"Thug who attacked dying Pole was on bail" (75 previous convictions)

SeanW

djpbarry wrote: »

Irrespective of the crime? To hell with rehabilitation, eh?

Not irrespective of the crime, and within reason, yes, damn rehabilitation for scumbags who are clearly beyond rehabilitation.

We need to realise that some people are just no good - and it's partly because we failed to recognise this that those two Polish men died brutal, senseless and needless deaths.

I am in favour of something like a "3 strikes" rule - albeit it could be more lenient to something like 20 to make sure there's no possibility of a non-scumbag being caught up in it - to basically remove incorrigable offenders from civilisation - permanently. The laws pertaining to murder MUST IMHO now be retooled so that everyone involved in a murder like this gets an automatic life sentence.

johnnyskeleton

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

That was the other guy and that was lenient.
The girls got nothing, not even a charge iirc :mad:

No, that was the guy the OP was talking about:

A 21-year-old man with 75 previous convictions was out on bail when he attacked one of two Polish mechanics who were murdered by another man with blows to the head from a screwdriver.

Sean Keogh, a father of one, was sentenced to four years in prison yesterday for kicking Pawel Kalite in the head, seconds after the Polish man had been stabbed through the skull.

1)The other guy got life, which is the maxmium setnence that ANY judge in Ireland can pass and is the mandatory sentence for murder.

2)The girls weren't even charged.

3)For the third time, the maximum sentence for section 3 assault is 5 years, of which the judge imposed 4 and a half years with the last 6 months suspended on a guilty plea.

I fail to see how any of the above is in any way a failing of a judge, in that he:
1) imposed the mandatory maximum penalty;
2) has no power to prosecute anybody; and
3) imposed 54 months out of a maximum of 60 months, which takes into account the guilty plea.

Ok, he could have imposed 5 years, but is the difference between 4.5 and 5 years the only reason for complaint in this thread? Because other than that, I can't see what else the judge could have done.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Cookie_Monster,to be fair to Mr Skeleton (The hint is in his sig ) he is arguing the points from an informed legal position.

I take it you've never seen "In the Heat of the Night" then?

AlekSmart wrote: »

He represents,it would appear,a viewpoint held by many within the judicial administration,that those of us who express a sense of misgiving over verdicts such as the Kalite/Swjaikos executions (In my opinion these men were hunted down and executed in a manner which we need to ensure is never forgotten) are simply ill-informed or reactionary in their attitude.

Complete strawman argument and you know it. Don't put words in my mouth. The law is the law. You can't ignore it. If you have specific misgivings about a certain point let's hear it. But to blame the judge for something beyond his control is very unhelpful. Plus, your emotive language does nothing to hide the fact that you are not addressing the issues.

AlekSmart wrote: »

He also,in common with many of those who inhabit the Politico/Legal zone,has little time for so called sensationalist reporting by the media,which he feels tends to incite the lower-orders into making wild accusations and recriminatory statements against the Judiciary and Courts Process.

Not lower-orders (by the by, what a vile phrase, I don't know what kind of background you come from but don't patronise people on a class basis), but people who post on boards who ignore the facts and stick to their assertions of injustice, often using the victims of crime as a political football and unable to see the rationale behind a decision through their crocodile tears. Nothing to do with class, all to do with ability to debate.

AlekSmart wrote: »

This particular case was I felt reported upon in avery factual manner by the Media with little sensationalizing or non-factual reportage.

Straw man argument again. I never criticised that report. I do however criticise those who suggest, as walshb suggests, that the judges are to blame. They are the ones being sensationalist.

AlekSmart wrote: »

However,as Mr Skeleton advises,in modern Ireland those who do feel uncomfortable at the direction our country is being pushed in are probably best being "careful" or simply saying nothing ?

Those who respect DeVore's site and the laws of Ireland should be careful stating someone did a criminal act which they were acquitted of. It's called defamation.

A Country Voice

I'm nice and calm while typing this. (just incase someone thinks I've just been robbed or beaten up and I'm over-excited).

So, Is it time to bring back the death penalty?
Seriously now, i'm not trying to provoke a response from some hippy/civil rights activist/amnesty badge wearing type.

Lets think about the facts.

