Blood on the hands of the Irish Criminal Justice System

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

Can you point to your source that the convictions are for no insurance or dangerous driving.

My post related to convictions for non production etc. if a I get stopped tonight and am asked to produce in ten days my licence and insurance but I forget, I have both but I can be convicted of 3 separate offences 1 non production on demand licence, 2 non production in 10 days licence and 3 non production of insurance in 10 days.

Ah right, so he just had to 'forget' 7 times to rack up 22 convictions. I think your hypothetical is stretching credulity

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Ok so we'll not talk about a specific case.

So it is not alarming that a 20 yr old racks up 22 RTA convictions? Can you explain the difference between penalty points and a conviction as most people I know with driving offences never went to court and got convictions, they were dealt with through penalty points. Even with your bizarrely unlucky hypothetical case of racking up 10 convictions all in one go, you'd need to be that utterly stupid twice to make it to 22.

And how many convictions does it take to get a ban?

There is a separate DC in Dublin that only deals with road traffic cases there are in cork days in the DC that only deal with road traffic many issues under the road traffic acts only the court system can deal with. Also if a person does not accept penalty points then summons issues. I have seen many cases of people with multiple convictions in the DC for a single event road traffic incident. My only point is when we read in a paper 20 or 30 previous for road traffic offence we do not know what they are for. To take the leap that a person with a certain number of what may be minor road traffic offences, will someday commit a serious crime just does not add up.

In relation to a ban it is open to the court to impose a ban for any RTA offence and other than mandatory bans, there is no minimum mandatory once you clock up x number of convictions no matter what for, except of course if penalty points are given and the person hits 12.

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Driving from 17 at the earliest, penalty points stay on your licence for 3 years. With 22 convictions for 'boy racer' offences (a description I imagine his solicitor gave to downplay their seriousness) he should have been banned.

From your hypothetical

guy is stopped for speeding, 2-4 points
no seat belt, 4 penalty points
non production on demand licence,
non production of licence in 10 days,
non production in 10 days insurance, 5 penalty points
non display of tax.
conviction for tinted windows
loud exhaust
no NCT 5 penalty points

source

So just those ones rack up 18 points (automatic ban at 12 points) - how was he driving at the time of the road rage incident? what was the consequence of this incident for his licence?

Are you arguing that breaches of driving bans are not dealt with by a further driving ban? essentially the judge saying 'we'll try this again'

Like you I do not know what this guy has previous for, I gave an example of how a one stop could lead to multiple convictions. BTW it's not 5 points for failure to produce insurance. I am only dealing with the OP's issue that the criminal justice system failed because a guy with 22 previous which must not have led to a ban even though those offences happened in a 3 year period and he was still driving, so either very minor and or the person had not hit 12 points. Leading to the conclusion that the offences are very trival.

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Ah right, so he just had to 'forget' 7 times to rack up 22 convictions. I think your hypothetical is stretching credulity

Fact a person aged 20 with 22 previous who is not banned then those convictions are very minor or did not attract 12 points, so no no insurance no dangerous driving in fact the paper described the convictions as "boy racer" convictions sounds to me like incorrect number plates, loud exhaust etc. but you see I don't know exactly but I do know that after 22 convictions he was not banned so I can guess very minor.

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

There is a separate DC in Dublin that only deals with road traffic cases there are in cork days in the DC that only deal with road traffic many issues under the road traffic acts only the court system can deal with. Also if a person does not accept penalty points then summons issues. I have seen many cases of people with multiple convictions in the DC for a single event road traffic incident. My only point is when we read in a paper 20 or 30 previous for road traffic offence we do not know what they are for. To take the leap that a person with a certain number of what may be minor road traffic offences, will someday commit a serious crime just does not add up.

In relation to a ban it is open to the court to impose a ban for any RTA offence and other than mandatory bans, there is no minimum mandatory once you clock up x number of convictions no matter what for, except of course if penalty points are given and the person hits 12.

