Good backround, no jail for you

All I can say is the girls solicitor must be shít hot.

It raises the question would the judge have been so lenient if the girl was from ballymun as opposed to Terenure.

I'm going to start dealing and pretend ive diabetes so I won't get jail time

Community service for UCD dropout with €20,000 ecstasy
30/03/2007 - 15:32:54

A south city UCD dropout who was found transporting over €20,000 worth of "ecstasy" tablets in a borrowed car "as a favour" is to be assessed for community service in lieu of three years imprisonment.

Claire Hanrahan (aged 21), of Terenure Road East pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to possession of "ecstasy" for sale or supply at Winetavern Street and at Comeragh Road, Drimnagh on December 14, 2005.

Judge Katherine Delahunt referred the case to the Probation Service to assess Hanrahan’s suitability for community service in lieu of three year jail term "to see if you can repay to the community some of the damage your behaviour would have caused".

She noted that Hanrahan had been diagnosed as an insulin dependent diabetic shortly before the incident and medical reports suggested that a "cognitive deficit" may have occurred as a result leading to mental instability which would explain her "complete personality transformation" during this time.

Garda Corina Carroll told Mr Garnet Orange BL, prosecuting, that she searched a car that Hanrahan was driving at Winetavern Street on foot of confidential information.

She said she found two clear plastic bags in Hanrahan’s handbag containing "ecstasy" tablets valued at €20,060.

A search of the bedroom of the apartment where Hanrahan was living at the time yielded a further €540 of "ecstasy" and a quantity of cannabis resin valued at €34.

Gda Carroll said that during interview Hanrahan told them that she had earlier collected the tablets and brought them to a person as a favour. She said this person had counted out 2,000 tablets for her to bring to someone else and it was in the course of this second trip she was stopped.

She agreed with Mr John Nolan BL, defending Hanrahan, that the car was not hers and that she immediately admitted her guilt. She agreed that there had been a "degree of naivety" on her part.

She told Judge Delahunt that she believed the tablets were being transported as a "favour" and did not think any money was going to change hands.

Ms Martina Hanrahan, mother of the accused, told Mr Nolan that her daughter had been a "very good student" and she "had great hopes for her".

She said her daughter had wanted a year out after school but she had persuaded her to go to UCD, which Hanrahan found "unstructured" and, despite her pleas, Hanrahan had left college six weeks before she was due to sit her exams. Her daughter was also diagnosed with diabetes which came as a "total shock".

Ms Hanrahan said she tried to exercise "tough love" with her daughter and told her to go out and find a job and flat, not expecting her to actually do so. She said this incident was "out of character" for her daughter and she was now living back at the family home.

Mr Nolan submitted that Hanrahan had become "disaffected" at UCD and after moving out of the family home her "lifestyle had to be funded".

He said she had "cooperated to the highest degree with the gardaí" and was now back in the family home and in employment.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/?jp=MHAUEYEYAUEY

humanji

Cool, I'm diabetic too. Anybody need anything transported back from Amsterdam?

ArthurDent

My favourite bit from the above report

"Mr Nolan submitted that Hanrahan had become "disaffected" at UCD and after moving out of the family home her "lifestyle had to be funded"."

Anyone else here move out from their family home and needed their lifestyle funded resorted t pushing drugs - what's wrong with getting a bloody job?:eek:

seamus

Each case on its own tbh. Assuming that this girl had no previous convictions, I think that's a fairly reasonable sentence, given the circumstances.

I don't think it's a case of "Good background, no jail", but they would rather look on the person's ordinary character as a measure. Someone who has been arrested/charged multiple times on drugs offences, is clearly not the kind of person who "just made a really dumb mistake". Diabetes can come as a bit of a shock to people, and it seems fairly reasonable to me that it could have altered her outlook life, which is why she'd be happy to do something like this.

IMO, in cases of serious disorder or violence, it's more a case, "Ah poor pet was beaten as a child and had an alcoholic father, sure give him a suspended sentence. That guy has a wheelchair to get around, he'll be grand". Whereas if you've a good background, you get the book thrown at you because you're seen as having no excuse.

Gurgle

seamus wrote:

Each case on its own tbh. Assuming that this girl had no previous convictions, I think that's a fairly reasonable sentence, given the circumstances.

Agree ^^

I'd rather see real scumbags locked up, this girl doesn't exactly pose a threat to society.

