Gender, going to jail, male victims, etc.: the Caroline Brennan case, etc.

iptba

Although I do not follow the courts that closely, I have seen it pointed out that some women in Ireland have got light sentences for killing men.

To me, it looks like Caroline Brennan got a light sentence (5 years suspended) for killing her brother with a knife.

I think if the defendant had been a man or the dead person had been a woman, I think time it is quite likely that time would have been served.

People talk about domestic violence and that it should be taken seriously. Well, this could be said to be an example of domestic violence against a man.

deadhead13

There was the case of Patrick O'Dwyer who was sentenced to 6 years in prison for the manslaughter of his sister in 2007. Similar offences on the face of it, but dramatically different sentences.

Giselle

iptba wrote: »

Although I do not follow the courts that closely, I have seen it pointed out that some women in Ireland have got light sentences for killing men.

To me, it looks like Caroline Brennan got a light sentence (5 years suspended) for killing her brother with a knife.

I think if the defendant had been a man or the dead person had been a woman, I think time it is quite likely that time would have been served.

People talk about domestic violence and that it should be taken seriously. Well, this could be said to be an example of domestic violence against a man.

She had apparently suffered constant bullying growing up, and threats in the time immediately prior to the killing, from her brother.

She was convicted of manslaughter, not murder. The sentencing guidelines are different.

Cicero

without going into the details, I'm not quite sure that the cases above are similar....

deadhead13

Cicero wrote: »

without going into the details, I'm not quite sure that the cases above are similar....

It was an observation more than anything else. I don't know enough about either case to express an opinion either way really.

Cicero

deadhead13 wrote: »

It was an observation more than anything else. I don't know enough about either case to express an opinion either way really.

Neither do I, nor do I think anyone does...OP...if you can 'risk' posting a 3rd post, please elaborate on your rationale for referencing such a case and posting here..........

iptba

Cicero wrote: »

Neither do I, nor do I think anyone does...OP...if you can 'risk' posting a 3rd post, please elaborate on your rationale for referencing such a case and posting here..........

Lots of people complain about sentencing all the time on all sorts of issues including gender issues.

As I said, I believe gender could be a factor particularly in terms of the defendant but perhaps also in terms of the gender of the person who died.

I also think the issue of gender in sentencing is in general of interest (i.e. not just this case). A term, "chivalry justice", has been coined to describe the fact that gender can blame a part in sentencing. Men could perhaps complain about a lack of equality in this area.

As I mentioned, this issue could also be said to touch on the issue of domestic violence and whether domestic violence against men is taken seriously/dealt with in the same way that domestic violence against women is dealt with. And perhaps men should be speaking up more on the issue. Also, if a man feels threatened at home (not really the issue in this case but the heading was broader), there aren't that I know of many or any refuges for men in Ireland? I know there are a few in the UK. This can leave men in a difficult situation.

If she wasn't convicted of anything, it might be a different thing, maybe it shouldn't be discussed so much in a public forum then. But this person was convincted of manslaughter and the public can then discuss sentencing and matters relating to it, if they want.

I'm very interested in what could be called "men's issues" and looking at issues from a male perspective and the charter looks like such discussions are relevant.

I'm not sure why freedom of speech on such matters should be curtailed just because you might have a different perspective than mine. (Not sure if the "original" Cicero had anything to say on the issue of free speech?). I will keep an eye out to look for patterns in terms of threads where you question their right to exist in the GC to see if you could be said to be "picking" on this thead in an unfair manner or whether there is some unwritten aspect of the charter I'm missing.

iptba

Giselle wrote: »

She had apparently suffered constant bullying growing up, and threats in the time immediately prior to the killing, from her brother.

So does that mean bringing a knife out (something which is being discouraged) and then using it to kill somebody is seen as (almost) acceptable? (which is the signal a suspended sentence gives out)

I imagine quite a few men have been bullied in their time but that wouldn't stop them spending some time in jail if they took it out and then stabbed somebody to death.

And as I said, this is not the first case where a light sentence has been given.

Cicero

iptba wrote: »

I will keep an eye out to look for patterns in terms of threads where you question their right to exist in the GC to see if you could be said to be "picking" on this thead in an unfair manner or whether there is some unwritten aspect of the charter I'm missing.

