Is Hannon the only one snared by legal witch hunts?

philopus109

The DPP arrogantly fought a mans application for a miscarraige of justice over a false allegation of sexual abuse. The DPP said the state did nothing wrong! Nothing wrong? There was no forensic evidence, no medical evidence, no witnesses, no admissions and wait for it, her own father was convicted of assaulting Hannon's father and the DPP and the guards accepts the testimony of a 10 year old and thats it? It a sickening disgrace but not surprising. Hannon is not the only one here I bet.

All one has to do is coach a child now in allegations of sexual abuse and point the finger at someone one is having a row with. That will stop the row and the baddie will win. Nothing has changed from the witch hunts in the middle ages. If someone said then you were a witch, then you were a witch and you burned. Because why would they say it was the then culture!
The DPP proved that when it comes to allegations, they are the witch hunters.
We need to overhaul the system of allegations before YOU are next!

McCrack

You raise valid points but I do think you are dramatising it. Miscarriages happen for a variety of reasons and the DPP is under enormous pressure as per his remit to prosecute allegations of crime on behalf of the community where bona fide allegations are made to his office.

The DPP never convicts people of crimes, juries do and I think you are forgetting this. A jury of 12 independent people listened to the evidence presented by both sides and decided amongst themselves that this individual was guilty.

Seth Brundle

philopus109 wrote: »

and wait for it, her own father was convicted of assaulting Hannon's father

is that relevant to an abuse claim?

philopus109

Of course it is the jury that convicts however juries are only full aware that charges would not have been brought by the DPP if there was, and is promulgated by the prosecution "no smoke without fire". That is not only human nature but logical too for a jury to assimilate when trying to decide. In this case, the smoke was only dust that the DPP managed to kick up in collecting so called evidence and made it look like smoke. There was clearly no serious evidence except a child's word in a family dispute.
This is a very dangerous position and challenges not only genuine victims of sexual assault (whom are also losers in this debacle) but the very fabric of our legal but mainly prosecutorial system. Who else is in prison who is innocent?

McCrack

Your making a lot of assumptions and guessing. In this instance you are not privy to the evidence but you are basing your opinions on what youre reading in the media.

The DPP and the 12 jurors were far better placed than yourself to have make a determination based on the weight of the evidence presented and I also think you are not giving juries due credit.
Juries are not thick and they can and do exercise their common sense as much as rest of us.

And the DPP doesnt collect any evidence, the Gardai do and present it to his office for his determination.

enry

It is my opinion that anyone found guilty of assaulting another in the manner originally complained of in this case should spend a serious amount of time in prison likewise a person who is found to have made false allegation of this nature should also have a similar prison sentence imposed on them ( in both cases the effects on the innocent party are life last and devastating)

Unfortunately in this case the person making the allegations was a minor at the time. However she should be held accountable to the innocent man she accused and to the state from the time she reached the age of majority until she eventually decided to tell the truth.

Johnny Utah

Absolutely disgusting the way this case was handled. She should face prison, but she won't. Yet another example of how our criminal justice system offers preferential treatment for women!

kbannon wrote: »

is that relevant to an abuse claim?

Obviously, it would provide a motive for making a false complaint.

Seth Brundle

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Obviously, it would provide a motive for making a false complaint.

You could say that Hannon abused her to avenge his father.
It has no bearing on whether she was abused or not.

philopus109

McCrack wrote: »

Your making a lot of assumptions and guessing. In this instance you are not privy to the evidence but you are basing your opinions on what youre reading in the media.

The DPP and the 12 jurors were far better placed than yourself to have make a determination based on the weight of the evidence presented and I also think you are not giving juries due credit.
Juries are not thick and they can and do exercise their common sense as much as rest of us.

The facts were a statement by the girl hand written by her and presented by the guards to the DPP who made the decision to prosecute. The same system is still in place. Nothing has changed. Other criminal trials in other crimes rely on evidence such as forensic, witnesses, admissions etc. In cases like this it is clear that none of these need apply and only word of mouth is enough to send a potentially innocent person to a life not worth mentioning. We can only work with facts but it seems nobody thinks a child would do something like this. Well they did, they do, and they will do so again. Unless something is radically changed in relation to this type of legal vacuum, our legal system will be no more further away from the witch trials of the middle ages.

Unfortunately common sense can and has been manipulated by a 10 year old girl and this case has proved it. I would say the jury who convicted him are not too happy about it either.

McCrack

OP I have absolutely no doubt that there are facts to this case that are not reported so again I reiterate that you are misconceived in your assertions. You cannot base your assumptions on what you have read in the newspapers.

There are various protections afforded to accused persons along the chain of prosecution and miscarriages in this jurisdiction are really the exception. There is no 'legal vacum' as you claim to suggest. Any and all evidence whether inculpatory or otherwise is open to the same testing in front of a Judge or jury as the case may be.

I have seen first hand criminal trials where juries have acquitted on the uncorroborated evidence of a sole witness despite there even being forensic evidence to substantiate their assertions.

It boils down to the facts and with respect OP you dont have these with regards to this particular case so really your sweeping and bland statements don't wash with me.

grumpytrousers

McCrack wrote: »

OP I have absolutely no doubt that there are facts to this case that are not reported so again I reiterate that you are misconceived in your assertions. You cannot base your assumptions on what you have read in the newspapers.

There are various protections afforded to accused persons along the chain of prosecution and miscarriages in this jurisdiction are really the exception. There is no 'legal vacum' as you claim to suggest. Any and all evidence whether inculpatory or otherwise is open to the same testing in front of a Judge or jury as the case may be.