JayRoc

Fair play to the judge for making a tough choice (and one she probably knew she'd catch flack for).
She judged this case on it's individual merits, and probably came to the conclusion that the accused stood very little chance of re-offending if the probation act was applied, and that a custodial sentence would do more harm than good in this particular instance.

I'm all for the right people being sent down when appropriate, but I think in circumstances like this, where the accused hasn't hurt anyone, and has already been so thoroughly ****-scared by what's happened it's doubtful she'll ever so much as jaywalk for the rest of her life, rehabilitation is more important than punishment.

And sending her to prison would simply have meant adding one more person to the large list of write-offs this country's already lumbered with.
You wanna good shot at making someone a lifetime criminal/no-hoper/burden on society? Send 'em to prison, and cost the taxpayer a bundle while you're at it.

Good call.

WindSock

ArthurDent wrote:

Anyone else here move out from their family home and needed their lifestyle funded resorted t pushing drugs - what's wrong with getting a bloody job?:eek:

Yes many have. Not pushing though, thats a different thing altogether.
Nothing wrong with getting a job,but it doesnt pay as much.

brianthebard

seamus wrote:

Each case on its own tbh. Assuming that this girl had no previous convictions, I think that's a fairly reasonable sentence, given the circumstances.

I'd agree if the quantity wasn't so high-possession over €10,000 is fairly major dealer stuff and usually you would be looking at 10 years, maybe more. a 21 year old should have a bit more chop on, especially if she is a "good student". Why was ecstasy in inverted commas anyways? It either was or it wasn't surely?

seamus

brianthebard wrote:

Why was ecstasy in inverted commas anyways? It either was or it wasn't surely?

Ecstasy is the street name of the drug, not the actual name. It's MDMA. The quotes are to show that the paper is simply quoting what was said in court. Journalistic pedantry at its best

robinph

brianthebard wrote:

Why was ecstasy in inverted commas anyways? It either was or it wasn't surely?

Surely its the €20,000 that should have been in inverted commas as that is the completely invented part of the article. What about the €34 of cannabis that they found as well, with the way that they calculate the values of drugs that must have been a microscopic amount of the drug that they found.

Boston

Drugs prices don't vary hugely, 400 E's would be about 20 grands worth.

jdivision

Boston wrote:

Drugs prices don't vary hugely, 400 E's would be about 20 grands worth.

Eh, somebody's ripping you off. That's e50 a pill! I think that this case is a clear one of one law for the rich and another for the poor. Oh but she comes from a good background... more reason why she shouldn't have been in that situation.
I thought more than £10,000 drugs in your possession = mandatory 10 years in prison.

Boston

sorry meant 4000. And I've heard of people getting 10 years for that much in cannabis on a first offence.

Blush_01

seamus wrote:

Diabetes can come as a bit of a shock to people, and it seems fairly reasonable to me that it could have altered her outlook life, which is why she'd be happy to do something like this.

That's the most stupidly AH response I've ever heard. Normal people get shocks and deal with them, they don't turn around and use said shock as an excuse to deal drugs. My dad suffered heart failure last year - should I check his jeep out just in case? OOh, I wonder if I'll find crack under the floor covering.

JayRoc

jdivision wrote:

Eh, somebody's ripping you off. That's e50 a pill! I think that this case is a clear one of one law for the rich and another for the poor. Oh but she comes from a good background... more reason why she shouldn't have been in that situation.
I thought more than £10,000 drugs in your possession = mandatory 10 years in prison.

Judges are quite happy to ignore so-called "mandatory" sentences when they feel they're inappropriate, and rightly so (although I'm admittedly puzzled at the use of the word mandatory!).

event

seamus wrote:

Each case on its own tbh. Assuming that this girl had no previous convictions, I think that's a fairly reasonable sentence, given the circumstances.

Gurgle wrote:

Agree ^^

I'd rather see real scumbags locked up, this girl doesn't exactly pose a threat to society.

eh, what?

the girl was transporting drugs lads.

she was aiding these 'real scumbags'

should have got jail time, no doubt about it

jdivision

JayRoc wrote:

Judges are quite happy to ignore so-called "mandatory" sentences when they feel they're inappropriate

for rich kids;)

Boston

Lads the Key thing here is "cooperated to the highest degree with the gardaí" That more then anything else is probably why she's not in jail.

ChRoMe

The figure of 20,000 euros comes from the Gardai pricing each pill at ten euro. The article states that she was caught with 2000 pills.