..off you go...personally I could think of more interesting things to do with my time than read over my previous posts but if it rocks your boat, then by all means..btw, if you have a good roast chicken recipe, there's a food forum that I post in that would be delighted to hear from you...:)

...in answer to your original post, I don't think we will get anywhere talking about cases that as you say, 'you haven't followed closely' ...I would prefer to see a thread created based on fact, not heresay..in addition, comparing one case of 'manslaughter' to another , wether male or female related, without the facts, will, in my opinion, only lead up a blind alley and no-one will be any the wiser...

iptba

Cicero wrote: »

...in answer to your original post, I don't think we will get anywhere talking about cases that as you say, 'you haven't followed closely' ...I would prefer to see a thread created based on fact, not heresay..in addition, comparing one case of 'manslaughter' to another , wether male or female related, without the facts, will, in my opinion, only lead up a blind alley and no-one will be any the wiser...

Who is to say that I am going to be the only supplier of facts in the thread? Other people can have specialist knowledge and know the information already; or have their interest piqued and then start reading up on the issue.

I have read things that appear to show there is an issue with regard to different sentencing based on gender in Irish courts. And I have read a bit on "chivalry justice" based on data from other countries.

This isn't a peer-reviewed journal - one should be allowed throw out observations and thoughts even if you personally don't find them of interest, it somehow makes you uncomfortable (e.g. you don't particularly like masculist opinions expressed too much http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism ?) or you think such discussions will only lead up a blind alley. You're not an all-powerful emperor, Cicero.

K-9

iptba wrote: »

So does that mean bringing a knife out (something which is being discouraged) and then using it to kill somebody is seen as (almost) acceptable? (which is the signal a suspended sentence gives out)

I imagine quite a few men have been bullied in their time but that wouldn't stop them spending some time in jail if they took it out and then stabbed somebody to death.

And as I said, this is not the first case where a light sentence has been given.

That would be my worry in this case, it becomes acceptable and somebody with intent could use the manslaugther defence.

In her defence, there was a history of abuse, he was a violent heroin addict and she said he had given his girlfriend a beating and she went into the house. He said "you're next" and he had a mop in his hand! :eek:

If the genders were reversed, I'm not sure if a jury would be as understanding.

CDfm

K-9 wrote: »

That would be my worry in this case, it becomes acceptable and somebody with intent could use the manslaugther defence.
In her defence, there was a history of abuse, he was a violent heroin addict and she said he had given his girlfriend a beating and she went into the house. He said "you're next" and he had a mop in his hand! :eek:
If the genders were reversed, I'm not sure if a jury would be as understanding.

This is an interestining article from the Sunday Tribune
http://www.tribune.ie/news/article/2009/mar/22/lady-injustice/


Studies in the USA show that when you exclude street crime and concentrate on domestic violence fatalities then are about equally split between genders.


I thought that even if you were using reasonable force to protect yourself that you have a duty to retreat. I will never understand the logic of this case..

Raze_them_all

iptba wrote: »

Although I do not follow the courts that closely, I have seen it pointed out that some women in Ireland have got light sentences for killing men.

To me, it looks like Caroline Brennan got a light sentence (5 years suspended) for killing her brother with a knife.

I think if the defendant had been a man or the dead person had been a woman, I think time it is quite likely that time would have been served.

People talk about domestic violence and that it should be taken seriously. Well, this could be said to be an example of domestic violence against a man.

It'd annoy you further to know that her female cousin also stabbed her fella through the lung(he lived) and got away with it too.

The place they are from is an utter kip.

CDfm

Raze_them_all wrote: »

It'd annoy you further to know that her female cousin also stabbed her fella through the lung(he lived) and got away with it too.

what sentence did she get ????????

Raze_them_all

CDfm wrote: »

what sentence did she get ????????

No idea I don't follow the lives of comer people, but she didn't serve any time cos she's still walking around the dump and it was the same month as yer one topped her brother

Cicero

iptba wrote: »

You're not an all-powerful emperor, Cicero.

