72 Previous Convictions!!!

Giacomo McGubbin

soups05 wrote: »

A hero? i bloody wish mate, not a damn thing I could do to protect my family from them. Daily I live with the shame of failure from that time. I know there was not much I could have done, but it does not help, not even a little.

IMO even worse are the ones who come out saying things like " oh it's not their fault, it's society, they never had a chance" etc etc

I should just leave it here, even typing this makes me miserable thinking back on it, but that's the thing, there is no escape from it.

i know, i know, build a bridge and get over it lol

Your a hero because in the real world, that's what hero's have to do, you are one of the few that recognise real the truth and reality of this society and then . . .you endure it.

FortySeven

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

They don't, but would you not agree that to take my example, if everyone with even a remote connection to the recent Kinahan killing spree was permanently locked up, it would make inner city Dublin at the very least a slightly safer place?

No. There would be someone along to take over instantly. Who did the kinahans replace again?

FortySeven

mynamejeff wrote: »

yes i agree your sentiments but the pertinent question is at what point do you decide that they arent going to change. 10 or 20 conviction ? 50 ? 80 ? 100 ?


Some people are just toxic and we should be protected from them and the only way to do that is isolate them from the rest .

Jail in some shape or form

Jail them in a system of rehabilitation. If they reoffend the three strike rule applies. Its the best of both worlds?

FortySeven

K.Flyer wrote: »

But those that are locked up cannot commit crime while locked up.
The crux of the problem is that prison is Not a deterrent in this country due to very lenient sentencing and the hand wringers appealling on behalf of scum.
If there was a lot more prison space and much heftier prison terms then at least those who are repeat offenders would be off the streets for much longer periods of time.

They still offend in prison. I was assaulted more often in prison than outside. It is a rewarded and fostered hierarchy. It breeds violence.

Chorcai

There is free legal aid for everyone of these 70+ cases (and that just one guy), how about a person only gets 3 per life. After that you pay for your legal bills, I bet if half these scumbags can't afford a lawyer they wouldn't be doing as much crime, oh whats that you can't afford a lawyer??? Represent yourself n see how far you get big man. Wonder if I ran for the Daíl on such things would I get in and through

Sweetemotion

soups05 wrote: »

A hero? i bloody wish mate, not a damn thing I could do to protect my family from them. Daily I live with the shame of failure from that time. I know there was not much I could have done, but it does not help, not even a little.

IMO even worse are the ones who come out saying things like " oh it's not their fault, it's society, they never had a chance" etc etc

I should just leave it here, even typing this makes me miserable thinking back on it, but that's the thing, there is no escape from it.

i know, i know, build a bridge and get over it lol

No shame, you did what you did to protect your family, you are with them now, not in prison.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Imagine being such a useless criminal. 72 convictions??

When major NY Gangster Albert Anastasia was shot dead in a barber shop in 1957 a wily Sicilian immigrant by the name of Carlo Gambino took over his Mafia family. Carlo lived to 74 and never incurred one conviction in his lifetime.

One of the most successful criminals of all time. These current thugs should study him.

Sweetemotion

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Imagine being such a useless criminal. 72 convictions??

When major NY Gangster Albert Anastasia was shot dead in a barber shop in 1957 a wily Sicilian immigrant by the name of Carlo Gambino took over his Mafia family. Carlo lived to 74 and never incurred one conviction in his lifetime.

One of the most successful criminals of all time. These current thugs should study him.

That is me awake for another hour.

Sweetemotion

Who was the mob boss that wore slippers and pj bottoms? can not think of his name.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Who was the mob boss that wore slippers and pj bottoms? can not think of his name.

Vincenzo 'The Chin' Gigante, boss of the Genovese Crime Family from 1981 to 2005.

Known as the "Oddfather" by the New York Press.

Sweetemotion

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Vincenzo 'The Chin' Gigante, boss of the Genovese Crime Family from 1981 to 2005.

Known as the "Oddfather" by the New York Press.

Thank you.

Wow 2005

DEFTLEFTHAND

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Thank you.