Its not a small amount of pills either and to be honest Im firmly of the view that where she lives has something to do with it.

I love how many people are posting that with anti drug views feel for some reason that this girl should be treated differently from the "real scumbags" as is regulary stated here.

Pot its kettle on line 2.

Boston

She cooperated with the Gardi, end of story like

seamus

Blush_01 wrote:

That's the most stupidly AH response I've ever heard. Normal people get shocks and deal with them, they don't turn around and use said shock as an excuse to deal drugs. My dad suffered heart failure last year - should I check his jeep out just in case? OOh, I wonder if I'll find crack under the floor covering.

Shocks affect different people in different ways. It's not about suddenly doing something because you have an excuse that can get you out of jail.

Lads the Key thing here is "cooperated to the highest degree with the gardaí" That more then anything else is probably why she's not in jail.

Yep. That's pretty much most of "the circumstances" I was referring to

dermot_sheehan

There are several exceptions to the mandatory penalty provisions of s. 27(3A) of the Misuse of Drugs Act for a first time conviction
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA10Y1999S5.html

including early co-coperation with gardai and pelading guilty,

The new Criminal Justice Bill will restrict these provisions, for example these exemptions from the mandatory penalty won't apply for a second offence.

CiaranC

event wrote:

eh, what?

the girl was transporting drugs lads.

she was aiding these 'real scumbags'

should have got jail time, no doubt about it

If we start throwing these people in jail, where are we going to get our drugs from? Use the loaf mate

griffdaddy

i hate de way dem bleedin' poshies do be getting off for everything dat dey do be doin', if dat was sumone from talla dey'd be done for dat dey wud:p

Dave!

seamus wrote:

Each case on its own tbh. Assuming that this girl had no previous convictions, I think that's a fairly reasonable sentence, given the circumstances.

I don't think it's a case of "Good background, no jail", but they would rather look on the person's ordinary character as a measure. Someone who has been arrested/charged multiple times on drugs offences, is clearly not the kind of person who "just made a really dumb mistake". Diabetes can come as a bit of a shock to people, and it seems fairly reasonable to me that it could have altered her outlook life, which is why she'd be happy to do something like this.

IMO, in cases of serious disorder or violence, it's more a case, "Ah poor pet was beaten as a child and had an alcoholic father, sure give him a suspended sentence. That guy has a wheelchair to get around, he'll be grand". Whereas if you've a good background, you get the book thrown at you because you're seen as having no excuse.

Yeh

Gyalist

Heh. I know this girl very well though I haven't seen her for over a year. She's been a diagnosed diabetic since I first met her which is about 8 years ago when she went to secondary school at Stratford College. Her father owns a few pubs around Dublin.

I have to say that I'm very surprised at this turn of events. She must have gotten involved with the wrong crowd. Hope that she's learned her lesson.

faceman

if her doing community service results in her not re-offending then it was a good decision in court.

Sleepy

2000 pills equals €20000 my arse.

"Retail" a pill costs about a fiver. Now multiply that by the number of pills and you get €10k which still isn't a fair valuation for that quantity since the more you buy, the cheaper you get them (due to less people having to get their cut). Come on, surely the cops have seen layer cake by now?

I'd say she had about 6k worth of pills on her tbh.

Boston

Sleepy wrote:

2000 pills equals €20000 my arse.

"Retail" a pill costs about a fiver. Now multiply that by the number of pills and you get €10k which still isn't a fair valuation for that quantity since the more you buy, the cheaper you get them (due to less people having to get their cut). Come on, surely the cops have seen layer cake by now?

I'd say she had about 6k worth of pills on her tbh.

In fairness the end user would probably be spending 10 euro a pill, espcially the ones she would be selling to.

stepbar

I dont think jail would have been the correct option in this case. I think the parents / UCD have a lot to answer for. College can be a daunting experience for some people. UCD prob didnt offer a lot of help to her when she was struggling. Like its even tough to get proper notes out of most lecturers. Her parents overreacted bigtime. Perhaps the "tough love" approach was the wrong one to take. It sounds like she was suffering from depression, the last thing the needed was her parents telling her to go out and get a job.

I think community service will do her the world of good.

ChRoMe

Boston wrote:

In fairness the end user would probably be spending 10 euro a pill, espcially the ones she would be selling to.

Id find it very difficult to believe that people can still sell one pill for a tenner those days are long gone.

