What a sadistic bastar*

Yakult

Local-womanizer wrote: »

Judges here love suspending sentences, I know it's probably to do with over crowding etc but in cases like this, where a foreign national commits serious assault they should be deported, simple as. If only we could deport some Irish scum as well.

We are too soft with foreign criminals.

We are too soft with criminals full stop, not just foreign.

Local-womanizer

Yakult wrote: »

We are too soft with criminals full stop, not just foreign.

I agree. Didnt want to come across as racist with the foreign thing either, but surely it would be easy to deport a foreign criminal if convicted, it would be nice if we could deport our own too!

Myrddin

MagicSean wrote: »

He got the maximum sentence allowed by law. He had a portion of it suspended in mitigation but it can be reactivated if he does not comply with the conditions. Two and a half years for an assault is pretty long.

Yeah he got the max sentence that law allows, but that still doesn't make it right. Some laws are archaic here, & need to be looked at. Also, after reading the details, in particular the fractured eye socket, I'd say this warrants a charge far more serious that simply assault. It takes a fairly serious blow to the face/head to fracture an eye socket...this filthy scumbag should really have been charged with attempted murder, served every single day of it, & then deported out of the country by the scruff of the neck. At least the victim then might have some solace.

As for your two & a half years is pretty long comment, I somehow doubt you'd have that approach had it been your mother assaulted in a similar fashion.

Predalien

MagicSean wrote: »

He got the maximum sentence allowed by law. He had a portion of it suspended in mitigation but it can be reactivated if he does not comply with the conditions. Two and a half years for an assault is pretty long.

He broke her eye socket, burned her, threatened to kill and rape her, threatened to gouge her eye out with a butter knife, originally pleaded not guilty, saying she did it to herself, and will be released in 26 months... I'd love to know what mitigating factors halved his sentence.

As for you stating they refuse help, maybe they refuse it because they are scared the system won't protect them and the beating they get when the abuser is released from arrest might be the one that kills them.

Zulu

Leftist wrote: »

the state doesn't really care about assault on women.

Bull****! Don't be so trite making this into a gender thing, it's not. The state equally doesn't care about men. :rolleyes:

We see similar sentences when the victim is male.

biko

Norway is bringing in separate prisons for foreign criminals, with less comfort. But only, I think, in cases where they'll be deported after serving the sentence.
http://www.newsinenglish.no/2012/09/18/foreign-convicts-face-separate-jails/

I suppose Gheorge Pasare will be back on the streets of Galway in a couple years.

Mousewar

Local-womanizer wrote: »

I agree. Didnt want to come across as racist with the foreign thing either, but surely it would be easy to deport a foreign criminal if convicted, it would be nice if we could deport our own too!

I'd prefer if these criminals paid their debt they owe to our society before being deported. However, I'm not sure how being housed in one of our prisons at the taxpayer's expense is really repaying us in any way.

HeyThereDeliah

Predalien wrote: »

He broke her eye socket, burned her, threatened to kill and rape her, threatened to gouge her eye out with a butter knife, originally pleaded not guilty, saying she did it to herself, and will be released in 26 months... I'd love to know what mitigating factors halved his sentence.

As for you stating they refuse help, maybe they refuse it because they are scared the system won't protect them and the beating they get when the abuser is released from arrest might be the one that kills them.

This was not the first time he beat her and we don't know if she has refused help before this, if the victim is not willing to make a statement she cannot be forced into it.
has he served a year all ready?

Tombo2001

The guy was done for
(i) Assault causing serious GBH
(ii) Emotional torture?

And he pleaded guilty to all offences (ok after initially denying it).

I think 2.5 years is fair enough for that. I've certainly heard worse.

And I have read the full article; and I do appreciate that if it happened to my mother my view might be different.

Certainly ...... its a major major major improvement on the situation that went in the 1980s, 1970s, 1960s and beyond when a woman could be beaten black and blue for decades and no one would raise an eyelid.

Myrddin

Mousewar wrote: »

I'd prefer if these criminals paid their debt they owe to our society before being deported. However, I'm not sure how being housed in one of our prisons at the taxpayer's expense is really repaying us in any way.

At the very least, it might give the victim some comfort knowing the attacker has been deprived of their rights & is imprisoned. When the sentence is up, straight to the airport & out the gates.

Local-womanizer

Mousewar wrote: »

I'd prefer if these criminals paid their debt they owe to our society before being deported. However, I'm not sure how being housed in one of our prisons at the taxpayer's expense is really repaying us in any way.