..and never was, funnily enough..:eek:

The DPP said that they would not appeal a non-custodial sentence...does this not show that there was something more to this case than we might have read in the newspapers...a certain evaluation of the facts of the case to conclude that for this particular instance, a custodial sentence would not be appropriate?
...we usually do not get all the facts in the reporting of such cases in the media so it's much harder to determine the rationale..

..that is why I believe comparing manslaugher sentences between males and females may not necessarily derive any results that can lead to an accusation of gener bias in sentencing, which I believe this thread is about...if studies were done on something like clear cut drink/driving convictions, and if females in general were found to be given lighter sentences, then I think it would be cause for alarm...

amacachi

Cicero wrote: »

..and never was, funnily enough..:eek:

The DPP said that they would not appeal a non-custodial sentence...does this not show that there was something more to this case than we might have read in the newspapers...a certain evaluation of the facts of the case to conclude that for this particular instance, a custodial sentence would not be appropriate?

Not really, since we're talking about an imbalance in the justice system, which that would be evidence of, not evidence against.

Cicero

amacachi wrote: »

Not really, since we're talking about an imbalance in the justice system, which that would be evidence of, not evidence against.

.........or, on reflection, thirdly indeed,.. maybe not evidence at all for either side?....in the absence of accurate figures, it's simply a recorded stated decision..with no comparative data to go on, and no similar cases to judge it against, it stands simply as a 'decision'...nothing more..

CDfm

Cicero wrote: »

..that is why I believe comparing manslaugher sentences between males and females may not necessarily derive any results that can lead to an accusation of gener bias in sentencing,

If you look at the Sunday Tribune article it does indicate a bias

By comparison, the average length of time served by females for life sentences between 2001 and 2007 stood at just 11 years. The figures can be difficult to interpret and the figure for women 'lifers' is likely to have increased over the past year as a harder line has been adopted by the Department of Justice towards violent crime.

It also cites a number of cases like the Dolores O'Neill case, Franco Sacco's shooting dead (not cited), Dr Lynn Gibbs drowning her daughter.

These seem very odd not to be classed as a trend.

Cicero

CDfm wrote: »

If you look at the Sunday Tribune article it does indicate a bias



It also cites a number of cases like the Dolores O'Neill case, Franco Sacco's shooting dead (not cited), Dr Lynn Gibbs drowning her daughter.

These seem very odd not to be classed as a trend.

...and...it also says the following:

in 2007 for instance, 37 men went to jail for killing somebody, convicted of either murder or manslaughter. Only a single female was found guilty of manslaughter.

..based on those statistics...how exactly is an arguement of gender bias supposed to be put forward...sorry guys...if I'm wrong I'm wrong, but my gut was that the original post was a troll (or at the very least a very badly put together arguement).....coupled with the personal abuse the OP has thown out at me, I couldn't care less where this thread goes....

CDfm

I think the general point is that when women are sentenced the courts are more lenient. There is also the issue that there is a limit on the prison space available cause further early release.

Also, the statistics are based on convictions where both domestic violence and other crimes together.

To have a valid comparison you would need to compare numbers charged by gender to convictions by gender.

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

Raze_them_all wrote:

It'd annoy you further to know that her female cousin also stabbed her fella through the lung(he lived) and got away with it too.

what sentence did she get ????????

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1106/1224258193993.html

A YOUNG woman who stabbed a man in his 20s in the chest during a row at a house party, partly piercing his heart, has been given 240 hours of community service.

Again I think if a man had done this, particularly if he did it to a woman, he'd almost certainly be spending time inside.

iptba

Cicero wrote: »

..and never was, funnily enough..:eek:

The DPP said that they would not appeal a non-custodial sentence...does this not show that there was something more to this case than we might have read in the newspapers.

Not necessarily. If you take the Comerford case from over a decade ago, where she went downstairs, took a knife up and stabbed him to death when he slept, the jury were given the option of murder and manslaughter but wouldn't pick either. In that case, the DPP should have taken the case again I believe but instead dropped it. The DPP could well be biased too e.g. influenced by sob stories from women.

iptba

From an article in the Sunday Business Post (3/8/2008) - anonymous female barrister:

‘‘It is my experience that men are much more likely than women to go to jail for similar offences,” she says.

iptba

Saw this on another forum (p.ie) last year:

The Law Society reported a few years ago that women get on average 1/2 the sentence a man gets for the same crime and women are twice as likely to be found innocent. Can't find a link but I am sure the Law Society have a copy of the research. So I think the title is fine.

iptba

(Apologies for all the posts but I have a little time to spare now)

When Etta Ann Urdiales was murdered in Colorado, two completely different juries convicted two different people of the crime. Both juries believed there was only one murderer. One convicted Bobbie Hogan, a woman. The other convicted Jess Jacobs, a man.