The hypothetical convictions you listed come with penalty points. I've added them up and it results in a ban. To avoid this you suggest an even more bizarre hypothetical where a fella just fails to produce documents 7 times, fails to pay fines or accept points and is summoned to court where he is convicted??

Grand. So you don't think it alarming that a 20 year old clocks up 22 convictions for 'boy racer' offences, and then gets probation for chasing a man down through a shopping centre car park smashing through pedestrian barriers. No ban. No jail time. Just probation with that record. Fine. We'll disagree.

Monty Burnz

ResearchWill wrote: »

Fact a person aged 20 with 22 previous who is not banned then those convictions are very minor or did not attract 12 points, so no no insurance no dangerous driving in fact the paper described the convictions as "boy racer" convictions sounds to me like incorrect number plates, loud exhaust etc. but you see I don't know exactly but I do know that after 22 convictions he was not banned so I can guess very minor.

Perhaps some of the convictions were for driving while banned?

ResearchWill

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I have as much reason to think that 'boy racer offences' refers to dangerous driving as you do to believe it relates to not producing a licence. I'm not demanding you provide evidence for your speculation, but for some reason you feel you should demand it of me?

Dangerous driving carries a ban, he was not banned. The reason I can demand it of you is that this thread is your post you have made a statement that the criminal justice system has blood on its hands because of 22 previous with no idea what the previous was. You made the statement you must back it up.

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

but you see I don't know exactly but I do know that after 22 convictions he was not banned so I can guess very minor.

We enforce bans with further bans, people can flout the law, ignore their bans, and get more chances from the fumbling mess of a judiciary

source
The court was told it was her second drink-driving incident within a few months as she was already banned for three years for an offence outside Tuam in November 2010.

Or disregard bail conditions? sure what harm

source 30/5/12

A 16-YEAR-OLD Dublin boy, who allegedly attacked an elderly man with a bottle during the course of two house burglaries within the space of 30 minutes, has been released on bail.
The teenager has been charged with two counts of burglary at the Navan Road in Cabra, in north Dublin, in the early hours of Sunday morning. He was remanded in custody by the Dublin Children's Court the following day.
Judge Ryan granted bail with several conditions.
The teenager was told that he had to obey a 10pm to 8am curfew, sign on three days a week at his local garda station and not have any contact with the burglary victims.
He was also told that he must abstain from alcohol and was remanded on bail to appear again in July. Directions from the DPP need to be obtained to determine whether his case should stay in the juvenile court or instead be sent forward to the Circuit Court.

source 7/6/12
However two days after getting bail he was charged for being intoxicated to such an extent he was a danger to himself and others, engaging in a breach of the peace and resisting arrest at East Sussex Street, in Dublin 2.

She released him saying the bail conditions remained in force and he also had to engage with drug abuse services. The judge also agreed to ban him from the D1, D2, D8 and D7 areas except at times when he has to come to court.
The boy, who has not yet entered pleas to any of the charges, was warned that he would lose his bail and stay in custody for a long period if he broke the conditions again.

ResearchWill

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Perhaps some of the convictions were for driving while banned?

The offence in the supermarket was criminal damage he was not charged with anything else a ban while driving banned would be at least two years in fact a third offence while banned would lead to jail time.

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

you have made a statement that the criminal justice system has blood on its hands because of 22 previous with no idea what the previous was. You made the statement you must back it up.

Well I made the thread and it isn't just based on this case, it is obvuious that judges make poor decisions that put society at risk. People get robbed, assaulted and murdered because judges err on the side of protecting the rights of criminals over the rights of society. They are afraid of appeals and so drop what should be attempted murder and murder charges down to manslaughter and assault causing harm.

IN RECENT weeks two High Court judges have implicitly criticised the Court of Criminal Appeal, suggesting they were inhibited from imposing the sentences they thought appropriate by its jurisprudence

source

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

We enforce bans with further bans, people can flout the law, ignore their bans, and get more chances from the fumbling mess of a judiciary

source
The court was told it was her second drink-driving incident within a few months as she was already banned for three years for an offence outside Tuam in November 2010.

