by an "East European" gang, and appealing for information. Avoiding the use of "east european gypsy" seems to be paramount, all in the name of PC. Another example- ive never seen a report seeking information describing a suspect of "traveller appearance", or "speaking with what may be a traveller accent".

Delboy05

You should change your name Freelancer to 'can you provide linkes for that'...

read todays papers....

As for the boy that died...it happened in kilkenny if memory serves me right about 1.5 years ago. Case took place 2 or 3 months ago and was widely covered. Kevin Myers even wrote his daily article in the Times on the judges comments and his instructions to the jury that i have already relayed.

And the 3rd case, An Post, was ruled on by a govt body - i thre this in to show what is happening throught our systems and not just the judicial.....

Freelancer

Delboy05 wrote:

You should change your name Freelancer to 'can you provide linkes for that'...

read todays papers....

Read the politics guidelines......

As for the boy that died...it happened in kilkenny if memory serves me right about 1.5 years ago. Case took place 2 or 3 months ago and was widely covered. Kevin Myers even wrote his daily article in the Times on the judges comments and his instructions to the jury that i have already relayed.

Ah Kevin Myers that bastion of pure facts and facts alone never one to twist the story to change the situation. How does the circumcision story measure up to Wayne O'Donoghue? Death by misadventure.

And the 3rd case, An Post, was ruled on by a govt body - i thre this in to show what is happening throught our systems and not just the judicial.....

So you admit it has nothing to do with your point about the judical system.

lostexpectation

and where is this country headed deloboy?

Delboy05

lostexpectation wrote:

and where is this country headed deloboy?

ask the dutch, or the english.......

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/0221/79831320HM4CTHEROINGARDA.html
there's ur story on the reduced jail term for being black.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1481639&issue_id=13091
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/opinion/2006/0111/819219926DIJAN11.html
there's details on the case, and the 2nd article is Kevin Myers in which he quotes the judge along the lines of what I said initially.

ivan087

to tell you the truth i'd be more worried about the judges casting soft sentences on recent child murderers and drunk drivers then on this case. as was said by another poster - drug cases are influenced by cooperation and informing on other gang members.
it doesnt seem to me that the poster is very concered about the soft sentences of all drug crimes. if this was the case he would be posting everyday about all the criminals who get off lightly. what pisses this guy off is the fact that he was black.

Freelancer

Delboy05 wrote:

ask the dutch, or the english.......

You're the one who made the claim, what are suggesting is going to happen?

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/0221/79831320HM4CTHEROINGARDA.html
there's ur story on the reduced jail term for being black.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1481639&issue_id=13091
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/opinion/2006/0111/819219926DIJAN11.html
there's details on the case, and the 2nd article is Kevin Myers in which he quotes the judge along the lines of what I said initially.

All requiring registration I note

Delboy05

Freelancer wrote:

All requiring registration I note

I'll pay for you Freelancer, is that what u want!!!! The Indo is free, so won't cost u a penny.
For a man who likes to post on these topics, u don't seem to read any papers that would make u aware of the issues being discussed.

To respond to a previous poster, I have to say i find it amazing that a judge lowers a sentence cos a guy is black. Put this in reverse, where a judge increased the sentence and there'd be outcry from the usual quarters

ivan087

Delboy05 wrote:

To respond to a previous poster, I have to say i find it amazing that a judge lowers a sentence cos a guy is black. Put this in reverse, where a judge increased the sentence and there'd be outcry from the usual quarters

you dont get what im saying. sentences are reduced everyday for some very strange reasons. him being black could be an excuse for the sentence being reduced. the real reasons for the sentence being reduced - we'll never know. my point is, why dont you read about all the other sentences that are reduced. it happens everyday in the courts - they're poor, disadvantaged, on medication, pushed into it, had a new baby - needed the money, seperated from the wife, etc, etc. and frankly id take the excuse that hes an immigrant more then some of the other excuses.

Zombrex

Delboy05 wrote:

I see again from todays papers that the Irish Judicial systme has shown it's prejudice towards the natives of this country...

