Man avoids jail for sexually assaulting two nieces

davet82

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/car-dealer-avoids-jail-for-sexually-assaulting-two-nieces-3249984.html

He ordered that Farrington's name can be reported in the media after hearing the victims have no problem with this.

"This will be a punishment in itself," the judge added. "He will be rightfully held in public odium for what he has done."

Since when was it the medias job to administrate justice?

This really pisses me off, is being named and shamed not a consequence of being a dirty pervert!

The guy walks free and sends out a message to other dirtbags they can get away with it and a message to victims that there is no point going to the courts you won't get justice!

:mad:

neemish

How can you "accidentally" abuse someone three times? A once off is unacceptable, and you'd still wonder about it being accidental but THREE times? The last line of the article reads "a family has been destroyed".

Yes, a family has been destroyed, by this man abusing his nieces. And he seems to have walked away scott free.

Praetorian Saighdiuir

Scumbag....vigilante justice will sort that out.

tigger123

Heard this on the radio this morning and was sickened by it. Sentencing guidelines really need to be examined in relation to sexual assaults in this country.

Also heard his wife was making statements on his behalf saying what a wonderful person, husband and father he is. The mind boggles, it really does.

It says he has four kids himself.

Boombastic

"People on one side believe a punishment should be imposed and people on the other believe I shouldn't be as severe," he continued..............

Farrington was not added to the sex offender's register as the victims were over 18 and a suspended sentence was given"



My only conclusion is he sucked off the judge

bbam

Another sad example that our Judges are becoming more and more sepreated from society and real life as time goes on they seem to have less and less perspective on justice and fairness.. How insulting for these poor girls after they were brave enough to come forward..

davet82

If you sexually assault somebody, you should go to prison, no ifs or buts or bullshít, it almost gives first offenders a free pass to try their luck!

g'em

Saw that story this morning. It's so horrible and disheartening and I feel for the nieces so much. In refusing to administer a custodial sentence the judge has at best dismissed the actions of a man who abused a family's trust to abuse his own family members, he has implied that these actions are not worthy of time in prison and he has encourage vigilantism (the implication being that by naming him, natural justice will take its course).

Our judicial representatives really do live on another planet.

Rasheed

tigger123 wrote: »

Also heard his wife was making statements on his behalf saying what a wonderful person, husband and father he is. The mind boggles, it really does.

Next we'll have the priest saying he's a mighty man for going to mass. Sick Fcuker.

cassiedoll

no custodial sentence ....and to top it off his name isnt even put on the sex offenders register because they were over 18.

If i remember correctly the bloke Lyons who was in the paper a while back, his name was added to the register and his victim was over the age of 18.

Why does Farrington get a pass on this aswell.

"the incidents of abuse lasted a short amount of time and were lower down the scale compared with other cases that come before the court" - from the Kildarenationalist.ie

just makes me sick

padd b1975

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/car-dealer-avoids-jail-for-sexually-assaulting-two-nieces-3249984.html



Since when was it the medias job to administrate justice?

Says the guy who starts a thread on a social media website to facilitate exactly what the judge suggested.

super_furry

This is the same judge who sent a man to jail for not paying tax on garlic. Should be on trial himself.

He wasn't even placed on the sex offenders list.

davet82

padd b1975 wrote: »

Says the guy who starts a thread on a social media website to facilitate exactly what the judge suggested.

there is a huge difference between consquence and justice

Dartz

super_furry wrote: »

This is the same judge who sent a man to jail for not paying tax on garlic. Should be on trial himself.

He wasn't even placed on the sex offenders list.

Vigilante justice is free.

But people not paying taxes? That costs the state money if they all start getting the idea into their heads that they can get away with it.

tigger123

padd b1975 wrote: »

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/car-dealer-avoids-jail-for-sexually-assaulting-two-nieces-3249984.html



Since when was it the medias job to administrate justice?

Says the guy who starts a thread on a social media website to facilitate exactly what the judge suggested.

You obviously then feel this thread is an appropriate response to the crime he was found guilty of?

MagicMarker

He said that all the incidents of abuse lasted a short amount of time and were lower down the scale compared with other cases that come before the court.

{.........}

He came into the room, pulled down her underwear and performed oral sex on her as the victim lay there shocked and crying. When he stopped he said sorry and told her: "I must have been sleepwalking." The next day he begged her not to tell anyone.

This ****ing judge should be given a jail sentence, fucking cunt.

tigger123

super_furry wrote: »

This is the same judge who sent a man to jail for not paying tax on garlic. Should be on trial himself.

He wasn't even placed on the sex offenders list.

Euch.

CrazyRabbit

I see that once again "drinking heavily at the time" was a factor. That phrase is used almost like an excuse, and far too often for my liking.

padd b1975

tigger123 wrote: »

You obviously then feel this thread is an appropriate response to the crime he was found guilty of?