Or disregard bail conditions? sure what harm

source 30/5/12

A 16-YEAR-OLD Dublin boy, who allegedly attacked an elderly man with a bottle during the course of two house burglaries within the space of 30 minutes, has been released on bail.
The teenager has been charged with two counts of burglary at the Navan Road in Cabra, in north Dublin, in the early hours of Sunday morning. He was remanded in custody by the Dublin Children's Court the following day.
Judge Ryan granted bail with several conditions.
The teenager was told that he had to obey a 10pm to 8am curfew, sign on three days a week at his local garda station and not have any contact with the burglary victims.
He was also told that he must abstain from alcohol and was remanded on bail to appear again in July. Directions from the DPP need to be obtained to determine whether his case should stay in the juvenile court or instead be sent forward to the Circuit Court.

source 7/6/12
However two days after getting bail he was charged for being intoxicated to such an extent he was a danger to himself and others, engaging in a breach of the peace and resisting arrest at East Sussex Street, in Dublin 2.

She released him saying the bail conditions remained in force and he also had to engage with drug abuse services. The judge also agreed to ban him from the D1, D2, D8 and D7 areas except at times when he has to come to court.
The boy, who has not yet entered pleas to any of the charges, was warned that he would lose his bail and stay in custody for a long period if he broke the conditions again.

1 dd ban 2nd dd ban third usually gets 6 months inside.

If you want this to be about under funding of prison and probation services and social workers I agree with you 100%. But how are previous for burglary and serious alcohol and drug abuse by a 16 year old related to minor road traffic offences and criminal damage where POA was applied.

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Well I made the thread and it isn't just based on this case, it is obvuious that judges make poor decisions that put society at risk. People get robbed, assaulted and murdered because judges err on the side of protecting the rights of criminals over the rights of society. They are afraid of appeals and so drop what should be attempted murder and murder charges down to manslaughter and assault causing harm.



source

A judge can not drop murder to manslaughter only the DPP can make that decision or a jury can make that finding. A judge on indictment makes no finding of guilt or otherwise except to refuse to put a matter to the jury if there is no evidence.

Yes judges do give people chances and the vast majority take those chances, some don't they end up in prison.

Have you every sat in a district court, or a circuit court criminal sentencing day, if not do and see what actually happens not only what is reported.

Laminations

http://www.thejournal.ie/forty-murders-committed-by-criminals-out-on-bail-123393-Apr2011

THERE HAVE BEEN 40 murders carried out in Ireland by criminals out on bail, new figures from the Central Statistics Office reveal.
The Irish Daily Mail reports today that these murders all took place during the past five years.
The figures also show that the criminals on bail also made 162 death threats and that 8,033 non-aggravated and 233 aggravated burglaries were committed by people out on bail between the start of 2006 and the end of 2010.
There were also 97 rapes and sexual offences committed by people freed by the courts during the same five years.

Now some judge deemed these people not to be a threat to society and released them back onto the streets - those murders, assaults, rapes are on the hands of those judges. We've seen the scandal recently of cardinals making terrible decisions in the past to move paedophile priests away from victims and more protecting the priests than the victims.


Just as Brady 'failed to fulfil his duty as a human being' and protect further victims, the judges in this country release violent and sexual threats back onto the streets.They really should be accountable for their mistakes

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

1 dd ban 2nd dd ban third usually gets 6 months inside.

If you want this to be about under funding of prison and probation services and social workers I agree with you 100%. But how are previous for burglary and serious alcohol and drug abuse by a 16 year old related to minor road traffic offences and criminal damage where POA was applied.

The DPP is part of the Irish Criminal Justice System and I'd include that office as having blood on their hands. Judges impose sentences they aren't comfortable with to avoid appeals. Maybe appeals courts should focus more on the rights of the victims

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

Yes judges do give people chances and the vast majority take those chances, some don't they end up in prison.

Some don't and end up creating more victims. If you have a chance to stop somebody from hurting more people and you give them a chance instead to rack up more crimes, you have enabled that criminal.

christmas2012

My opinion on the judges who released the troublesome boy as above,should have to live a week on the street where he lives,and get some sleepless nights and up for work the next day..