Theres an awful lot of people out there who don't care about the law, The people who try very hard to enforce it, the justice system that trys very hard to deal with the consequences of their actions, and all the side issues of the health services, fire brigade, local authoritys, neighbours, local communities, schools, society at large.

There doesn't seem to be room for these people in prisons currently.
We need solutions then don't we?
Here's what I've been thinking.....
Now I don't often agree with the U.S. way of doing things, but if you get caught doing something illegal over there it has serious consequences for you.
In a lot of states, for the more minor to middle ground offences you will do hard time. By hard time I mean you will work while you are not at liberty. Your work is often for the common good. Working on roads and public projects etc.
And yes, for the serious offences you can be put to death in a lot of states.
Serious and repeated offences have the deterrent of the possibility that if you are caught you might actually die.
I would see nothing wrong with bringing in a system in this country where for murder, you actually serve a life sentence. You don't get out again full stop. For multiple or repeated serious offences, ie multiple rapes, multiple murders, multiple armed robberies you would be put to death.
As stated earlier, there are people walking around this country as free as the decent god fearing people, the only difference being that some of the people at large have actually got hundreds of criminal convictions. My limit would be 25. Once you are found guilty of your 25th criminal offence you are taken hence to the place of execution and put to death. End of story.
Any guy with half a brain would upon reaching 20-24 convictions promptly leave the country. I think it would be a great idea.
Lesser numbers of convictions could be dealt with in the "hard labour" way.
I'm sure the guys who currently go on their "holidays" for a stretch, would think again if they were going to be breaking rocks or saving turf every day for 2, 3, 4, or 5 years instead.
I know some people won't like these ideas. I suppose they're ideas that have been touted before too, but I think we're getting close to a tipping point in this country.

A Country Voice

loldog

A Country Voice wrote: »

I'm nice and calm while typing this. (just incase someone thinks I've just been robbed or beaten up and I'm over-excited).

So, Is it time to bring back the death penalty?

No. The death penalty is barbarous. No state should ever have the power to execute its citizens. It's ineffective as a deterrent anyway, just look at the US.

I'd be well in favour of convicted murderers being detained for the rest of their natural lives (i.e. life means life), but no, the State should have no right to be killing anyone.

.

djpbarry

SeanW wrote: »

The laws pertaining to murder MUST IMHO now be retooled so that everyone involved in a murder like this gets an automatic life sentence.

Is that not already the case? I was of the impression that murder carries an automatic life sentence?

djpbarry

A Country Voice wrote: »

So, Is it time to bring back the death penalty?
Seriously now, i'm not trying to provoke a response from some hippy/civil rights activist/amnesty badge wearing type.

So you’re not interested in hearing from anyone who might disagree with you?

A Country Voice wrote: »

There doesn't seem to be room for these people in prisons currently.
We need solutions then don't we?

How about building more prisons? It’s a pretty radical idea, I know.

A Country Voice wrote: »

Now I don't often agree with the U.S. way of doing things, but if you get caught doing something illegal over there it has serious consequences for you.

Indeed. But as I said already, American society is one of the most violent in the world, so something is quite clearly not working.

A Country Voice wrote: »

Serious and repeated offences have the deterrent of the possibility that if you are caught you might actually die.

And yet violent crime is rife in the US – capital punishment doesn’t seem to be much of a deterrent, does it?

A Country Voice wrote: »

Once you are found guilty of your 25th criminal offence you are taken hence to the place of execution and put to death. End of story.

So someone can be put to death for not paying 25 parking tickets (or some other minor indiscretion)?

A Country Voice wrote: »

Any guy with half a brain would upon reaching 20-24 convictions promptly leave the country.

Suppose every other country in Europe adopts a similar approach? We all export our problem citizens to one another? That’s not really dealing with the problem in a meaningful manner, is it?

Nijmegen

I'd be in favour of the death penalty, if it worked.

Sadly, it does not.

I'd rather these people be given punishment that lasts a lifetime, not 5 years. I want that punishment to be harsh, and I want all crimes to be punished, no matter how many tent city's we need.

I believe that in doing so, one can help bridge the gap between law and justice. In this case, legally there was a victory, but justice was a third victim.