What nonsense. Judges reduce sentences for "natives" all the bloody time, especially if they plead guilty and cooperate with the police. It is standard practice.

You seem to think that because he is a black Nigerian we should throw the entire book at him. I think that shows more your prejudice than the irish Judicial system.

Freelancer

Delboy05 wrote:

I'll pay for you Freelancer, is that what u want!!!! The Indo is free, so won't cost u a penny.

Yes but again the rule of thumb is if a site requires registeration, the protocal is to include the article.

For a man who likes to post on these topics, u don't seem to read any papers that would make u aware of the issues being discussed.

I read several papers demanding that I memorise ever one of myers columns is a bit much....

To respond to a previous poster, I have to say i find it amazing that a judge lowers a sentence cos a guy is black. Put this in reverse, where a judge increased the sentence and there'd be outcry from the usual quarters

Wicknight gave an excellent alternative explanation. You still haven't answered the question about where you think this country is heading

Delboy05

Freelancer wrote:

I read several papers demanding that I memorise ever one of myers columns is a bit much....

the story on the heroin case is in todays paper!!!! and where did i demand you memorise every inch of kyers articles. don't be a drama queen

as for wicknight...waht a shock to see the 2 of ye backing each other up and complimenting each other.
here we have a case of a sentence being altered beacuse of colour....is that not racist...... and I don't agree with those here either who are 2nd guessing the judge in saying he is covering up up the real reason for reducing the sentence....that is what i'm trying to discuss while others try and go off a different path

shuushh

lowering a jail sentence because a person is black seems utterly ridiculous however the 2 year lowering due to pleading guilty seems fine with me as it was probably part of some arrangment

i would have to read the An Post memo before I had any opinion on what went on there but I could understand the equality tribunal ruling that way if An Post had implied that ALL of its black employees were potential criminals to its entire staff

the circumcision case doesnt need any comment really I don't think many people would argue about that show of moral cowardice from Judge Kevin Haugh. However I am unsure about exactly how that child died and how the circumcision related to the death.

interesting thread but what is your general feeling about people with black skin coming to live in this country ? Is it foreign people you don't like in general or just the way we treat them?

ivan087

Delboy05 wrote:

as for wicknight...waht a shock to see the 2 of ye backing each other up and complimenting each other.
here we have a case of a sentence being altered beacuse of colour....is that not racist...... and I don't agree with those here either who are 2nd guessing the judge in saying he is covering up up the real reason for reducing the sentence....that is what i'm trying to discuss while others try and go off a different path

yeah well it seems to me that you just want to focus on the fact that he is black. all im saying is that there could be other reasons for it, which have already being outlined by other posters. not everything is black and white. if youre going to just take the paper for fact and if you dont question it, well then...
at the end of the day, sentences get reduced everyday for all sorts of reasons. an isolated case like this shouldnt get you so pissed off. i think you should be pissed off with the whole justice system that doesnt keep to mandatory sentences.

Zombrex

Delboy05 wrote:

here we have a case of a sentence being altered beacuse of colour....is that not racist...... and I don't agree with those here either who are 2nd guessing the judge in saying he is covering up up the real reason for reducing the sentence....that is what i'm trying to discuss while others try and go off a different path

You are saying the Judge treated this criminal better than he would have treated a "native" white Irish person. That is, as I said, nonsense.

Judges will often reduce sentences for criminals because they plead guilty or cooperate with the police.

Judges will also reduce sentences if they believe that a particular person has cooperated and will have an exceptionally hard time in a prision, for what ever reason. A foreign national, especially a black foreign national, will have a harder time in an Irish prision than an Irish person. Thats just the way it is.

So I have not read the article (not registered with the Irish Times or Union, and could not be bothered just to argue with you) but all I can see here is that the judge has been lenient.

He has been lenient because the criminal cooperated. He has been lenient because the criminal is going to have a particularly hard time in an Irish prision compared to other criminals. And the criminal system in Ireland is supposted to be about justice, not unnecessary punishment for the sake of it (you might disagree).