It's the course of justice I suppose, you commit a crime here and you will serve some time then be feck out to your own country. It would look pretty bad if you were convicted of a serious crime and just shown the door.

Also tombo2001, he didnt plead guilty straight away, he claimed her injuries were self inflicted.

MagicSean

EnterNow wrote: »

Yeah he got the max sentence that law allows, but that still doesn't make it right. Some laws are archaic here, & need to be looked at. Also, after reading the details, in particular the fractured eye socket, I'd say this warrants a charge far more serious that simply assault. It takes a fairly serious blow to the face/head to fracture an eye socket...this filthy scumbag should really have been charged with attempted murder, served every single day of it, & then deported out of the country by the scruff of the neck. At least the victim then might have some solace.

As for your two & a half years is pretty long comment, I somehow doubt you'd have that approach had it been your mother assaulted in a similar fashion.

He wasnt charged with just assault. He was charged with assault causing harm. Simple assault doesn't carry a five year sentence. And her injuries weren't bad, or more accurately more permanent, enough for the charge to be elevated any more. It's also quite impossible to deport an EU national.

And your reference to my mother? That's why punishments aren't decided by families.

Mousewar

EnterNow wrote: »

At the very least, it might give the victim some comfort knowing the attacker has been deprived of their rights & is imprisoned. When the sentence is up, straight to the airport & out the gates.

I assume that won't be happening though?

Odysseus

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Every time you read some judgement from these useless kunts in our judiciary, you always read something like this....



Why would the useless fúcker suspend part of the sentence on this animal? If you ask me, then only thing that should have been 'suspended' was the bástards life.

I don't know what was in the judges mind, but it seems to me that he took the guilty plea into consideration. You look at what he did and intially think so what; however, I think he has to take this into consideration. The most important aspect from my position would be the guilty plea meant the victim did not have to re-live the experience in open court, from a sentensing viewpoint this go in his favor.

I also think that by suspending the last 2 1/2 year it allowed the Judge to impose the restriction upon his relas, which will benefit the victim. From what I can make of it they would be the reasons for supending the last half of the sentense.

Now for me the dopmestic violence side of my work is one of the harder aspects on a personal level.

Wibbs

bluewolf wrote: »

Is there anything we can even do about it?
I mean seriously, not in a "who cares" way. Write to the DPP? What?

Maybe. They seemed to be open to looking at dubious sentences like the one handed out to the "upstanding businessman" convicted of sexual assault recently. I'd say it would be better to organise a large scale countrywide petition to the government to tackle it at that end. I'm quite sure such a petition would gather up many signatures

Myrddin

Tombo2001 wrote: »

and I do appreciate that if it happened to my mother my view might be different.

So basically your saying because you don't know the woman the sentence is fine, but if you did, you'd feel a harsher sentence would be warranted?

Just because the law says so, doesn't mean its valid. Ever hear the saying 'The Law Is An Ass'? A fractured eye socket should be allowed to hold up in court, where the victim is undergoing sustained abuse over a period of time, as a far higher charge. What is he did more damage than he had done? How did he know she wasn't going to get a bleed on the brain, or concussion? Did he carefully measure his force to only ensure the bone was fractured? Bollox, this could have, & does in other cases, end up much worse. The sentence should reflect as much.

air assault

why am i not surprised. this country is rotten to the core and the "justice" system shows it

Odysseus

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

This was not the first time he beat her and we don't know if she has refused help before this, if the victim is not willing to make a statement she cannot be forced into it.
has he served a year all ready?

Yes he was in custody for about a year prior to the court date, so he has a year and a half to serve, that is without remission; which I think is still a thrid off provided he behaves himself whilst locked up.

MagicSean

Predalien wrote: »

He broke her eye socket, burned her, threatened to kill and rape her, threatened to gouge her eye out with a butter knife, originally pleaded not guilty, saying she did it to herself, and will be released in 26 months... I'd love to know what mitigating factors halved his sentence.

As for you stating they refuse help, maybe they refuse it because they are scared the system won't protect them and the beating they get when the abuser is released from arrest might be the one that kills them.

No that's very rarely the reason, although sometimes it is. The reasons are often things you might consider to be silly but to the victim are scary. Fear of embarassment, fear of separating the family, doubting themselves. Very rarely is fear of further assault the reason a victim won't take help.

Tombo2001

EnterNow wrote: »

So basically your saying because you don't know the woman the sentence is fine, but if you did, you'd feel a harsher sentence would be warranted?