A Country Voice

djpbarry wrote: »

So you’re not interested in hearing from anyone who might disagree with you?
How about building more prisons? It’s a pretty radical idea, I know.
Indeed. But as I said already, American society is one of the most violent in the world, so something is quite clearly not working.
And yet violent crime is rife in the US – capital punishment doesn’t seem to be much of a deterrent, does it?
So someone can be put to death for not paying 25 parking tickets (or some other minor indiscretion)?
Suppose every other country in Europe adopts a similar approach? We all export our problem citizens to one another? That’s not really dealing with the problem in a meaningful manner, is it?

Hi djpbarry, Firstly, I suppose when I said I didn't want to provoke a response, I probably didn't phrase that very well. What I meant was an over the top emotional response from someone who isn't interested in the practicalities of dealing with the problems in the criminal justice system if it conflicts with some principle or other that they have. I'm quite happy to calmly debate the matter with anyone who doesn't agree with my opinions.

In relation to building more prisons, I wonder where do we draw the line at when it comes to building what are costly hotels in effect for people who work and pay taxes to fund the lifestyle of the people who don't work and pay taxes and rob or injure the people that do. I like the "work camp" idea mentioned by another poster. No luxuries there I'd say in a -14 frost like we had last winter. In essence crime shouldn't pay. There should be a deterrent. I feel that hard work and lack of luxury might constitute a deterrent for a lot of the criminals that we need to deal with.
In relation to copying exactly what the americans do, I wouldn't.
My idea would be that we pick the best parts of their system that actually work and try them out here. If it doesn't work we can always change to something else.
Maybe the U.S. was a bad example. Other countries that have the death penalty like Singapore are virtually crime free. I've been there, and I've never felt as safe anywhere, never seen such a law abiding population, even down to minor things like littering!!!
I did mention my 25 conviction rule being for serious crimes. Criminal offences, not civil offences. I think I mentioned multiple murders, multiple rapes, and multiple armed robberies as examples. I'm not saying what should or could be on the list, I'm not a legal expert by any means. The list would have to be teased out. I wouldn't see parking infringements being on the list though.
In relation to "exporting" our "problem" to some other E.U. country. We already have open borders with the rest of the E.U.
A lot of our more famous gangsters are living it up in spain, the netherlands and elsewhere. I have also heard of some british criminals setting up residence here, (in particular sex offenders), which means the criminals travel already. We wouldn't be exporting a problem, its up to each citizen to behave. If they don't they must face the consequences or else flee. Its up to them. They have a choice. Thats the main thing, choice.
If you rob a bank, you choose to rob it and break the law, nobody forced you. Nobody robs a bank to buy food, or pay a mortgage. If you choose to break the law there should be serious consequences.

Thanks for replying
I do like a debate.
A Country Voice

donaghs

djpbarry wrote: »

Is that not already the case? I was of the impression that murder carries an automatic life sentence?

It think he means something closer to a real life sentence (i.e. spending your life in jail beacuse you deliberately set out to kill someone). Not playing semantics with legal definitions.

For various reasons not all murderers are actually convicted of murder. In the case of the Polish guys, I think most people would agree that those who attacked them the second time were involved in a murder.

The courts may say one thing, but your own eyes and ears can tell a different story.

And those actually convicted of murder typically serve around 12 years. Which is a long way from what a "life sentence" would appear to mean?

bigbadbear

I would probably be slightly in favour of the death penalty myself. However anyone who believes it's a deterrent is sadly mistaken. Prison to certain people is not a deterrent, ever. It doesn't even matter whether they'll be in solitary for a year. They will still commit crime. The cost of €100,000 a year to keep a criminal locked up is a good incentive to re-introduce the death penalty. If you are clearly never going to reform your ways and will always be a danger to society then a nice painless death would be great for these people. I think it should be debated as there are clear advantages and disadvantages. One disadvantage might be that if you knew you were going to be executed if you were caught for something you did then you would probably do ANYTHING to get away. I certainly wouldn't like to be near one of these people!

Now, for the people who believe in inflicting great pain or discomfort upon our criminals please consider the following: If someone who is already a violent criminal and goes to jail and is subjected to bad conditions like overcrowding/ painful labour/etc don't you think they will come out of prison more sour against society and maybe more psychotic. I do think they should have to do some sort of work but only for the monetary gain for the state.