What part of this do you actually not agree with? Do you think Judges should not have the freedom to be lenient on a criminal based on their judgement of the criminal. Or you agree with judges being lenient to Irish criminals but not to Nigerians?

Either way this person has been treated no differently than any other Irish person who goes in front of a judge in this country. So if you do have a problem it is with the legal system in and how they treat all criminals in general, not just black ones.

There is no postive discrimination going on here.

Freelancer

Delboy05 wrote:

the story on the heroin case is in todays paper!!!! and where did i demand you memorise every inch of kyers articles. don't be a drama queen

But is the Myers one? You're asking me to remember a Myers quote verbatium. Myers a "journalist" of dubious integrity, highlighted in the Cory report as someone who writes conjecture and speculation as fact.

I'm sorry I forgot sometimes debating with you is like banging my head againist a brick wall and only half as rewarding.

as for wicknight...waht a shock to see the 2 of ye backing each other up and complimenting each other.
here we have a case of a sentence being altered beacuse of colour....is that not racist...... and I don't agree with those here either who are 2nd guessing the judge in saying he is covering up up the real reason for reducing the sentence....that is what i'm trying to discuss while others try and go off a different path

Whut, Wicknight offered a plausible alternative explanation, you're refusing to admit it. And you're refusing to address the salient point, how does this one case prove "where the country is going", and what do you mean by that exactly.

constitutionus

actually one thing people havent mentioned is that guy that got away with killing a baby was preforming *drumroll please* genitial mutilation.

the very act manyaslyum seekers are fleeing their own countries to come here for. the judge should have thrown the book at him for preforming a medical procedure without a liscence. not to mentioned doing something to allay the fears of aslyum seekers who've fled this stuff.
i mean honestly , how long before this becomes common practice putting these people back at square one

Zombrex

constitutionus wrote:

actually one thing people havent mentioned is that guy that got away with killing a baby was preforming *drumroll please* genitial mutilation.

I was under the impression he was performing a medical circumcision at the request of the parents?

Maybe I read it wrong. If he was attempting to sexually assaulting the girl in question, then yes they should have thrown the book at him. And thrown away the key.

constitutionus

Wicknight wrote:

I was under the impression he was performing a medical circumcision at the request of the parents?

indeed . but he wasnt a qualified doctor. i'll admit my knowledge on this one is sketchy so im open to correction but im sure he wasnt allowed to practice medicine in ireland and was just an aquaitance of the family. at the very least he should have got manslaughter

Zombrex

constitutionus wrote:

indeed . but he wasnt a qualified doctor.

No he wasn't and I disagree with the judges decision in that case.

But then he wasn't performing genital mutaliation was he?

It is a bit scare-mongering to suggest he was. He didn't assault the girl in question as far as I know.

Freelancer

constitutionus wrote:

indeed . but he wasnt a qualified doctor. i'll admit my knowledge on this one is sketchy so im open to correction but im sure he wasnt allowed to practice medicine in ireland and was just an aquaitance of the family. at the very least he should have got manslaughter

Firstly, it isn't the form of genital mutilation people are fleeing. Thats female circumision designed to multilate gential to remove sexual pleasure. Circumisions of males are carried out by Rabbi's in Ireland. Many without medical training.

This was an accident, he was carrying out the operation with the consent of the parents. Hence the reckless endangerment, not man slaughter.

constitutionus

Freelancer wrote:

Firstly, it isn't the form of genital mutilation people are fleeing. Thats female circumision designed to multilate gential to remove sexual pleasure. Circumisions of males are carried out by Rabbi's in Ireland. Many without medical training.

This was an accident, he was carrying out the operation with the consent of the parents. Hence the reckless endangerment, not man slaughter.

the kid died, i call that manslaughter. and circumcission is still genital mutilation. which ever way you "cut" it:D

Freelancer

constitutionus wrote:

the kid died, i call that manslaughter.

You call that manslaughter the DPP call it reckless endangerment. You're not the DPP, so I think their opinion of what the crime was carries a tad more weight than yours.

and circumcission is still genital mutilation.

