Prominent Galway Businessman jailed for abusing granddaughter

Wompa1

A "prominent" Galway businessman who sexually abused his granddaughter and tried to bribe her family has been jailed for a year.

The 63-year-old man - who cannot be named for legal reasons - abused the girl around forty times from the age of nine to twelve.

He pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to 18 sample counts of sexual assault.

The court heard rumours of the abuse began to circulate in the community and soon after, the girl told her family about the abuse and they confronted the man.

This is bull, since when do guys that are proven guilty get his name protected!?...I don't mean for this to be an accusation or rumour thread. I just found this odd that the guy isn't named seeing as though he is going to jail! Anyone know what legal reasons could be!?

[-0-]

Link to article?

Cormac2791

Because they would know who his granddaughter is..

tiintin

he's not named to protect his victim

Starie1975

cormacharraghy wrote: »

Because they would know who his granddaughter is..

+1. He can't named, unless she comes forward herself.

biko

No need for all CAPS in title, this isn't the Sun.

http://www.galwaynews.ie/12373-prominent-galway-businessman-jailed-abusing-granddaughter

Wompa1

Sorry had copied and pasted from the article. Biko got the link. Never even sprung to my mind that would be why. It makes sense. Thanks. Hopefully those in his community that do know will stop using his business whatever that is.

Wompa1

Wompa1 wrote: »

This is bull, since when do guys that are proven guilty get his name protected!?...I don't mean for this to be an accusation or rumour thread. I just found this odd that the guy isn't named seeing as though he is going to jail! Anyone know what legal reasons could be!?

You should really have thought about your question before posting.

Dave Joyce

Kinda similar but what I can't understand and its happened many times in Galway but AFTER a trial and guilty charge why are scumbags STILL allowed to cover their faces from photographers?????

civis_liberalis

Dave Joyce wrote: »

Kinda similar but what I can't understand and its happened many times in Galway but AFTER a trial and guilty charge why are scumbags STILL allowed to cover their faces from photographers?????

There is no law against them trying to cover their faces from the press.

I'd imagine it's difficult enough to do that completely when they are cuffed anyway.

In that case they are named anyway. The new criminal court in Dublin has a separate court entrance/exit for the accused/convicted where the press have no access.

mims_lally

ok is it only me but people not think him only getting 1yr is a disgrace! he abused her for years and all he gets is 1yr in jail !!!:mad:

galwayrush

mims_lally wrote: »

ok is it only me but people not think him only getting 1yr is a disgrace! he abused her for years and all he gets is 1yr in jail !!!:mad:

I expect he will face worse when he is released, some people will obviously know who the scunbag is.

McTigs

I know galway's gotten a lot bigger over the past few decades but the city centre is still a small town.

Everyone will know who this is in no time

civis_liberalis

galwayrush wrote: »

I expect he will face worse when he is released, some people will obviously know who the scunbag is.

Doesn't excuse the leniency of a 1 year sentence.

grainnereills

people know who this guy is alright. bit of a misleading title tho. dont think he has been around for ages.

ErnieBert

I know him. He has a small retail business in the city for over 20 years but he lives in a county. Galway town I hope he gets the sh!t kicked out of him everyday in prison.

Clemon

****in perverts is all we have in ireland. If we could sell our perverts we wouldnt be in a recession

Xiney

Clemon wrote: »

If we could sell our perverts we wouldnt be in a recession

LOL


Brilliant.

Mrs OBumble

ErnieBert wrote: »

I hope he gets the sh!t kicked out of him everyday in prison.

Any that will make things better how, exactly?

The granddaughter will know that no only did he do this dreadful stuff to here, but now he's disfigured/disabled/dead (which ever is the outcome) because she told on him.

The first event 100% was not her fault - I think everyone would agree. But there will be some folks who think that the results of whatever violence he meets will be her fault. Just look at the farmer from Kerry a while back, with half the town lining up to shake his hand.

I'm absolutely not excusing the inexcusable.

But violent responses don't fix anything, or reduce anyone's chances of re-offending.