Can somebody tell me why the Keogh had all his sentences running concurrently and why he had 2 years suspended? Why do they suspend sentences for these repeat offenders (apart from guilty pleas)

Also, I am a believer that getting out of prison early 'on good behaviour' is ridiculous. It should be that you are kept longer in prison if you don't behave.

donaghs

I'm generally against the death penalty. But it has one clear deterrant value in that it can prevent multiple murders. Here's a good example:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2000/1205/roscommon.html

Nijmegen

bigbadbear wrote: »

I would probably be slightly in favour of the death penalty myself. However anyone who believes it's a deterrent is sadly mistaken. Prison to certain people is not a deterrent, ever. It doesn't even matter whether they'll be in solitary for a year. They will still commit crime. The cost of €100,000 a year to keep a criminal locked up is a good incentive to re-introduce the death penalty.

I disagree with this logic, given that one can reduce the cost of holding prisoners substantially from this level.

My biggest problem with the death penalty is that it does take the lives of people are, it is later discovered, innocent. I believe the last woman to be hung in Britain turned out to have been innocent. What if they still had hanging at the time of the Guildford and Manchester bombings? Etc.

johnnyskeleton

A Country Voice wrote: »

In relation to building more prisons, I wonder where do we draw the line at when it comes to building what are costly hotels in effect for people who work and pay taxes to fund the lifestyle of the people who don't work and pay taxes and rob or injure the people that do.

Funny you should mention hotels as there are a number of useless hotels going into NAMA.

Tea drinker

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Funny you should mention hotels as there are a number of useless hotels going into NAMA.

Very true, and this is what happens if we are not vigilant with our politicians. But that's a whole other thread ;-)
IMHO this young chap should have got life too for his part in the assault leading to death.
We need to carefully balance the rights of offenders to have a try again at getting it right in society, with the rights of their potential or even likely future victims.
To have serial offenders arbitrarily released to commit further offences is tantamount to an unprovoked attack on his next victim, with the legal system as an accomplice.
The only way to avoid this is harsh sentences. These may not be as expensive to impose when you consider the purely monetary costs of having scum on the streets. Things like Garda resources, court time and costs, insurance costs, personal injury claims, dole etc. Add in the human cost and I'm sure the benefit to society wins it out. Removing troublemaking elements from society will have apositive and stabilising effect for communities and could help keep troubled youngsters from being involved with criminals.

caseyann

But have to take into account he is only a young lad,and he indeed i would say was not intending to murder anyone.

AlekSmart

But have to take into account he is only a young lad,and he indeed i would say was not intending to murder anyone.

Caseyann,I can appreciate your desire to see a positive element in all of this sad spectacle,however at 21 years of age and with some serious violence related offences under his belt,this was no ordinary "young-lad" out for a bit of harmless craic.

Yesterday, the Central Criminal Court heard that Keogh had 75 previous convictions.

Det Gda William Ryan said that on May 26 last year Keogh was sentenced to five years for two counts of endangerment.

He also received a five-year sentence for criminal damage, three years for the unauthorised taking of a vehicle and six months for driving without insurance,with his driving without a licence being taken into consideration.

He was banned from driving for seven years for dangerous driving. All sentences were concurrent, with the last two years suspended.

Det Gda Ryan explained that Keogh got bail on these charges on August 30, 2007 and was out of prison when he kicked a dying Pawel Kalite in the head.

One really does have to underline the views of Justice McKechnie and particularly the final sentance....

Mr Justice Liam McKechnie said Keogh and others accompanied a screaming David Curran to the house where the two Poles lived and that Keogh knew Curran had a screwdriver.

The judge noted that after Keogh had seen David Curran stab Pawel Kalite, he delivered "a vicious kick" to the head.

"It showed a deep and sickening sense of personality to which society should not be exposed. On any level, it was pure thuggery.

"If he's capable of doing this sort of thing,what else is he capable of doing?"

I cannot accept that watching an associate stick a screwdriver through another man`s skull and then kicking that victim in the head can demonstrate any intent other than to deprive that victim of his senses,and most likely life itself,as happened here.