Also to Sleepy: Why are you surprised that the cops artifically inflate the value of drugs that they confiscate? The gardai know exactly what the story is with the value of drugs. But take this offical line to make them look better.

Saying you caught somebody for 20,000 grands worth when in reality it was 2-3 which number would you prefare to report to the press?

Wertz

ChRoMe wrote:

Saying you caught somebody for 20,000 grands worth when in reality it was 2-3 which number would you prefare to report to the press?

Which is why in court, monetary value would not enter into it, it goes by weights/amount. Reporters and the media are as much to blame for inflated seizure figures as the cops are, in fairness.

No doubt that one of the mitigating factors in this case is area and social class....her cooperation is proof of that alone (if you were from a background that knew WTF, you wouldn't be "helping gardaí with their enquiries" on something like this).
That aside she is perhaps an unwitting victim, whoever sent her on the errand and whoever she was off to visit are who the law should be coming down on....but that said, at 21, she is well into adulthood, knows the craic with the illegality of what she was doing and yet went on ahead and did it. Without help like this a lot of the movements higher up in the sale/supply ladder couldn't be carried out, because you can bet your ass that the guys making the big bucks in all this wouldn't have the stuff within a stone's throw of them...

slipss

Sleepy wrote:

2000 pills equals €20000 my arse.

"Retail" a pill costs about a fiver. Now multiply that by the number of pills and you get €10k which still isn't a fair valuation for that quantity since the more you buy, the cheaper you get them (due to less people having to get their cut). Come on, surely the cops have seen layer cake by now?

I'd say she had about 6k worth of pills on her tbh.

The gardai value all drugs they find, even if it was 25 million pills, or 12 tons of cocaine, at the individual price of a minimum single street deal. They take a single street deal of ecstacy to be one pill. Their valuation of ecstacy is based on what they believe buying a single pill in a club would cost.

And 2000 ecstacy pills bought together cost an average of 2000 euro not 6000.

slipss

As for the sentence given, if it was her first offence and she co-operated fully with the gardai (i.e. rated someone out) and she plead guilty, then it seems a fair sentence. You will rarely if ever find that Judge Delahunt made a sentencing error. Shes by far one of the best judges in the country, if not the best.

Blush_01

stepbar wrote:

I dont think jail would have been the correct option in this case. I think the parents / UCD have a lot to answer for. College can be a daunting experience for some people. UCD prob didnt offer a lot of help to her when she was struggling. Like its even tough to get proper notes out of most lecturers. Her parents overreacted bigtime. Perhaps the "tough love" approach was the wrong one to take. It sounds like she was suffering from depression, the last thing the needed was her parents telling her to go out and get a job.

I think community service will do her the world of good.

Oh. My. GAWD! How dare UCD treat her like an adult and expect her to come to any of the many student advisors, the councellors, the tutors or lecturers, the welfare officer etc. if she needed help. Outrageous! And you mean to say the lecturers didn't hand write letters outlining everything to her? Shocking! The purpose of lectures (you know those big class things with the lecturer talking at the lectern for an hour) is for you to take your own notes and maybe even encourage you to think for yourself.

But it's easy to let someone blame a University for their being a scumbag, even if they are a well-disguised, trainee one. The girl is in her 20s. She's officially an adult and should be able to support herself without resorting to selling drugs. Obviously she's not. UCD didn't do that to her. Nor did it force her to start living beyond her means. SHE did that herself. So she cooperated with the Gardaí. Bully for her. A slap on the wrist after the "tough love" her mother and father showed her will definitely set her on the right path again. No longer will she crave Fendi sunglasses or a Juicy Couture bag. All is right with the world once again.

Face facts here - she broke the law and got caught. In Sparta she'd have been fcuked!

griffdaddy

Blush_01 wrote:

Oh. My. GAWD! How dare UCD treat her like an adult and expect her to come to any of the many student advisors, the councellors, the tutors or lecturers, the welfare officer etc. if she needed help. Outrageous!

I was waiting for someone from the UCD forum to make this point, couldn't agree more. When i was reading this story i could think of about 8-10 different people/organisations i could go to if i was in trouble in UCD.

NutJob

ChRoMe wrote:

The figure of 20,000 euros comes from the Gardai pricing each pill at ten euro. The article states that she was caught with 2000 pills.

Its not a small amount of pills either and to be honest Im firmly of the view that where she lives has something to do with it.

2000 X 5 = 10,000
not 20,000

But if it was me id be in jail and be praying i never drop the soap.
Its a surprise why the judge was so lenient.