Getting back to the original topic,alan shatter has recently devised an early release programme for prisoners,due to overcrowding,you know what the problem is?prisons arent PROFITABLE..Well..make them profitable,by having prisoners work for free,they get no money just whatever food they get,thats it!

Overcrowding is a huge issue for the system and needs urgent addressing so judges aren't making daft rulings

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/an...l-2218900.html

Quote:
A third of prisoners who go into Mountjoy are currently released back on to streets due to chronic overcrowding

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

Have you every sat in a district court, or a circuit court criminal sentencing day, if not do and see what actually happens not only what is reported.

Why would I need to see what happens? Does the judge give them some amazing lecture that makes it very unlikely they'll reoffend before he releases them on bail (often against the wishes of the Gardai) after which they go on a crime spree because concurrent sentences are given out like candy? What happens in court that makes it a justice system and not a game of law?

"IT'S the Courts of Criminal Law. It's a game played out by two teams, and our children are the ones who lose. Justice never wins."

source

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/forty-murders-committed-by-criminals-out-on-bail-123393-Apr2011




Now some judge deemed these people not to be a threat to society and released them back onto the streets - those murders, assaults, rapes are on the hands of those judges. We've seen the scandal recently of cardinals making terrible decisions in the past to move paedophile priests away from victims and more protecting the priests than the victims.


Just as Brady 'failed to fulfil his duty as a human being' and protect further victims, the judges in this country release violent and sexual threats back onto the streets.They really should be accountable for their mistakes

A judge will refuse bail if given the relevant information, if everyone currently before the courts was refused bail we would need thousands of extra prison places. If a person is a flight risk or there is a risk of witness intimidation or committing other offences then bail can be refused but evidence of that must be put before the judge.

ResearchWill

christmas2012 wrote: »

My opinion on the judges who released the troublesome boy as above,should have to live a week on the street where he lives,and get some sleepless nights and up for work the next day..

Getting back to the original topic,alan shatter has recently devised an early release programme for prisoners,due to overcrowding,you know what the problem is?prisons arent PROFITABLE..Well..make them profitable,by having prisoners work for free,they get no money just whatever food they get,thats it!

The problem is there is only one place to lock up that boy either on remand or custody, the problem is that place is full, the judge knows that if he puts a remand in there then a custody case has to be given early release. We have 3 places for people under 16 and only one place for boys 16 to 21. It's a catch 22 for the judge lock up this guy and another gets out early either one of which might offend.

While your idea of making prisoners work is good, that has led in the US to 1 in every 100 adults in custody, huge numbers of small electrical appliances are made in US prisons at slave labour rates, same for military helmets and other military gear.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/americas/23iht-23prison.12253738.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8289

An interesting quote from the second link

". Jailing persons convicted of non-violent crimes, and long prison sentences for possession of microscopic quantities of illegal drugs. Federal law stipulates five years' imprisonment without possibility of parole for possession of 5 grams of crack or 3.5 ounces of heroin, and 10 years for possession of less than 2 ounces of rock-cocaine or crack. A sentence of 5 years for cocaine powder requires possession of 500 grams - 100 times more than the quantity of rock cocaine for the same sentence. Most of those who use cocaine powder are white, middle-class or rich people, while mostly Blacks and Latinos use rock cocaine. In Texas, a person may be sentenced for up to two years' imprisonment for possessing 4 ounces of marijuana. Here in New York, the 1973 Nelson Rockefeller anti-drug law provides for a mandatory prison sentence of 15 years to life for possession of 4 ounces of any illegal drug."

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Why would I need to see what happens? Does the judge give them some amazing lecture that makes it very unlikely they'll reoffend before he releases them on bail (often against the wishes of the Gardai) after which they go on a crime spree because concurrent sentences are given out like candy? What happens in court that makes it a justice system and not a game of law?


source

Maybe because it's better to get your information from where it actually happens, rather than second hand.