She got 10 years in prison.

He was put to death.

This case is just one example of the discrimination men face in criminal courts throughout the United States.

According to Pradeep Ramanathan, vice president of the National Coalition of Free Men (NCFM), a volunteer, non-profit organization that has explored and addressed men's issues since 1976, "All the research clearly demonstrates that gender is the most significant biasing factor in determining whether or not someone will be charged, prosecuted, indicted and sentenced, as well as determining the severity of the sentence."

And Ramanathan is right.

Department of Justice figures show that being male increases a murderer's chance of receiving a death sentence by more than 20 times. And the data repeatedly confirms that men receive higher sentences than women for the exact same crime.

See: http://www.dvmen.org/dv-66.htm for full article

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

There is also the issue that there is a limit on the prison space available cause further early release.

Perhaps there are more recent figures somewhere.

1/3 Mountjoy female inmates freed
Thursday, 20 November 2008 10:09
One third of women sent to jail in Mountjoy are being freed because the prison is overcrowded.

New figures show almost every female prisoner serving a sentence of less than 20 months has been released early.

In recent weeks Ireland's prison population has exceeded 4,000 for the first time.

AdvertisementMore inmates than ever are female and serving long sentences for serious crimes, including murder.

As a result of this pressure on the system, beds for women serving shorter sentences are no longer available.

Figures released by the Department of Justice to Sinn Féin TD Aengus Ó'Snodaigh, show that a third of women at the women's jail in Mountjoy have been released because of overcrowding.

The women are officially on temporary release, but it is unlikely they will be recommitted to the jail, which is still operating 30% over capacity despite the early releases.

CDfm

Iptba - I hate to see a gender approach to any of these issues and I think this is what you are promoting.

I think that lots of the sentences handed down to guys for DV crime etc are fair.

There are some aspects of the system that are totally wrong and some areas horribly mismanaged.

Nasty_Girl

Man kills drug addict man

http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0314/sutcliffej.html

Guilty of Manslaughter, suspended sentence.

Perhaps you get a suspended sentence if you stab a drug addict.

This guy killed his Dad and got a suspended sentence,

http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2009/0430/ireland/six-years-suspended-for-manslaughter-of-father-408911.html

So perhaps it is the gender of the victim and not the perpetrator that has the influence.


But then this evil woman got a few years in jail for manslaughter.
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/womans-sentence-increased-in-taxi-driver-stabbing-case-446312.html

Maybe some Law student will do a proper study

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

Iptba - I hate to see a gender approach to any of these issues and I think this is what you are promoting.

I do not see why I should not be allowed point out that I think there may be a gender equality issue, whatever preferences you (or other individuals) might have.

iptba

Nasty_Girl wrote: »

Maybe some Law student will do a proper study

As I mentioned before, there appears to have been a report from the Law Society on the issue a few years back if one goes by one poster to another forum. Perhaps others might know.

I would certainly welcome more research on it. (Although to be honest I have little confidence in an awful lot of gender researchers in Ireland).

I do know there have been studies in other countries:

"One study, published in Justice Quarterly in 1986, examined 181,197 felonies in California and found that, for the same crime, being male increased the chance of incarceration by 165 percent. Being black, in comparison, increased the chance of incarceration by 19 percent.

Another study, published in Crime & Delinquency in 1989, examined non-accomplice crimes and factored together the number of charges, convicted offenses, prior felony convictions, as well as the race, age, work history and family situation of the accused and found that "gender differences, favoring women, are more often found than race differences, favoring whites."

In yet another study, published in the International Journal of the Sociology of Law, researchers Mathew Zingraff and Randall Thomson found that being male increases sentence lengths more than any other discriminatory variable.