NutJob

NutJob wrote:

2000 X 5 = 10,000
not 20,000

But if it was me id be in jail and be praying i never drop the soap.
Its a surprise why the judge was so lenient.

10 euro says the quote not 5...

ScumLord

The garda pricing is a ****ing joke. I've been at the recieving end of it for hash and they do go by price in the court. Mine trippled in price because aparently the Gardi pay €20 a GRAME!

NutJob

bluewolf wrote:

10 euro says the quote not 5...

Your being done mate

NutJob

NutJob wrote:

Your being done mate

You're the one who quoted it, not I

NutJob

I'm quoting 5 euro per pill sold signally as that's what i normally see them sold at not 10.

But it was just to point out that guardai over value them im sure there cheaper somewhere else.

But now im confused.

Ardent

If she was from Ballymun, she'd be in jail already.

Kind of reminds me of the Brian Murphy/Annabel case, the two lads from the affluent, leafy areas of South Dublin were acquitted and the gombeen from the country ended up behind bars.

Red Alert

that's exactly what i was thinking. sure one of the guys was let out to 'sit his exams'. i presume his class did like ours did and got totally hammered after the exams - did the judge not consider the possibility the guy might lose it again?

Boston

Ardent wrote:

If she was from Ballymun, she'd be in jail already.

Bull**** mate, she probably would have claimed to be a junkie, starting a rehab program and had two kids to support. Chances are she wouldn't have even got community service. People need to make up to the fact the system isn't just broken in one direction.

Red Alert: If you're from a working class background your ****ed wrt the legal system. Too poor for high prices barristers, too rich for the "society made me do it" line.

Tha Gopher

robinph wrote:

Surely its the €20,000 that should have been in inverted commas as that is the completely invented part of the article. What about the €34 of cannabis that they found as well, with the way that they calculate the values of drugs that must have been a microscopic amount of the drug that they found.

Indeed. And ive sometimes seen court cases in the paper "the garda stated he was arrested with a quarter ounce of cannabis resin, enough to make 250 hand rolled cigarettes"

250? Must be some feckin quality stuff if you have to spread so little into each spliff eh.

The profit she made depends on how she planned to sell them. If she planned to off 200 a time to 10 dealers, she would be lucky to make 2 grand profit. She would only make 10-12 grand if she sold them all herself (which is higher risk than just getting rid of them to 10 lads)

As for the northside chip on shoulder, im from the north and know full well people from here have been caught with loads and not been locked up, particularly if its a first offence. There just isnt the room in prison to keep everyone.

ROCKMAN

stepbar wrote:

I dont think jail would have been the correct option in this case. I think the parents / UCD have a lot to answer for. College can be a daunting experience for some people. UCD prob didnt offer a lot of help to her when she was struggling. Like its even tough to get proper notes out of most lecturers. Her parents overreacted bigtime. Perhaps the "tough love" approach was the wrong one to take. It sounds like she was suffering from depression, the last thing the needed was her parents telling her to go out and get a job.

I think community service will do her the world of good.

Don't forget the cat, That's it blame everybody but her, she's 21 An adult responsible for her action. All these excuses given in court are just that excuses and good legal play my her solicitor.

The sentence was a joke but it was probably a " reward " for co operation.

Blush_01

griffdaddy wrote:

I was waiting for someone from the UCD forum to make this point, couldn't agree more. When i was reading this story i could think of about 8-10 different people/organisations i could go to if i was in trouble in UCD.

But then again, we probably already deal drugs and don't even realise it. :rolleyes: I've heard that's what really goes on in the library. Those books? They're just an elaborate cover-up. :eek: No, really it's all about drugs. And expensive handbags. Your degree depends on it.

stepbar

Blush_01 wrote:

Oh. My. GAWD! How dare UCD treat her like an adult and expect her to come to any of the many student advisors, the councellors, the tutors or lecturers, the welfare officer etc. if she needed help. Outrageous! And you mean to say the lecturers didn't hand write letters outlining everything to her? Shocking! The purpose of lectures (you know those big class things with the lecturer talking at the lectern for an hour) is for you to take your own notes and maybe even encourage you to think for yourself.