A judge does not give a lecture when bail is granted the accused is guilty of nothing at that stage, he enters and leaves the court an innocent man, he is only guilty when such a finding is made. I have never seen bail granted where the Gardai have made serious objections, in the DC.

Laminations

christmas2012 wrote: »

My opinion on the judges who released the troublesome boy as above,should have to live a week on the street where he lives,and get some sleepless nights and up for work the next day..

Getting back to the original topic,alan shatter has recently devised an early release programme for prisoners,due to overcrowding,you know what the problem is?prisons arent PROFITABLE..Well..make them profitable,by having prisoners work for free,they get no money just whatever food they get,thats it!

I don't really agree with getting them to work like slaves, but it should be a requirement of early release (or better still release on time) that they engage in education and skills programs while in prison, that they fill their days with reading and voluntary work. AFAIK they still receive dole while in prison? There dole should have to go directly to covering the costs of their incarceration. Early release is not the answer....well maybe for some very trivial crimes that should never have been allowed get to the stage of imprisonment - these could be avoided by deducting fines at source so people don't have the choice of disobeying court orders etc. Surveillance and intelligence in the prison system needs to be bulked up. All prisoners should be gps tagged so their whereabouts within the prison is known at all times - this would prevent melees and brawls - or at least make it clear who was present or involved (along with proper CCTV). Prisoners should be encouraged to inform and undercover prison guards should dress as inmates on occasion. All visits should be non-contact, or else opt for full body search after if you want face to face meeting. It is ridiculous that we have a drug and phone problem in prisons. When you cannot monitor a captive population you really are doing something wrong. While incentives should still be given for good behaviour, additional punishments need to accrue for bad behaviour and large prisons should have small adjacent court houses which quickly try inmate crimes and remove their privileges and lengthen their sentences appropriately. No weight lifting equipment should be allowed and exercise should focus on fitness rather than bulk muscle building.

There is so much room for reform in the prison system, and no need in this climate for expensive single cell super buildings. Once you have a secure double perimeter wall and a permanent facilities building, inmates can have tent-style living quarters (once there is sufficient segregation of prisoners and high guard presence and electronic surveillance.

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

A judge will refuse bail if given the relevant information, if everyone currently before the courts was refused bail we would need thousands of extra prison places. If a person is a flight risk or there is a risk of witness intimidation or committing other offences then bail can be refused but evidence of that must be put before the judge.

Given the figures of crimes committed while on bail, the judges aren't doing their duty of protecting society - maybe you don't see that as part of their duty? Maybe bail should be refused on the back of criminal record / number of previous convictions which would give an indication (to an ordinary person at least) of the defendants regard for the law?

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

Maybe because it's better to get your information from where it actually happens, rather than second hand.

A judge does not give a lecture when bail is granted the accused is guilty of nothing at that stage, he enters and leaves the court an innocent man, he is only guilty when such a finding is made. I have never seen bail granted where the Gardai have made serious objections, in the DC.

Maybe you should get some of your information second hand?

Thread on it here

and cases here here here and here

And here are Advics issues with the granting of bail in some cases

They list proposals, one of which is

We further call for amending legislation to ensure that where Gardai object to Bail for all violent offences, that this should be the judge’s sole determining criteria in deciding whether Bail should be granted.

So it obviously happens often enough


It is funny that bail can be granted on foot of good character references i.e. a positive past record, but it cannot be refused on foot of a negative past record i.e. previous criminal convictions

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Given the figures of crimes committed while on bail, the judges aren't doing their duty of protecting society - maybe you don't see that as part of their duty? Maybe bail should be refused on the back of criminal record / number of previous convictions which would give an indication (to an ordinary person at least) of the defendants regard for the law?

And where does the judge get this information, dealing with 70 cases on a day in court how does he know. He has to be told if he is he will act. But again AGS know that if too many remands are sent up to the prison then custody case will be left out. If the places are not there, you can only fit so many people in a cell, in cork prison some cells have 4 prisoners, if you have every seen one they are tiny, too many prisoners then the guards are in danger. If you want to put people in custody while awaiting hearing fine but be willing to pay for it, we need new prisons, we need more guards.

christmas2012

I don't really agree with getting them to work like slaves

What about the lives these prisoners ruined?And by making prisons profitable,they can have the money to expand and look after themselves without the paw out going to the government asking for a bigger budget they might not get - this is how we are in this predicament of overcrowding,as the prison authorities cannot afford.