But it is not the form of genital mutilation that you said people were fleeing from, in your original piece of scarymongering, so that point of yours is null and void.

which ever way you "cut" it:D

Oh my aching sides, the wit on display here. Have you ever considered stand up? As in standing up and walking away from here?

Hobbes

Delboy05 wrote:

ask the dutch, or the english.......

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/0221/79831320HM4CTHEROINGARDA.html
there's ur story on the reduced jail term for being black.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1481639&issue_id=13091
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/opinion/2006/0111/819219926DIJAN11.html
there's details on the case, and the 2nd article is Kevin Myers in which he quotes the judge along the lines of what I said initially.

Generally in politics forum if you make a claim it is up to you to supply somewhere someone can actually read it.

Can you try this. Read the links you supplied and give the names of the people tried or the first paragraph of the story. Should be enough to go rooting for the story elsewhere.

constitutionus

Freelancer wrote:

You call that manslaughter the DPP call it reckless endangerment. You're not the DPP, so I think their opinion of what the crime was carries a tad more weight than yours.



But it is not the form of genital mutilation that you said people were fleeing from, in your original piece of scarymongering, so that point of yours is null and void.



Oh my aching sides, the wit on display here. Have you ever considered stand up? As in standing up and walking away from here?

whatever, if you cant see a racist policy in dealing with "non nationals" thats your failing:rolleyes:

Freelancer

constitutionus wrote:

whatever, if you cant see a racist policy in dealing with "non nationals" thats your failing:rolleyes:

Ah the "I can't make a coherant and rational point, so this is your fault" defense.

I rarely use em but this is apt;

:rolleyes:

Delboy05

Wicknight wrote:

I was under the impression he was performing a medical circumcision at the request of the parents?

Maybe I read it wrong. If he was attempting to sexually assaulting the girl in question, then yes they should have thrown the book at him. And thrown away the key.

you see...certain people here argue,shout, put you down, take the high moral gorund and they don't even know the basic facts of the argument they're defending.........the kid was a BOY. not a GIRL.

Freelancer wrote:

This was an accident, he was carrying out the operation with the consent of the parents. Hence the reckless endangerment, not man slaughter.

operation!!!!!! with a razor blade....please....

wicknight wrote:

You are saying the Judge treated this criminal better than he would have treated a "native" white Irish person. That is, as I said, nonsense

nonsense,you say. Better tell the judge. Would I, a culchie, get a year off my sentence if iwas going to jail 'cos it's full of dubs? No I would'nt . but here is a man getting a year off because he's a "black nigerian man in an Irish jail". So yes, the Judge did treat him differently than a "native" as you say above.

Hobbes wrote:

Generally in politics forum if you make a claim it is up to you to supply somewhere someone can actually read it

'make up a claim'.....how condescending and petty can you get. Tone of the argument does'nt suit ur politics and thats ur line of attack. sad really.
I refer you to the 2 biggest selling national papers. Not much more I can do. I don't know the website addersses for the Sun or the Mirror I'm afraid....

John Doe

Freelancer wrote:

Myers a "journalist" of dubious integrity, highlighted in the Cory report as someone who writes conjecture and speculation as fact.

I've always thought this, and I'm glad it's actually been acknowledged. Could you point me towards the Cory report please? Also, nobody here knows why this man got a reduced sentence. We do know, however, that there are plenty of reasons to reduce a sentence in drugs cases, most of which can't then be announced. So this probably isn't about giving black people preferential treatment.

pete

Delboy05 wrote:

operation!!!!!! with a razor blade....please....

what would you suggest be used? a blunt butterknife?

note to those on high horses: male circumcision is generally not considered "genital mutilation".

Laumann et al. (1997) used data from the National Health and Social Life Survey.1 That survey questioned men who were born from 1932 through 1971. Laumann reported that the overall incidence of circumcision in U.S. born men was 77 percent - ranging from a low of about 31 percent in 1932 to a high of about 85 percent in 1965 and declining to about 77% in the last year of the survey.