Liam Byrne

caseyann wrote: »

But have to take into account he is only a young lad,and he indeed i would say was not intending to murder anyone.

Did you ask him ?

Because ramming a screwdriver through the side of someone's head would certainly seem to contradict that statement.

As a matter of interest, what would you think he was "intending" ?

And with 75 previous convictions, the "out-of-character, one-off madness" cannot be applied (regardless of a side-debate of whether it ever should).

irishh_bob

caseyann wrote: »

But have to take into account he is only a young lad,and he indeed i would say was not intending to murder anyone.

most idiotic wooly liberal post i think ive ever read on boards

Laminations

Johnnyskeleton can I ask you if you think the sentence was fitting (not in a legal sense i.e. It was almost the max allowed) but does 4.5 years fit the crime? And although the judge may be limited by maximum sentences here, how do you explain the doling out of concurrent sentences or the fact that some judge, on this scums 75th conviction, thought it appropriate to let this guy out on bail? Bail is a sign of judgement that the offender is not a danger to society. The amount of crimes committed on bail shows very poor judgement from our judiciary, a judiciary that are accountable to no one. At least we can and will fire the minister come next election

FTA69

A Country Voice wrote: »

In relation to building more prisons, I wonder where do we draw the line at when it comes to building what are costly hotels in effect

Hotels? I stayed in a hotel once and unlike Mountjoy I wasn't put into a vermin-invested, 2-person room with a floor-mattress for a bed and 4 heroin addicts as room mates with one bucket between us to sh*t and p*ss in.

Prisons in Ireland are some of the most horrible in Europe, way worse in fact although perhaps some of the ones in Spain would give them a run for their money. Usually the people banging on about "holiday camps" have never been to a prison, nor do they know anyone who has been in one.

Nijmegen

FTA69 wrote: »

Hotels? I stayed in a hotel once and unlike Mountjoy I wasn't put into a vermin-invested, 2-person room with a floor-mattress for a bed and 4 heroin addicts as room mates with one bucket between us to sh*t and p*ss in.

Prisons in Ireland are some of the most horrible in Europe, way worse in fact although perhaps some of the ones in Spain would give them a run for their money. Usually the people banging on about "holiday camps" have never been to a prison, nor do they know anyone who has been in one.

If they have a rat or mouse problem, I'd suggest releasing snakes into the building.

loldog

caseyann wrote: »

But have to take into account he is only a young lad,and he indeed i would say was not intending to murder anyone.

You might think differently if you had to meet him in your neighbourhood every day.

.

Laminations

FTA69 wrote: »

Hotels? I stayed in a hotel once and unlike Mountjoy I wasn't put into a vermin-invested, 2-person room with a floor-mattress for a bed and 4 heroin addicts as room mates with one bucket between us to sh*t and p*ss in.

Prisons in Ireland are some of the most horrible in Europe, way worse in fact although perhaps some of the ones in Spain would give them a run for their money. Usually the people banging on about "holiday camps" have never been to a prison, nor do they know anyone who has been in one.

I wouldn't knowingly check into a rat infested hell hole of a hotel. The same way I don't commit crime, knowing the consequences (in addition to my upbringing). If you end up in prison it is your own fault, or are you suggesting they are not responsible for their behaviour with no knowledge of right and wrong? Be very careful because if that's what you are suggesting that makes them even more of a danger to society. We have to give prisoners some amount of dignity in prison, this does not so much relate to conditions but to the opportunities available to them behind bars to rehabilitate themselves

AlekSmart

You might think differently if you had to meet him in your neighbourhood every day.

Loldog does raise a pertinent issue here.

It would appear that this little grouping were well known in the area and could be relied upon to be at the forefront of many other incidents.

On the few occassions that I visited the Chipper there was always a presence of surly young acting the twat outside.

It would be a very rare to be able to go into the shop without a snide comment or some other attempt to provoke a reaction.

So yes,Loldog might just have a point here.