The bias applies to victims as well as the accused. When Edward Glaeser of Harvard University and Bruce Sacerdote of Dartmouth College examined 2,800 homicide cases randomly drawn from 33 urban counties by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, they found that killing a female instead of a male increased sentences by 40.6 percent. Killing a white instead of a black, in comparison, increased sentences by 26.8 percent."

CDfm

iptba wrote: »

I do not see why I should not be allowed point out that I think there may be a gender equality issue, whatever preferences you (or other individuals) might have.

Hey,I agree with you on the factual arguments.

That said, what concerns me is that it gets viewed as a gender issue and that the perpetrators get punished and that the punishments suits the crime. Punishments should be equally harsh for both.

If in the Lillis case he had gotten a suspended sentence I would have been shocked as I am shocked by this case. Its rotten justice for the victim.

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

Hey,I agree with you on the factual arguments.

That said, what concerns me is that it gets viewed as a gender issue and that the perpetrators get punished and that the punishments suits the crime. Punishments should be equally harsh for both.

If in the Lillis case he had gotten a suspended sentence I would have been shocked as I am shocked by this case. Its rotten justice for the victim.

Thanks for that. The suggestion I'm making is that one factor in discrepancies in sentencing (I'm not talking about these two cases specifically) might be gender. It looks like there is statistical evidence that it could be the case in one or more other countries (and perhaps in Ireland if that Law Society report exists).

CDfm

iptba wrote: »

Thanks for that. The suggestion I'm making is that one factor in discrepancies in sentencing (I'm not talking about these two cases specifically) might be gender. It looks like there is enough evidence that it could be the case in one or more other countries.

Yes but I don't believe that men should escape punishment because women are.

So if lack of accomadation is being used as an excuse or there are sentencing guidelines giving lenient sentences then that should be questioned.

iptba

CDfm wrote: »

Yes but I don't believe that men should escape punishment because women are.

Neither do I.

CDfm wrote: »

So if lack of accomadation is being used as an excuse or there are sentencing guidelines giving lenient sentences then that should be questioned.

I agree.

Senator Ivana Bacik on the other hand believes:

"Women are a particularly vulnerable prison population and there is a strong case for abolishing prisons for them and replacing them with small custodial units for just a small number of people who have committed crimes of violence,” Senator Bacik said, in advance of her address.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhgbcwsngbid/

Advocacy like that may mean there is not sufficient prison size for female prisoners. Also, it appears that if you're a woman, only crimes of violence should mean you should go to jail. I've no problem if people are consistent and say only certain crimes should result in jail. I have a problem with the gender of defendant being a significant factor in sentencing.

iptba

Nasty_Girl wrote: »

Man kills drug addict man

http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0314/sutcliffej.html

Guilty of Manslaughter, suspended sentence.

Perhaps you get a suspended sentence if you stab a drug addict.

Thanks for the link.

I just got around to reading some media reports on the first case (which is from 2005 – there have been a lot of men sent to jail since then).

Maybe this man should have gone to jail too but I think there are some differences.


He stabbed him once in the abdomen which is different to stabbing somebody in the heart i.e. doesn’t look like he was trying to kill him.

He “believed he had only nicked Mr Sutcliffe” and he said the man ran away http://breaking.tcm.ie/archives/2005/0215/ireland/court-hears-of-fatima-mansions-murder-accuseds-remorse-189477.html

And when the victim showed it to a woman after:

http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2005/0210/ireland/witness-not-sorry-murder-victim-was-killed-188808.html

(a woman said) "There was blood coming out of his nose. He lifted up his top and there was a tiny wound, but it wasn’t bleeding."

This all suggests that it doesn’t look like he was trying to kill him which is different from the Caroline Brennan case where she stabbed him in the heart.

Nevyn

The law is the law is the law but some times the law is an ass.

Yes men are women are treated differently under the law and when it comes to being found guilty and sentencing.

Why? cos society treats men and women differently based on a range of things.

1 that men have testosterone.
This one bites both sexes in the ass as far as I am concerned.
Men are presumed to be more aggressive there for dangerous and there for more of a threat and women are not. This is such a double edged issue, it means that while men are more of a threat it is more 'natural' for a man to lash out phyically and the boys will be boys card is often played and it means that a woman taking the same action as a man is seen as unnatural.