The 2000 British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal 2000) found that 15.8 percent of British males aged 16 to 44 reported being circumcised. The incidence of circumcision was highest in the men aged 40-44 at 19.6 percent [born 1956-60] and lowest in the group aged 16-19 [born 1981-84] at 11.7 percent.

But it's no skin off my nose.

Captain Trips

Wicknight wrote:

Judges will also reduce sentences if they believe that a particular person has cooperated and will have an exceptionally hard time in a prision, for what ever reason. A foreign national, especially a black foreign national, will have a harder time in an Irish prision than an Irish person. Thats just the way it is.

Says who? Where are the studies showing black people get worse "treatment" in prisons compared to Irish people? That's just hypothetical PC nonsense.

A crime was committed and the sentence was lower than that what would be for me simply because I am not black.

So to ensure fair treatment of prisoners and no special treatment, surely there should be special black-only prisons - which is the logical conclusion of giving him a reduced sentence, as opposed to say, letting him out into the public community earlier.

Freelancer

John Doe wrote:

I've always thought this, and I'm glad it's actually been acknowledged. Could you point me towards the Cory report please?

Google the Cory report and Myers, Myers made claim that there was colusion between Dundalk Garda and the IRA which led to the murder of senior RUC men, he was later under criminal investigation forced to admit his conclusions were based on speculation, and hypothesis , and he would not consider writing them as facts "today".

Also, nobody here knows why this man got a reduced sentence. We do know, however, that there are plenty of reasons to reduce a sentence in drugs cases, most of which can't then be announced. So this probably isn't about giving black people preferential treatment.

Yup thats what were saying.

Freddie59

Wicknight wrote:

What nonsense. Judges reduce sentences for "natives" all the bloody time, especially if they plead guilty and cooperate with the police. It is standard practice.

You seem to think that because he is a black Nigerian we should throw the entire book at him. I think that shows more your prejudice than the irish Judicial system.

Not if this is true - this is the very type of thing that is breeding racism in Ireland. Imagine if the words 'black Nigerian man' were used under different circumstances. It's this type of positive discrimination in favour of immigrants (and particularly CRIMINAL immigrants - which is what he is) which is maddening people.:mad:

Freddie59

Freelancer wrote:

You call that manslaughter the DPP call it reckless endangerment. You're not the DPP, so I think their opinion of what the crime was carries a tad more weight than yours.

Have you ever considered that there would be a moral description of this heinous crime or act? The DPP are not infallible you know.

Hobbes

Delboy05 wrote:

'make up a claim'.....how condescending and petty can you get.

Reading is not your strong point. I said "make a claim", not make up a claim.

I am not calling you a liar either. However your links are inaccessible to the majority here.

If you are looking for links for sun/mirror.
Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk/
Mirror: http://www.mirror.co.uk/
(though I wouldn't call the Sun+Mirror bastions of the media as replacements).

All I am asking you to do is to look at the news report yourself, as you appear to be able and just copy out the names of the parties involved or a paragraph from the start. This is more then enough to start googling for other reports on it. I tried last night based on your original post and could find nothing. So I would be intrested in reading the story.

Hobbes

Ok I can get to your unison court case story. Quite sad, however that report is from October of last year and said the trial was still ongoing. Do you have any update regarding this court case? I can't believe this guy (or the parents for that matter) would of been let off.

Still looking for report on your original post though.

Freddie59

Hobbes wrote:

Ok I can get to your unison court case story. Quite sad, however that report is from October of last year and said the trial was still ongoing. Do you have any update regarding this court case? I can't believe this guy (or the parents for that matter) would of been let off.

Still looking for report on your original post though.

I can.

Zombrex

Delboy05 wrote:

you see...certain people here argue,shout, put you down, take the high moral gorund and they don't even know the basic facts of the argument they're defending.........the kid was a BOY. not a GIRL.