But it's easy to let someone blame a University for their being a scumbag, even if they are a well-disguised, trainee one. The girl is in her 20s. She's officially an adult and should be able to support herself without resorting to selling drugs. Obviously she's not. UCD didn't do that to her. Nor did it force her to start living beyond her means. SHE did that herself. So she cooperated with the Gardaí. Bully for her. A slap on the wrist after the "tough love" her mother and father showed her will definitely set her on the right path again. No longer will she crave Fendi sunglasses or a Juicy Couture bag. All is right with the world once again.

Face facts here - she broke the law and got caught. In Sparta she'd have been fcuked!

You patronising bitch. Who do you think you are?

Some people find university tough. Not everyone breezes through college and comes out the other end having had it easy. Not everyone has brains to burn. She could have been depressed; you failed to take that into account. Clearly you've had no problems and thankfully I had none either. But I can understand how students can feel overwhelmed by it all.

So get off your high horse.

Mods: If you want to ban me fair enough but her attitude stinks.

Ms Martina Hanrahan, mother of the accused, told Mr Nolan that her daughter had been a "very good student" and she "had great hopes for her".

She said her daughter had wanted a year out after school but she had persuaded her to go to UCD, which Hanrahan found "unstructured" and, despite her pleas, Hanrahan had left college six weeks before she was due to sit her exams. Her daughter was also diagnosed with diabetes which came as a "total shock".

It seems to me that the girl in question was just not ready for college. If her parents had let her take a year out, things might have been different. A year more mature and wiser. Instead of listening to her, they talked at her. Parents know best :rolleyes: ...... a lot of the time they don’t. She rebelled and was eventually done for drugs.

I never said UCD was entirely to blame but they were a small part of the overall problem.

She said her daughter had wanted a year out after school but she had persuaded her to go to UCD, which Hanrahan found "unstructured"

.

As we all know the "learn everything off by heart" attitude of the L.C, probably was the problem. For some people, the transition from L.C to College is a hard one to make, when you are used of everything being spoon fed. However there is no excuse for lecturers in university not having proper notes. It’s just lazy and unprofessional. Is it any wonder students struggle? It would be like building a house with no plans. Obviously, if a student wants to do well then extra reading is needed. However you need a platform to do that from i.e. proper notes.

Anyway off topic.

I still think the parents have a lot to answer for. Don’t get me wrong, so does she, but I think a little more understanding on the part of her parents etc would have helped.

walrusgumble

that last person has got a few good points there. especially lecture notes. but look she is 21, and you made a good point about being forced to go to ucd, maybe if she went to a college outside dublin were there are smaller classes and a better community within the college she may have been better.

but as you know she cant hang on to mummy's apron all her life. what is she gonna do when she is working in a flash high pressure job (or whatever she does) where the boss is baying for blood cause you aint meeting the deadline?

the news paper comment about her luxurious life, if true (maybe journalists are stirring the sh*t) then for that issue, if she cant afford those luxuries on her own steam then she needs a good boot up the ar8e, cause when she gets into the big bad world she will have to earn her own way. hopefully she will value money then. and without getting on my high horse and proclaiming "ah that's nothing i had to do this and that for the last 4/5 years to get were i am on my own ..... bla bla,, you cant blame people for almost frothing in the mouth and feeling unsympathetic for her on that issue.

at some point she does gotta get her self together. maybe its harsh but i am sure WE ALL have been there at a certain degree. maybe you were dumped by a bf or gf or parents divorce, failed exams etc... did that make us turn to dealing, or extensive taking of drugs/ booze/ or other crazy things and then blame society for all your problems? surely not.

it is def a wake up call for the parents as in they should start listening to their daughter instead of telling her what she should do.

but look at it from the parents perspective. they were teenagers in the 1960- 1970's. how many of our parents got even as far as leaving cert never mind college/university (pre free secondary school) because their parents could not afford it or our parents were not bright enough for scholars or they had to work on their parents farm? they had to struggle tooth and nail in the crappy 1980's. they just want whats best for their kids but here they are being too pushy.

nlgbbbblth

Ardent wrote:

If she was from Ballymun, she'd be in jail already.

Kind of reminds me of the Brian Murphy/Annabel case, the two lads from the affluent, leafy areas of South Dublin were acquitted and the gombeen from the country ended up behind bars.

:rolleyes:

Explain this one then

New Ross: Seven working class dudes and one girl from tough estates and a prior reputation for being pricks kill a Swedish flower seller. I know this because I grew up there. Get even lighter sentences than the above Anabels case. No media uproar bar cursory reporting of the case. No focus whatsoever on their backgrounds.