Wow 2005

The Genovese were traditionally the strongest of NY's 5 Mafia families. They're Lucky Luciano's family, renamed the Genovese for Vito Genovese who took over after Lucky was deported back to Sicily in 1946.

Since Gigantes death in 05 they apparently use a rotating panel for leadership. Liborio Bellomo is thought to be the man with the final say on this panel.

Chorcai

Chorcai wrote: »

There is free legal aid for everyone of these 70+ cases (and that just one guy), how about a person only gets 3 per life.

Highly unlikely.

He may have received it for the ones that involved assault or possession of a knife. But the article refers to a drink and drugs issue and if the convictions related to drinking/public order/possession of drugs/road traffic...you don't get legal aid for that category of offence.

old_aussie

SubrbanOblivion wrote: »

*Sigh*..I really hate seeing obviously bright people spreading blatent mis-information.

The 3 strikes rule does NOT mean you offend 3 times, you get life in prison. Not even remotely close.

Remember also the 3 strikes rule only applies to heavier situations, such as grand larceny (stealing more expensive things like cars) or very violent crimes. 3 strikes does not exist for smaller things like shoplifting, so no, it does not just 'clog up the jails'.

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

Firstly stop hating yourself, you'll upset yourself so much it will be detrimental to your health. Although the "obviously bright" bit I not sure about, as I don't know you.

Depends which US state you did the crime. Then you might be a remotely close.

Thousands sit in California prisons for life over crimes as trivial as stealing socks.

Maybe have a read an enlighten yourself!

Wilkerson had two prior convictions, both dating back to 1981, the shoplifting charge counted as a third strike against him. He was sentenced to 25 years to life, meaning that his first chance for a parole hearing would be in 25 years.

And given that around 80 percent of parole applications are rejected by parole boards, and governors override parole boards in about 50 percent of the instances where parole is granted, it was a near certainty that Wilkerson would never see the outside of a prison again.

The state also fined him $2,500 – restitution for the stolen socks. He works that off by putting in four to five hours a day in the prison cafeteria, for which he gets paid $20 a month, of which the state takes $11. At this rate, he will be in his nineties before he's paid the state off for that one pair of socks.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-the-shame-of-three-strikes-laws-20130327

As for the big question – does he ever wish he could go back in time and wait it out in that McDonald's for another hour, instead of 18 years in the California prison system? – Wilkerson, who has learned to laugh, laughs again.

old_aussie

old_aussie wrote: »

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

Firstly stop hating yourself, you'll upset yourself so much it will be detrimental to your health. Although the "obviously bright" bit I not sure about, as I don't know you.

Depends which US state you did the crime. Then you might be a remotely close.

Thousands sit in California prisons for life over crimes as trivial as stealing socks.

Maybe have a read an enlighten yourself!

Wilkerson had two prior convictions, both dating back to 1981, the shoplifting charge counted as a third strike against him. He was sentenced to 25 years to life, meaning that his first chance for a parole hearing would be in 25 years.

And given that around 80 percent of parole applications are rejected by parole boards, and governors override parole boards in about 50 percent of the instances where parole is granted, it was a near certainty that Wilkerson would never see the outside of a prison again.

The state also fined him $2,500 – restitution for the stolen socks. He works that off by putting in four to five hours a day in the prison cafeteria, for which he gets paid $20 a month, of which the state takes $11. At this rate, he will be in his nineties before he's paid the state off for that one pair of socks.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-the-shame-of-three-strikes-laws-20130327

As for the big question – does he ever wish he could go back in time and wait it out in that McDonald's for another hour, instead of 18 years in the California prison system? – Wilkerson, who has learned to laugh, laughs again.

The 3 strikes law is just utterly insane. At least it was modified a little in recent years.

old_aussie

Deleted User wrote: »

The 3 strikes law is just utterly insane. At least it was modified a little in recent years.

I totally agree with you, petty crime should be treated as such.

sunny2004

old_aussie wrote: »

I totally agree with you, petty crime should be treated as such.