As i said I'm not very familar with the case... Silly me for assuming when constitutionus said this was genital mutilation (something that is largely carried out against women in Africa, designed to do anything from scare the woman so no man will want her to prevent her from having children) he wasn't actually talking about a girl... he was talking about a boy, getting a standard circumcision... silly me :rolleyes:

Delboy05 wrote:

Would I, a culchie, get a year off my sentence if i was going to jail 'cos it's full of dubs? No I would'nt.

I doubt it, and you wouldn't get a year off your sentence if you had blonde hair and were going into a prision full of black haired men.

You would probably get time taken off your sentence though if the judge had a valid cause for concern about the time you would spend in prision. But then it would be up to the judge. He might just not like you very much.

How about you sell some drugs and we see what happens...

Delboy05 wrote:

but here is a man getting a year off because he's a "black nigerian man in an Irish jail". So yes, the Judge did treat him differently than a "native" as you say above.

As soon as you present any evidence that judges are not lenient on sentencing to Irish people I will listen to your point Delboy about Judges being unfair to "native" people.

So far all you have is your rather ill-informed views on judges and lack of understand of how the Irish legal system works. Hardly a convincing argument now is it.

Hobbes

Freddie59 wrote:

I can.

You can what?

Zombrex

Freddie59 wrote:

Not if this is true - this is the very type of thing that is breeding racism in Ireland. Imagine if the words 'black Nigerian man' were used under different circumstances. It's this type of positive discrimination in favour of immigrants (and particularly CRIMINAL immigrants - which is what he is) which is maddening people.:mad:

Its not possitive discrimination, Judges have to right and responsibility to be lenient in certain cases. "Native" Irish white criminals are always having sentences reduced, for a wide wide range of reasons. You can argue "special treatment" in all of these cases. But when a black man gets this special treatment, especially a Nigerian, well that just ain't on is it.

As far as I can see, and taking Delboys assessment of the case at face value (haven't read the article in question) the Judge in this case believed this person would have an acceptionally hard time in the prision he was being sent to because he was a foriegn national and a different skin colour.

Do you agree or disagree with the Judges assessment? Do you think this guy would not have had a harder than normal time in prision?

Zombrex

Captain Trips wrote:

Says who?

The Judge, obviously ..

The_Minister

I have great respect for Kevin Myers. He is funny, wiity and takes a different slant on things.

Dyr

Wicknight wrote:

What nonsense. Judges reduce sentences for "natives" all the bloody time, especially if they plead guilty and cooperate with the police. It is standard practice.

Judges dont reduce sentences for natives because they're from Sutton and wouldnt really fit in with the prison population, which is what seems to have happened here.

Sounds like a smokescreen to me. Guy probably co-operated with the cops and ratted out his supplier or customers, so for that reason he received a reduced sentence. In addition, if he co-operated, possibly naming Irish people, part of any intelligent deal would be to spend as little time as possible in this country.

Linky? or is that all in the realms of pure speculation? Call me naive but when a judge stands up in a court of law and says he's reducing someones sentence due to his nationailty i believe he's not telling porkies

it doesnt seem to me that the poster is very concered about the soft sentences of all drug crimes. if this was the case he would be posting everyday about all the criminals who get off lightly. what pisses this guy off is the fact that he was black.

Different things get different peoples goat. Some people here get hot under the collar about IRA murders but never seem to mention loyalist murders, it's their perogative what they post. Interesting to see how many people implied that Delboy was motivated by racism in posting this. The old race card is a great way to stifle a debate.

:v: < kick racism out of sentencing!!

Freelancer

Firespinner wrote:

I have great respect for Kevin Myers. He is funny, wiity and takes a different slant on things.

That's nice, utterly irrelevant but nice. The Cory report proves he pretty much fabricated evidence about Dundalk Garda. While his sniveling backpeddling about "not meaning to offend" over the "bastards" incident last year (when he clearly and unequivable was trying to offend) makes me loath the man.

Freddie59 wrote:

Have you ever considered that there would be a moral description of this heinous crime or act? The DPP are not infallible you know.

Jesus henious crime? Moral description?

Say it again. He commited this with the consent of the parents and post trial, stated clearly that'd he'd prefer the health boards to offer circumision to children in hosiptial.