Obviously??
How did you come to that conclusion?
I feel it is neither appropriate or inappropriate.

However, I do feel that a thread here and other media comment on the case is inevitable.

Perhaps when passing comment, the judge hoped that the abuser would read some of the comments about himself and it may reinforce the wrongness of what he did to his victims and his family.

jaja321

I really feel people should write to their local TDs, opposition included, about the sentencing for sexual assault in Ireland. It’s an absolute joke in this country and its hard enough for people to come forward without being made to feel you won’t even be taken seriously. What kind of message does this non-sentence give out?! I wrote to numerous TDs about this issue, when the ‘sentence’ for Anthony Lyons was handed down – and while TDs can’t or shouldn’t be able to influence specific cases, they can raise the issue of sentencing as a whole… Apparently there is a review of the penal policy, including sentencing happening shortly and the Law Reform Commission is also reviewing the law on mandatory sentences. If people keep the pressure on maybe something will be done about it.

padd b1975

davet82 wrote: »

there is a huge difference between consquence and justice.

O yeah I agree totally.

I also think that the judge got one thing right when passing sentence (3 years suspended), he allowed the abusers name to be reported in the media, more of this please. except when it is a parent who abuses their children.

What the f*ck is wrong with the judges
Seriously

I do hope there is some vigilante justice here since that seems to be what they are pushing for :mad:

Duggy747

Judges like him should be ashamed of themselves.

Sentences like this are disheartening to victims of abuse and to the Gardaì who compile the cases only for a numpty not to deem it serious enough that it warrants a serious sentence.

Name and shame should accompany the sentence, not BE the sentence.

He came into the room, pulled down her underwear and performed oral sex on her as the victim lay there shocked and crying. When he stopped he said sorry and told her: "I must have been sleepwalking." The next day he begged her not to tell anyone.

You have got to be fùcking joking.

HeyThereDeliah

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it ? I'm not sure i disagree with the sentence.

OP your thread title is slightly misleading again.

SEPT 23 1989

Poor old Garlic man he should have fcuked up peoples lives rather than the finances of a failed corrupt state

charlemont

Of course he gets off, Says a lot about the mindset of some judges here, Sure in his younger days training as a solicitor sex abuse/rape was swept under the carpet. We need new judges new police force etc, What we have is tainted by sleaze and hypocrisy.

Justice my ass..

tigger123

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it ? I'm not sure i disagree with the sentence.

OP your thread title is slightly misleading again.

Do you think the sentence is proportionate?

HeyThereDeliah

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you think the sentence is proportionate?

I think the sentence is right in this case.

bbam

Wouldn't it be hard to critizise these people if they pooled their money together and got a few thugs to give this fella a going over...

I know the rule of law is the rule of law but cases like this are bizzare as to their lack of justice... If it were my family I would be thinking of some home cooked justice..

cojomo2

He came into the room, pulled down her underwear and performed oral sex on her as the victim lay there shocked and crying. When he stopped he said sorry and told her: "I must have been sleepwalking." The next day he begged her not to tell anyone.

Does anyone else think this is a bit weird (apart from the obvious reasons)?
The victim here was 22 year old adult - how did he even get as far as pulling down this womans underwear without being told to fcuk off, get out, what the hell are you doing etc? Unless ofcourse she was actually afraid of this guy?

davet82

padd b1975 wrote: »

O yeah I agree totally.

I also think that the judge got one thing right when passing sentence (3 years suspended), he allowed the abusers name to be reported in the media, more of this please. except when it is a parent who abuses their children.

I dont think he got anything right imo, he asked the victims if they would like to wave their anonymity and have him named.

It seems the punishment is to have him named and shamed and forfeiting jail time, I'm sure the women would have opted to stay anoynomous if it ment some time in prison for him or at least making them aware of this and subsquent ruling based on their decision.

Either way suspended sentence are not appropriate for sexual crimes

Totally agree with parent and children cases btw

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it ? I'm not sure i disagree with the sentence.

OP your thread title is slightly misleading again.

How exactly is the title misleading? A man escapes jail for sexually assaulting his two nieces, how is that misleading... is that not what happened?

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

How exactly is the title misleading? A man escapes jail for sexually assaulting his two nieces, how is that misleading... is that not what happened?

Title suggests children but these women were adults. He is only a few years older than them. This makes no difference only that I first thought little girls and old man. Yes your thread title is confusing and misleading.


What relevance is the fact they are his nieces ? Do you think because its family the crime is worse?
What is the family relation ? Is he an uncle or uncle in law?

Title does not suggest children, nieces are nieces, and obviously it being family is even worse
good lord

Boombastic

Why is there no photograph of him if the punishment is to name and shame?

humbert

I really thought while reading the article I'd discover that want he did was pretty harmless, then there was :eek:

HeyThereDeliah

bluewolf wrote: »

Title does not suggest children, nieces are nieces, and obviously it being family is even worse
good lord

So it's ok to sexually assault women but make sure it's not family, right.