FTA69

Laminations wrote: »

I wouldn't knowingly check into a rat infested hell hole of a hotel. The same way I don't commit crime, knowing the consequences (in addition to my upbringing). If you end up in prison it is your own fault, or are you suggesting they are not responsible for their behaviour with no knowledge of right and wrong? Be very careful because if that's what you are suggesting that makes them even more of a danger to society. We have to give prisoners some amount of dignity in prison, this does not so much relate to conditions but to the opportunities available to them behind bars to rehabilitate themselves

I never said that people who end up in jail don't deserve to be there, most of the time they do. (Although why they ended up like that is a different question which also needs to be addressed.) How does massive overcrowding and a lack of facilities with sh*t conditions going to lead to rehabilitation?

Ardent

walshb wrote: »

More disturbing is that the filthy scum girls got away scott free.

BTW, it's the ****ing judges that need locking up, handing down
these disgusting lenient sentences.

You said it. Them and the DPP - the incompetents should be replaced.

Laminations

FTA69 wrote: »

I never said that people who end up in jail don't deserve to be there, most of the time they do. (Although why they ended up like that is a different question which also needs to be addressed.) How does massive overcrowding and a lack of facilities with sh*t conditions going to lead to rehabilitation?

It doesn't, the overcrowding could be dealt with without the need for state of the art facilities. Simple but secure locations would do, whether that's a tent village (ala maricopa county) or a sparse building. Overcrowding would not be such an issue if people did not demand the highest standards of buildings. What conditions are you referring to? If it's dirt and grime, the inmates should be on cleaning rotas, if it's slopping out (something I don't agree with) they can still do this more hygenically then now, as prisoners currently spill their buckets on landings etc in protest- ironically protesting the mess they got themselves into. They should be mainly responsible for the prisons upkeep and tidyness, a responsibility that would aid rehabilitation. They should also have courses with which to better themselves. So it's simple, if an inmate does not engage with their responsibilities in prison (e.g. Cleaning, cooking, learning and education) then they are in no way demonstrating that they are fit for release.you give them the opportunity to better themselves but they need to take an active role.

Edit: quite frankly the fact that 2put of 3 prisoners have/had mobile phones and the easy access to drugs in prison would be conditions I'd be more worried about

FTA69

What conditions are you referring to?

Overcrowding is the single biggest detrimental condition, and clearly one which is preventing any sort of rehabilitative atmosphere. All it does is breed more drug abuse and more violence.

if it's slopping out (something I don't agree with) they can still do this more hygenically then now, as prisoners currently spill their buckets on landings etc in protest- ironically protesting the mess they got themselves into.

Putting people into a cramped cell with a bucket of sh*t is inhumane and isn't tolerated in most other European countries. Mountjoy should be knocked and new, modern prisons with adequate facilities should be constructed i.e along the lines of Dóchas.

They should also have courses with which to better themselves.

It's a bit difficult to have educational and training facilities when there is so little space people sleep in the showers.

Nijmegen

FTA69 wrote: »

Overcrowding is the single biggest detrimental condition, and clearly one which is preventing any sort of rehabilitative atmosphere. All it does is breed more drug abuse and more violence.



Putting people into a cramped cell with a bucket of sh*t is inhumane and isn't tolerated in most other European countries. Mountjoy should be knocked and new, modern prisons with adequate facilities should be constructed i.e along the lines of Dóchas.



It's a bit difficult to have educational and training facilities when there is so little space people sleep in the showers.

Rather than spending millions we don't have to house our prisoners, why not go for the big field, two fences, guard towers and tents approach?

It would solve overcrowding.

Laminations

Nijmegen wrote: »

Rather than spending millions we don't have to house our prisoners, why not go for the big field, two fences, guard towers and tents approach?

It would solve overcrowding.

Exactly, the overcrowding issue (which I agree with FTA69 is the single biggest detrimental condition) could be dealt with cheaply, but you'll find that those opposed to overcrowding will likely be opposed to sleeping/living quarters that do not have all the mod/cons.

A facilities building could have recreational activities (gym, tv room, games console, etc) for those on consistent good behaviour (rather than early release) and an educational/skills building could help with rehabilitation and should be where prisoners spend most of their day (9-5) rather than in their cells 23 hours a day. These two buildings would have to have investment but where the prisoners sleep should be sparse (aside from books) and its upkeep should completely be the responsibility of the prisoners