And every pervert was once someone's innocent child, whose psycho-sexual development went dreadfully wrong somewhere along the way. No matter what they've done, they're still human and have basic human rights.

inisboffin

I agree that violence doesn't fix what's done. There is the need to express some form of redress re the sentence though, which seems way off the mark, given the offence, the frequency of which it occurred, and the impact the whole thing had on the survivor.

geekychick

Just to make it clear, I don't condone violence, in or out of prison, and neither has my post anything to do with whether the person in question will or should get beaten up in prison. However:

JustMary wrote: »

The first event 100% was not her fault - I think everyone would agree. But there will be some folks who think that the results of whatever violence he meets will be her fault.

What the heck is this supposed to mean??? There will also be some folks out there who "think" that J. Gilligan and his crowd are the loveliest bunch of people you could meet, but pandering to those kind of "thinkers" by deigning to take their ignorant or plain hypocrite views into consideration at all, is actually heaping insult upon injury for the victim, and is reiterating double standards and get-out clauses for the criminals in the eyes of society. And that way, Justice is most certainly not being seen to be done, not properly in any case. In my humble opinion.

I know you probably have the welfare of the victim at heart here, maybe you are concerned that she will be affected by what the hypocrites are saying about her having "caused" her rapist's incarceration etc, etc. I would suggest that the person who has been brave enough to face her rapist and no doubt considerable family turmoil and pressures, also has the inner resource to withstand a few nasty looks or words from the ignorant villagers.

It saddens me to see this attitude abound. I believe it is the same "hear no evil, see no evil, sure as long as it is not affecting me personally, what do I care about little Tommy being made 'special friends' with the parish priest", that has absolutely zero clerical rapists behind bars at this point in time, as far as I am aware (maybe I am mistaken, though? - I wish I were.)

happyoutscan

JustMary wrote: »

No matter what they've done, they're still human and have basic human rights.

He horrifically abused his granddaughter. If you want to give him rights then fair play to your bleeding heart, I hope he gets it back tenfold the dirty b*stard.

PopeBuckfastXVI

In my opinion the sentencing for crimes of a sexual nature in this country is far to lenient. 1-3 years for 18 counts of child rape just does not seem like punishment enough, absent of other facts.

There needs to be a review of this, and not just in the case of child rape, but rape in general.

Mrs OBumble

geekychick wrote: »

What the heck is this supposed to mean??? There will also be some folks out there who "think" that J. Gilligan and his crowd are the loveliest bunch of people you could meet, but pandering to those kind of "thinkers" by deigning to take their ignorant or plain hypocrite views into consideration at all, is actually heaping insult upon injury for the victim, and is reiterating double standards and get-out clauses for the criminals in the eyes of society. And that way, Justice is most certainly not being seen to be done, not properly in any case. In my humble opinion.

I know you probably have the welfare of the victim at heart here, maybe you are concerned that she will be affected by what the hypocrites are saying about her having "caused" her rapist's incarceration etc, etc. I would suggest that the person who has been brave enough to face her rapist and no doubt considerable family turmoil and pressures, also has the inner resource to withstand a few nasty looks or words from the ignorant villagers.

It means exactly what it says. My post was very explicitly about whether the perpetrator should be on the receiving end of violence either during or after his prison sentence, NOT about the sentence.

My key message for anyone who was thinking about assaulting the grandfather is that doing so will only make things even worse, not better, for all involved.

For the record, I personally don't at all agree with the type of thinking that I referred to. But there is a reality that lots of people in this country do. For example, see reactions to the case described in this article: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1217/1224260838823.html. And I have been absolutely horrified to (more than once) hear intelligent, educated young woman say that "lots of rape victims are asking for it - if they dress like that, it's not really rape".

And I'd imagine that the victim in this case will have to withstand a lot more than a few nasty looks and comments from ignorant villagers. Her grandfather's business is unlikely to survive - the economic impact on the entire family could be quite severe in the current climate.

po0k

Folks, chill or the thread will be locked for going off-topic.

No names please, or bannage.

geekychick

Apologies, I haven't even realised how off topic I had gone, until I had a look at the OP again

Pandoras Twist

As far as I know, with incest laws, the grandaughter can't even go public with it.

dec25532

On a point of clarification, the sentence was three years. He was sentenced to one year on three counts, the sentences to run consecutively. Probably be out in two.