I have seen first hand criminal trials where juries have acquitted on the uncorroborated evidence of a sole witness despite there even being forensic evidence to substantiate their assertions.

It boils down to the facts and with respect OP you dont have these with regards to this particular case so really your sweeping and bland statements don't wash with me.

McCrack, i think, with respect that you're possibly defending the system a wee bit too much in this regard. I take your points; 99.9% of the time they're watertight, but this case has blown open an apalling vista.

There's no reason why the media is cherry picking the facts here for the sake of a juicy story; the case has been heard and the conviction was handed down. The Papers would have been (possibly) free to report this assuming they did the usual anonymity thing, so there's probably good records in the media of it from when it happened, or at least there's nothing to say that such records don't exist.

Carol Coulter has a very good article on it in todays Times, and she's no sensationalist.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0428/1224245519181.html

I think the OP, whilst he might be getting a wee bit over dramatic in his language raises an interesting issue; the fact is that we're now conditioned to think that nobody would *dream* of making an accusation like this woman did if it wasn't true.

I mean, I've seen cases myself where Bloke A accuses another Chap B of assault and I've known the accuser to be lying thru his teeth. That happens, but it doesn't seem to bad 'cos, normally, there's a level of parity between them, and chancers tend to get caught out on the cross examination by a skilled barrister.

I think the rules are slightly different doing a cross on a ten year old; the defence goes too hard on the victim and there's a risk of further alienating the jury; it's a terrible thing to say, but there could well be justification of a strategy of taking the beating, rather than fighting back and getting a worse roasting on sentencing.

Tom Young

Folks, I know the adversarial system of justice is a hard thing to deal with at the best of times, but we need to remember that is the system and it works.

I am not trying to stoke the fire, but if I was for the DPP I'd have done the same.

Tom

philopus109

McCrack wrote: »

It boils down to the facts and with respect OP you dont have these with regards to this particular case so really your sweeping and bland statements don't wash with me.

There is nothing bland about being falsely accused of child molestation. Sexual assault cases are the hardest to defend but when facing a 10 year old girl, Mr Hannon's fate was sealed. The system which you are defending failed utterly and belongs to another era. From complaint to statements, questioning, files, DPP, charges, arraignment, trial and conviction Mr Hannon did not have a chance in the current climate. However the world is now a different place. Children are before the courts in this and other jurisdictions on the most serious of charges and are being convicted. They tell lies to the police, courts and perpetuate the lies to maintain their position. The current system does not reflect a new reality and some die hard opinions on the current prosecutorial system and methodology should take note. What is worse is that innocent children might be schooled to make false allegations.

Johnny Utah

"and wait for it, her own father was convicted of assaulting Hannon's father"

kbannon wrote: »

You could say that Hannon abused her to avenge his father.
It has no bearing on whether she was abused or not.

Let me explain; the girl's father is convicted of assault in court, and may have received a criminal record. This is obviously bad news from his point of view, and some people will be inclined to seek out revenge against the person who secured that conviction, ie. the victim of the assault. One way of getting revenge is to dream up a false complaint, and hide behind a child, which I suspect is what happened here.

You wouldn't believe what some people get up to. I've seen it happen in other cases where they use children to act out their criminal actions, because obviously they know that the children are free from criminal prosecution in the eyes of the law.


As for Hannon abusing the young girl in order to avenge the assault on his own father: well, firstly it's a lot more unlikely than the scenario I presented. Think about it, if there already was trouble between the families, and a conviction in place, the Guards would probably be quite familiar with the background. So, if there was any further trouble after the conviction, let's say even a minor assault in retaliation, well they would know where to look. Also, once a conviction is secured, the matter is usually brought to an end for the victim.

Moreover, the vast majority of people wouldn't even dream of carrying out the rape of a young girl in order to avenge an assault. There might be a small number of sick, twisted freaks out there that would, but not in this case.


Read between the lines, and it's quite clear what happened in this case.

---

^^ Anyway all of the above is going off-topic anyway. The fact is Mr Hannon was accused in the wrong, whatever the motivations for that false complaint were.

McCrack

Cases involving minors are held in camera (in private) so in this instance the chances of bona fide members of the press being present are slim.

Carol Coulter is an excellant and respected legal reporter but reading her article (which as always is balanced) it is clear she is basing it's content on the reported CCA judgment which I have read myself.

http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/2f6af8739574edee802575a5004d6ca3?OpenDocument

Her article and others I've read confirm my assertion that it's incorrect to blame the Gardai, DPP and 'the system' as the OP wants to do. None of us here were privy to the evidence so it's wrong to simply say the system is corrupt.
To the OP I believe you have a hidden agenda so I really take your opinions with a pinch of salt, your use of provocative and inflammatory language tells me this.

In reality our system of prosecution is very pro-defendant and some would even say the scales is tipped too far in the defendants favour. I offer no opinion on that but suffice to say I know of no other legal system in the world that is as indulgent towards defendants as our system.

You know this particular case is like a bad plane crash where 200+ people are killed. It makes headlines and puts the you know what up people but in reality how many 1,000's of plane journeys are made each week around the world without incident.

Food for thought.

grumpytrousers

1) Point taken on the in camera thing.

2) When plane crashes occur, the first thing that's done is an investigation as to what happened and what, if anything, could have been done to prevent it happening again.

Again, food for thought.

Eddie Yu

There have been three great withhunts in the history of man, first there was Salem, then there was the McCarthy witchhunts and now child sexual abuse..... have we forgotten the lessons learned from the Cleaveland and Orkney child sex abuse scandals...