Delboy05 wrote:

you see...certain people here argue,shout, put you down, take the high moral gorund and they don't even know the basic facts of the argument they're defending.........the kid was a BOY. not a GIRL.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant delboy, constitionious was trying to muddy the waters talking about female circumision.

operation!!!!!! with a razor blade....please....

Again what should he have used? As pointed out in the post trial he said he'd prefer if the "operation" or "procedure" was available in hospitials.

The rest of your posts are the same mismash of mispresenting what others are saying.

However I'll ask you again where do you think "this country is going" You made this claim and refused to elaborate in any real manner, and it's the point of your Original post, if you continue to post on this thread, I'll continue to ask this question.......

Zombrex

Bambi wrote:

Judges dont reduce sentences for natives...

They would if they had a genuine concern. It happens all the time.

Look, a lot of people might disagree that this person would have a hard time in prision, but then thats the judge's call. A lot of people think that the Nally case the judge was too lenient. A lot of people think Wayne O'Donoghue sentence was far to lenient.

If someone wants to argue that this man will not recieve any harder a time in jail because he is a non-national and African thats fine. Personally I would tend to trust the Judge that he knows what he is talking about in this case, but judges can make stupid decisions like anyone can.

But the bit where the discussion turns to nonsense ranting is when someone tries to use this case to show how the "liberal" justice system is actually prejudice against "native" (I assume that means white) Irish people.

As I have said a few times, judges make lenient sentencing calls to (white) Irish people on a day to day basis, for a wide range of reasons.

Freddie59

Wicknight wrote:

Do you agree or disagree with the Judges assessment? Do you think this guy would not have had a harder than normal time in prision?

100% DISAGREE. Personally I don't agree with ANY criminal having a sentence reduced (unless it's proven that the person was victimised in some way). Whether he/she is black/white/yellow/red is irrelevant. The issue of how hard a time he/she has in prison is also irrelevant - prison is supposed to be a DETERRENT - the harder the time the better - for ALL of them.

I note that you avoided commenting on as to what the reaction what be if the term 'black Nigerian man' was used elsewhere. I think 'racism' (that well-worn term) would be the cry.

Freddie59

Freelancer wrote:

He commited this with the consent of the parents and post trial, stated clearly that'd he'd prefer the health boards to offer circumision to children in hosiptial

And that makes it right? Let's say I travel to another country and commit an offence against an infant. I bet you that both I and the parents would be prosecuted (and rightly so). I'll also bet you won't see the regulations changed to accommodate me.

constitutionus

Freelancer wrote:

Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant delboy, constitionious was trying to muddy the waters talking about female circumision.

excuse me? where did i say "female" taking a razor to someones genetals is genital mutilation, its fairly self evident. be it male or female is irrelevant. particularly if i need remind you again the kid died. you accused me of scaremongering, well if having your kid die at the hands of an unregulated practice conducted by quaks doest scare you then you need to re evaluate your priorities

freelancer wrote:

Again what should he have used? .

a scalpal? in the presence of a nurse or health care professional such as a surgeon or doctor? in a hospital or clinic enviroment? is this too hard to comprehend?

Zombrex

Freddie59 wrote:

100% DISAGREE. Personally I don't agree with ANY criminal having a sentence reduced

Well there you go, you have an issue with all reduced sentences. Throw the book at them so to speak. Thats fair enough, but since the race of the criminal is irrelevant to that position, and since its established that white "natives" get reduced sentences too, and you are equally opposed to that, then this isn't an issue of race or immigration as Delboy seemed to want to turn it into, now is it.

Freddie59 wrote:

I note that you avoided commenting on as to what the reaction what be if the term 'black Nigerian man' was used elsewhere.

I "avoided" commenting on it because I have no idea what you want me to say.

Without any idea of the context of "elsewhere" is I can't answer that question. Do you mean in a immigration news letter or on a flyer for a neo-Nazi rally?

Simply saying 'black Nigerian man' isn't racist.