Whereas if we had them on the production lines working for nothing,getting no money,we all would be far better off,they get work exp,and were safer on our streets,as the prisons have the money to keep them housed.

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Maybe you should get some of your information second hand?

Thread on it here

and cases here here here and here

And here are Advics issues with the granting of bail in some cases

They list proposals, one of which is


So it obviously happens often enough


It is funny that bail can be granted on foot of good character references i.e. a positive past record, but it cannot be refused on foot of a negative past record i.e. previous criminal convictions

In one of the links you posted it was high court bail I did say in the DC, another the judge set the terms knowing the person could not get it, another the garda reasons where not with is allowed by the constitution. Another case was a circuit court case where the conviction was over turned, if I remember they had bail for the original trial.

Laminations

ResearchWill wrote: »

And where does the judge get this information, dealing with 70 cases on a day in court how does he know. He has to be told if he is he will act. But again AGS know that if too many remands are sent up to the prison then custody case will be left out. If the places are not there, you can only fit so many people in a cell, in cork prison some cells have 4 prisoners, if you have every seen one they are tiny, too many prisoners then the guards are in danger. If you want to put people in custody while awaiting hearing fine but be willing to pay for it, we need new prisons, we need more guards.

This seems to be you agreeing that they let people out that they shouldn't. These people commit crimes and create victims that they wouldn't have had the chance to had they been properly dealt with. Yes we can all point to prison overcrowding as an underlying reason but these decisions are being made by the justice system. It is as comforting to know that dangerous people are being released to strike again because of space issues as it is to know you were stabbed in the face because the fella has a drug habit.

Maybe a small legal tax should be introduced taxing anyone making money in the criminal justice system with the revenue raised going to a prison buildings fund?

Laminations

christmas2012 wrote: »

What about the lives these prisoners ruined?And by making prisons profitable,they can have the money to expand and look after themselves without the paw out going to the government asking for a bigger budget they might not get - this is how we are in this predicament of overcrowding,as the prison authorities cannot afford.

Whereas if we had them on the production lines working for nothing,getting no money,we all would be far better off,they get work exp,and were safer on our streets,as the prisons have the money to keep them housed.

Prisons should be self-maintaining, not profitable. There'd be an ulterior motive to incarcerating people if there was money to be made in it. And no dole should be paid.

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

This seems to be you agreeing that they let people out that they shouldn't. These people commit crimes and create victims that they wouldn't have had the chance to had they been properly dealt with. Yes we can all point to prison overcrowding as an underlying reason but these decisions are being made by the justice system. It is as comforting to know that dangerous people are being released to strike again because of space issues as it is to know you were stabbed in the face because the fella has a drug habit.

Maybe a small legal tax should be introduced taxing anyone making money in the criminal justice system with the revenue raised going to a prison buildings fund?

What I am saying is that our constitution only allows remand in custody in very limited cases. If thoses cases are believed strong enough then AGS will put that evidence before a judge, if the judge believes it is strong enough bail will be refused. Bail would only be refused where there is good reason, if AGS try to refuse bail on a hunch then hundreds if not thousands of places would be needed. If we don't provide thoses places then convicted people will be left out of prison.

I will agree with the proposal re taxing the people making money in the criminal justice system, being AGS, lawyers, judges, prison officers etc., to pay for the system. As long as the Same tax is imposed on thoses working in the Health System to fund that. Also the education system. The only problem with your logic is that you would have to tax all such income at 100% and you would still be short money.

ResearchWill

Laminations wrote: »

Prisons should be self-maintaining, not profitable. There'd be an ulterior motive to incarcerating people if there was money to be made in it. And no dole should be paid.

I agree if there is no profit motive it may very well work. Dole is not legally paid in prison.