Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Joe Duffy Show Bill O'Brien

  • 03-03-2011 3:07pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 44


    Just heard the great news on the radio that Tina O'Brien got some of her late husband Bills stolen possessions back after making an appeal on the Joe Duffy show. The returner claimed he had 'found' the goods and arranged a drop off point to have them recovered. My question is should he have immunity against prosecution for his Good Samaritan Act if he was the thief?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    No. But he should be given credit for it when it comes to his sentence.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 44 Chapo


    He took a chance to restore the situation due to the emotional trauma caused. Would that merit a suspended sentence?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,857 ✭✭✭Reloc8


    If he was a thief then I don't see why he should have an immunity (that is to say if he took the goods intending to deprive the owner of them).

    Saying that he found them however is a long way away from saying he's a thief.

    Returning goods which were stolen will always count in the favour of the person who stole them when it comes to penalties.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 44 Chapo


    My soul search on this one is whether the good (returning) outweighs the bad (theft)? Prodigal son comes to mind.


Advertisement