Good lord

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Title suggests children but these women were adults.
What relevance is the fact they are his nieces ? Do you think because its family the crime is worse?
What is the family relation ? Is he an uncle or uncle in law?

No the title was taken from the headline in the Indo where the link is posted.

The crime of sexually assaulting somebody is disgusting no matter who it is and their victims suffer regardless who the perpetrator is, whats your point?

How in the name of god does the title suggest they were children?

Unfortunatley you are given limited space in a title thread, maybe you should ask the mods so that you post a full article in the title so people like you aren't 'mislead' Click the bloody link to find out about the story, thats what its there for.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

So it's ok to sexually assault women but make sure it's not family, right.

Good lord

where the fcuk did she say sexually assaulting women is ok?

davet82

cojomo2 wrote: »

Does anyone else think this is a bit weird (apart from the obvious reasons)?
The victim here was 22 year old adult - how did he even get as far as pulling down this womans underwear without being told to fcuk off, get out, what the hell are you doing etc? Unless ofcourse she was actually afraid of this guy?

I dont think its weird, its very common for victims of sexual assault to come forward for years, even decades later.

Maybe if you met somebody that was sexually abused/assaulted/raped they could explain it to you.

I reckon shame and fear is a big factor. Not being believed and of course what is demonstrated in this case we're discussing now, not getting real justice.

cojomo2

davet82 wrote: »

I dont think its weird, its very common for victims of sexual assault to come forward for years, even decades.

Maybe if you met somebody that was sexually abused/assaulted/raped they could explain it to you.

I reckon shame and fear is a big factor. Not being believed and of course what is demonstrated in this case we're discussing now, not getting justice.

Yes, I'm not saying it's weird that it took the victim years to come forward...have another read of my post (don't mean that in a rude way)

LittleBook

davet82 wrote: »

This really pisses me off, is being named and shamed not a consequence of being a dirty pervert!

I don't understand this. People convicted of sexual assaults are routinely named in public unless it would identify the victim. If anything, this ásshole judge has probably outed the victims.

Boombastic wrote: »

"Farrington was not added to the sex offender's register as the victims were over 18 and a suspended sentence was given"

Again, I'm confused. Since when does the sex offenders register have anything to do with the age of the victims??

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it?

As in many cases, the victims themselves didn't initiate the investigation.

It was said on the radio that one of their parents found a letter the man had sent to one of the women describing what had happened and then encouraged the victims to press charges. I'll bet they're kicking themselves now.

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

I dont think its weird, its very common for victims of sexual assault to come forward for years, even decades later.

Maybe if you met somebody that was sexually abused/assaulted/raped they could explain it to you.

I reckon shame and fear is a big factor. Not being believed and of course what is demonstrated in this case we're discussing now, not getting real justice.

Their mother found a letter four years ago that was sent to one of the women, how did she find it? I'm curious to know how it all came about. I know this will cause outrage but could money be a factor here ?

MagicMarker

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

I think the sentence is right in this case.

So if he were to pull down your sisters underwear and perform oral sex on her against her will you'd be happy with this outcome? A suspended sentence and his name in the paper?

the_syco

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it ? I'm not sure i disagree with the sentence.

Probably shame, and a few helpings of catholic guilt.

=-=

If the chainsaw massacre happened in Ireland, the excuse would have been; sorry sir, but I was drinking heavily? FFS!

Boombastic

Anyone got a picture of him so I know who to avoid?

Sierra 117

LittleBook wrote: »

I don't understand this. People convicted of sexual assaults are routinely named in public unless it would identify the victim. If anything, this ásshole judge has probably outed the victims.

According to the article, the women wanted his name released.

charlemont

the_syco wrote: »

Probably shame, and a few helpings of catholic guilt.

=-=

If the chainsaw massacre happened in Ireland, the excuse would have been; sorry sir, but I was drinking heavily? FFS!

And he once smelled some cannabis from a few yards away so we think drugs are a contributing factor....:rolleyes:

davet82

LittleBook wrote: »

As in many cases, the victims themselves didn't initiate the investigation.

It was said on the radio that one of their parents found a letter the man had sent to one of the women describing what had happened and then encouraged the victims to press charges. I'll bet they're kicking themselves now.

cojomo2 wrote: »

Yes, I'm not saying it's weird that it took the victim years to come forward...have another read of my post (don't mean that in a rude way)

sorry i didnt mean to sound like i was having a go, i was just trying to explain...

anyways if you read LittleBooks post there, it explains the gap between the incident and reporting of the crime in this case

I know why you are suggesting it was weird but you sort of answered it yourself, they were probably afraid.