In my opinion when "petty" crimes start to get into double figures there is clearly an issue.. or is 72 petty crimes ok and then topped off with a murder to get the state to act, and convict for 10 years ?

As I stated before, what about the VICTIMS in all of this..

Wanderer78

I'm wondering would helping people with complex issues such as mental health problems, behavioural problems, personality disorders, learning disabilities etc etc, at an early stage, be any benefit in these situations!

mynamejeff

Deleted User wrote: »

Highly unlikely.

He may have received it for the ones that involved assault or possession of a knife. But the article refers to a drink and drugs issue and if the convictions related to drinking/public order/possession of drugs/road traffic...you don't get legal aid for that category of offence.

Highly likely

After the first few he (or his solicitor ) can claim that he is danger of getting a sentence in jail. Judges will always allow free legal aid in that case or its straight to appeal courts (likely any way )

With 72 convictions he is after putting some ones kid through collage

pablo128

sunny2004 wrote: »

In my opinion when "petty" crimes start to get into double figures there is clearly an issue.. or is 72 petty crimes ok and then topped off with a murder to get the state to act, and convict for 10 years ?

As I stated before, what about the VICTIMS in all of this..

You can have 100 convictions for road traffic offences. Who is the victim in that case?

mynamejeff

pablo128 wrote: »

You can have 100 convictions for road traffic offences. Who is the victim in that case?

other road users

people who pay their tax and insurance

people who have cars up to scratch

people who behave on the road

pablo128

mynamejeff wrote: »

other road users

people who pay their tax and insurance

people who have cars up to scratch

people who behave on the road

And how do they suffer? Did you even read my previous post in this thread regarding getting 14 summonses?

mynamejeff

pablo128 wrote: »

And how do they suffer? Did you even read my previous post in this thread regarding getting 14 summonses?

ya and whats the rest of the story ?

pablo128

mynamejeff wrote: »

ya and whats the rest of the story ?

??? What rest of what story?

mynamejeff

pablo128 wrote: »

??? What rest of what story?

no tax (no tax non display of tax ) 2 summons
4 bald tyres 4 summons

thats 6 what were the other 8 summons for ?

pablo128

mynamejeff wrote: »

no tax (no tax non display of tax ) 2 summons
4 bald tyres 4 summons

thats 6 what were the other 8 summons for ?

Not having a licence, not producing a licence, not having insurance, not displaying insurance, not producing insurance, and there's 3 I can't think of as it was so long ago.

They would only have been mickey mouse summonses anyway.

Giacomo McGubbin

pablo128 wrote: »

You can have 100 convictions for road traffic offences. Who is the victim in that case?

the people you endangered on the public roads.

mynamejeff

pablo128 wrote: »

Not having a licence, not producing a licence, not having insurance, not displaying insurance, not producing insurance, and there's 3 I can't think of as it was so long ago.

They would only have been mickey mouse summonses anyway.

so it was a lot more than 4 bald tires then right ?


No insurance and no driving licence are serious matters.

aside from not bothering to pay for tax and making sure your car is in a safe state so that some one doesnt get killed because your car loses control you dont think its important to have a driving licence ?
and to produce it when asked as your ment to ? instead of wasting time and money by not bothering

pablo128

mynamejeff wrote: »

so it was a lot more than 4 bald tires then right ?


No insurance and no driving licence are serious matters.

aside from not bothering to pay for tax and making sure your car is in a safe state so that some one doesnt get killed because your car loses control you dont think its important to have a driving licence ?
and to produce it when asked as your ment to ? instead of wasting time and money by not bothering

Could you please stop making assumptions about me. I produced everything in the Garda station apart from the tax, which could have been dealt with at the roadside with a fixed charge penalty. I then back taxed the car. Imagine my surprise then when I get 14 summonses.

In court it was my word against the garda's. Luckily the judge believed me and just got me on the tax. Otherwise I'd have a heap of convictions, with me being the only victim.

pablo128

Giacomo McGubbin wrote: »

the people you endangered on the public roads.

I endangered no-one.