2 women are still seen as the default carers so that sending a woman to jail means that the people who are dependent on her care suffer, were as sending a man to jail means that a family may be down money but sure we are a welfare state. This is pretty damaging to both sexes imho.

I do think that it can often looks like that women get lighter sentences with it comes to minor offenses but also when a woman breaks the taboos she can face harsher sentences then a man in the same circumstances.

It is skewed, society is skewed and we aren't all equal in the eyes of the law.

Raze_them_all

Thaedydal wrote: »

The law is the law is the law but some times the law is an ass.

Yes men are women are treated differently under the law and when it comes to being found guilty and sentencing.

Why? cos society treats men and women differently based on a range of things.

1 that men have testosterone.
This one bites both sexes in the ass as far as I am concerned.
Men are presumed to be more aggressive there for dangerous and there for more of a threat and women are not. This is such a double edged issue, it means that while men are more of a threat it is more 'natural' for a man to lash out phyically and the boys will be boys card is often played and it means that a woman taking the same action as a man is seen as unnatural.

2 women are still seen as the default carers so that sending a woman to jail means that the people who are dependent on her care suffer, were as sending a man to jail means that a family may be down money but sure we are a welfare state. This is pretty damaging to both sexes imho.

I do think that it can often looks like that women get lighter sentences with it comes to minor offenses but also when a woman breaks the taboos she can face harsher sentences then a man in the same circumstances.

It is skewed, society is skewed and we aren't all equal in the eyes of the law.

Would bringing a knife to your brothers place then stabbing him in the heart not be considered a bit of a taboo???

Nevyn

I don't know that details of that case, crazy people get off with a lot due to be crazy no matter thier gender.

nkay1985

Thaedydal wrote: »

The law is the law is the law but some times the law is an ass.

Yes men are women are treated differently under the law and when it comes to being found guilty and sentencing.

Why? cos society treats men and women differently based on a range of things.

1 that men have testosterone.
This one bites both sexes in the ass as far as I am concerned.
Men are presumed to be more aggressive there for dangerous and there for more of a threat and women are not. This is such a double edged issue, it means that while men are more of a threat it is more 'natural' for a man to lash out phyically and the boys will be boys card is often played and it means that a woman taking the same action as a man is seen as unnatural.

2 women are still seen as the default carers so that sending a woman to jail means that the people who are dependent on her care suffer, were as sending a man to jail means that a family may be down money but sure we are a welfare state. This is pretty damaging to both sexes imho.

I do think that it can often looks like that women get lighter sentences with it comes to minor offenses but also when a woman breaks the taboos she can face harsher sentences then a man in the same circumstances.

It is skewed, society is skewed and we aren't all equal in the eyes of the law.

I think that's a very good post. But I'm just wondering what you mean by the piece highlighted in bold. You must have one or two particular examples in your mind to make you think that way so I'd just be interested to hear them so I could form my own opinion.

I don't think the sentencing issue is as simple as being gender-specific. Two men might commit the same crime. One man comes from an upstanding family with a good address. The other's family has a history of crime and are from a rough part of town. I'd feel that those two men will not get the same sentence. I think human nature and human considerations come into play when human judges are making the decision.

CDfm

but also when a woman breaks the taboos she can face harsher sentences then a man in the same circumstances.

We are not talking about taboo's here we are talking about crimes.

Have you got examples of what these taboos might be

For example, whats this reduction in sentence for motherhood.

It sounds very like Anne Bonny the pirate "pleading her belly" ( getting a death sentence reprieve for pregnancy.

The other thing is that when a woman is violent or a drug addict or what would she be doing minding kids.

Would you allow the Brennan woman mind your kids or more importantly set her or her cousin up on a blind date with your brother.

Nevyn

CDfm wrote: »

We are not talking about taboo's here we are talking about crimes.

Have you got examples of what these taboos might be

Behaving in an unlady like manner or unnaturally for a woman.
We have legally and culturally a lot of conservative hang over from Victorian times, and also crimes which women can't be charged with as women don't or can't 'do' that sort of thing, which is very wrong.

CDfm wrote: »

For example, whats this reduction in sentence for motherhood.

There is not a specific laid out reduction, it is one of the factors which judges can take into consideration when sentencing.

CDfm wrote: »

It sounds very like Anne Bonny the pirate "pleading her belly" ( getting a death sentence reprieve for pregnancy.

That happens but also in the usa women have had to give birth alone in cells and in some cases shackled to beds in the hospital wards in prisons and that's not pretty either.

CDfm wrote: »

The other thing is that when a woman is violent or a drug addict or what would she be doing minding kids.

That I don't understand either, I have seen two junkie parents with 3 kids en-tow going to get their methadone and already being drunk shoving the bugging along at 10am. Social services need a reform care orders are too hard to get and there are not enough foster parents and places for children.

CDfm wrote: »

Would you allow the Brennan woman mind your kids or more importantly set her or her cousin up on a blind date with your brother.

Would you?

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

Behaving in an unlady like manner or unnaturally for a woman.

Killing someone is very unlady like.

We have legally and culturally a lot of conservative hang over from Victorian times, and also crimes which women can't be charged with as women don't or can't 'do' that sort of thing, which is very wrong.

Is child abuse what you have in mind?

There is not a specific laid out reduction, it is one of the factors which judges can take into consideration when sentencing.

Well it probably should not be IMHO.

That happens but also in the usa women have had to give birth alone in cells and in some cases shackled to beds in the hospital wards in prisons and that's not pretty either.

This is not the USA but it is punishment and probably a deterant.

I mean you had a dude in the USA on probation getting a life sentence under the 3 strikes rule for stealing a slice of pizza.

That I don't understand either, I have seen two junkie parents with 3 kids en-tow going to get their methadone and already being drunk shoving the bugging along at 10am. Social services need a reform care orders are too hard to get and there are not enough foster parents and places for children.

Reform - ahem - when you give the social welfare arbitrary powers. Bunch of do goody goody incompetants.

Would you?

My brother probably but my son no;)

Nevyn

CDfm wrote: »

Killing someone is very unlady like.

Yes and despite there being more women then men it seems that men do more unlawful killing then women, but there is also societal that for a woman to reach such appoint they are irrational and emotional to know what they are doing.

The FBI consider women invovled with armed situations to be more of a treath then men as they will have broke more taboos and societal conditioning in order to be in that situation.

Then there is the data or huge lack there of detailing female serial killers,
this one I am dubious about, I don't think they are as rare, I do think that given the place of women as carers that they could be just better at hiding their tracks and people don't ask the right questions.

CDfm wrote: »

Is child abuse what you have in mind?

I was thinking on the lack of proper charges and sentencing re incest and rape.

CDfm wrote: »

Well it probably should not be IMHO.

I think parental status should but that it should both be presumed that either parent is the main carer due to gender.

CDfm wrote: »

This is not the USA but it is punishment and probably a deterant.

It's endangerment.

CDfm wrote: »

Reform - ahem - when you give the social welfare arbitrary powers. Bunch of do goody goody incompetants.

They are bound to investigate all reports, pain in the arse when someone uses that system purely to cause upset but there are cases where there is not enough people and resources to help children in dire need.
Like the woman who tried to hand her kids over and no one would take them and then she went and drowned herself and them, or they don't' intervene until the child is irreparably damaged.

CDfm wrote: »

My brother probably but my son no

How kind of you, poor lad has enough of a burden with you as his Dad :P

iptba

Nasty_Girl wrote: »

But then this evil woman got a few years in jail for manslaughter.
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/womans-sentence-increased-in-taxi-driver-stabbing-case-446312.html

The court found that this was a pre-mediated attack. The man she was with got murder.

Not sure this case proves much except that there are women who have got manslaughter convinctions in Ireland who have gone to jail.

Not sure why you use the term "evil". Without reading the article, readers of the GC might think she was hard-done-by.

iptba

Thaedydal wrote: »

2 women are still seen as the default carers so that sending a woman to jail means that the people who are dependent on her care suffer, were as sending a man to jail means that a family may be down money but sure we are a welfare state. This is pretty damaging to both sexes imho.

It's interesting that there is a payment called, "Prisoner's Wife's Allowance" http://www.welfare.ie/EN/OperationalGuidelines/Pages/prisonerswa.aspx

Prisoner's Wife's Allowance is a means tested payment made to women under 66 years of age whose husband is in prison and who have no dependent children. Prisoner's Wife's Allowance was closed off to new applications with effect from 2 January 1997 when One-Parent Family Payment was introduced. Prisoner's Wife's Allowance was introduced in 1974."

Here's another quote from this article:
http://www.dvmen.org/dv-66.htm

One commission recently justified giving women shorter sentences because women are often custodial parents. But the sentencing disparities persisted in the above studies that took family situations are accounted for. So even if custodial parenthood justifies a shorter sentence, courts are giving men longer sentences than women even when neither (or both) are custodial parents. Needless to say, when a father commits a crime, the courts have no trouble calling him an unfit parent and removing him from his kids.

iptba

Thaedydal wrote: »

The law is the law is the law but some times the law is an ass.

Yes men are women are treated differently under the law and when it comes to being found guilty and sentencing.

Why? cos society treats men and women differently based on a range of things..

Thaedydal wrote: »

It is skewed, society is skewed and we aren't all equal in the eyes of the law.

But aren't we told that this is the age of gender equality and government agencies and society should strive to treat everyone the same regardless of gender and that if there are for example statistics which show gender differences, that is portrayed as evidence of gender discrimination. There seems to be a lack of consistency.

iptba

Thaedydal wrote: »

I don't know that details of that case, crazy people get off with a lot due to be crazy no matter thier gender.

That may be so. But there is research evidence from abroad that gender appears to be a factor. (One person on another forum has mentioned an Irish report that found the same trend but I don't know what is talked about). It seems perfectly plausible that the same trend exists in Ireland.

iptba

nkay1985 wrote: »

I don't think the sentencing issue is as simple as being gender-specific. Two men might commit the same crime. One man comes from an upstanding family with a good address. The other's family has a history of crime and are from a rough part of town. I'd feel that those two men will not get the same sentence. I think human nature and human considerations come into play when human judges are making the decision.

I accept there could be other factors that could influence sentencing. You may have heard of multi-variate analysis, logistic regression, etc - it is not unusual for various factors to play a part. But because there may be other factors, doesn't mean that gender isn't one of them.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

Yes and despite there being more women then men it seems that men do more unlawful killing then women, but there is also societal that for a woman to reach such appoint they are irrational and emotional to know what they are doing.

The FBI consider women invovled with armed situations to be more of a treath then men as they will have broke more taboos and societal conditioning in order to be in that situation.

Then there is the data or huge lack there of detailing female serial killers,
this one I am dubious about, I don't think they are as rare, I do think that given the place of women as carers that they could be just better at hiding their tracks and people don't ask the right questions.

If jail is deterent let it be that way. Equal sentencing down the line.

In the USA there has never been a gender balance on Death Row - now I know I often post like that as I wind up.

Proportionately more men are convicted of murder than women.

But in domestic violence situations I have read that where gender neutral studies are made the ratio is almost equal but certainly no greater than 60/40.

I was thinking on the lack of proper charges and sentencing re incest and rape.

Absolutely.

I think parental status should but that it should both be presumed that either parent is the main carer due to gender.

The person commiting the crime is already a parent and it has no bearing on it.

It's endangerment.

:eek:

They are bound to investigate all reports, pain in the arse when someone uses that system purely to cause upset but there are cases where there is not enough people and resources to help children in dire need.
Like the woman who tried to hand her kids over and no one would take them and then she went and drowned herself and them, or they don't' intervene until the child is irreparably damaged.

They are about as useful as a condom machine in a convent

How kind of you, poor lad has enough of a burden with you as his Dad :P

Miow

Nevyn

iptba wrote: »

But aren't we told that this is the age of gender equality and government agencies and society should strive to treat everyone the same regardless of gender and that if there are for example statistics which show gender differences, that is portrayed as evidence of gender discrimination. There seems to be a lack of consistency.

Yup, and what got it budget slashed by 43% oh yeah the Equality Authority
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/head-of-equality-authority-resigns-over-budget-cuts-390174.html