Just because the law says so, doesn't mean its valid. Ever hear the saying 'The Law Is An Ass'? A fractured eye socket should be allowed to hold up in court, where the victim is undergoing sustained abuse over a period of time, as a far higher charge. What is he did more damage than he had done? How did he know she wasn't going to get a bleed on the brain, or concussion? Did he carefully measure his force to only ensure the bone was fractured? Bollox, this could have, & does in other cases, end up much worse. The sentence should reflect as much.

No, I'm saying that if it was my own family member who was attacked I would be emotionally involved and would want the guy put in jail for the rest of his life. But thats not how the legal system works. It doesnt run on emotion.

I hope you can appreciate where I'm coming from, I'm not trying to be flippant about it.

I think the sentence is light but I dont think its outrageous in they way we've seen with some other recent cases.

What would you say is an appropriate sentence? 20 years? 30 years? 5 years? You tell me.

Myrddin

Tombo2001 wrote: »

What would you say is an appropriate sentence? 20 years? 30 years? 5 years? You tell me.

I do hear what your saying, & yes your completely right, emotion should have no place is ruling a sentence. However, the details & specifics of the crime, in my personal opinion, should warrant a harsher sentence then the one that was ruled.

I don't think subjecting another human being to months of physical, violant, & aggressive abuse...bordering torture, should only warrant two and a half years in prison. It's hard to put a time on what it should be, & each case should be looked at for its own specifics, but that 'man' needs to have his liberties removed for at least five years imo. He should then not enjoy the right to live in this country, & there should be legislation to deport any EU national who is convicted of crimes of this nature.

I'm not calling for a 20/30 year sentence at all here, just something a bit more deserving.

2ndcoming

What a shame we couldn't have planted a kilo of weed on him, that way he could have had to do a four times longer sentence than he does for horrifically assaulting someone and probably scarring them for life.

Something seriously needs to be done about sentencing in this country.

sbsquarepants

Odysseus wrote: »

I don't know what was in the judges mind, but it seems to me that he took the guilty plea into consideration. You look at what he did and intially think so what; however, I think he has to take this into consideration. The most important aspect from my position would be the guilty plea meant the victim did not have to re-live the experience in open court, from a sentensing viewpoint this go in his favor.

I also think that by suspending the last 2 1/2 year it allowed the Judge to impose the restriction upon his relas, which will benefit the victim. From what I can make of it they would be the reasons for supending the last half of the sentense.

Now for me the dopmestic violence side of my work is one of the harder aspects on a personal level.

Total bollox.
He didn't spare the victim anything - some sleaze bag free legal aid solicitor told him to plead guilty and he'd get out early. The assault was horrific and very sadistic - attempted murder imo and definitely the work of a dangerous individual not fit to be in open society. The guy should be looking at decades inside not months. Restrictions on his release?? Like what - don't torture and beat women half to death you naughty boy, or i'll be very very cross with you? That'll teach him eh:rolleyes:

Curly Judge

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

He cannot have any contact with her and I'm sure she does not want to contact him. She was most likely scared ****less of him and probably still is.

Maybe it doesn't apply in this case but I have seen enough of these "ring a rosey" abusive relationships to realise how much police time is wasted in these "domestics".
Drink seems to have played a very important part in this trailer trash "Romeo and Juliet".

I can guarantee if you beat the crap out of a judge and broke his eye-socket, you wouldn't get half your sentence suspended.

Tombo2001

EnterNow wrote: »

I do hear what your saying, & yes your completely right, emotion should have no place is ruling a sentence. However, the details & specifics of the crime, in my personal opinion, should warrant a harsher sentence then the one that was ruled.

I don't think subjecting another human being to months of physical, violant, & aggressive abuse...bordering torture, should only warrant two and a half years in prison. It's hard to put a time on what it should be, & each case should be looked at for its own specifics, but that 'man' needs to have his liberties removed for at least five years imo. He should then not enjoy the right to live in this country, & there should be legislation to deport any EU national who is convicted of crimes of this nature.

I'm not calling for a 20/30 year sentence at all here, just something a bit more deserving.

Well whats more deserving.....

He is getting 2.5 years. Thats almost 1000 nights in a row that he will be in a prison cell.

And if he infringes again when he releases it will be the same again (as I understand it).

And another point......the judge who passes sentence here sees every single abuse and assault case that comes before him/ her.

By saying this is a particularly bad case, you are also passing comment on other abuse / assault cases, saying that they are less bad. Are you comfortable saying that? Do you see the other cases that go before the court?

I'd agree with your point on deportation, but I'm not sure EU rules allow for it. If thats the case, is it fair the blame the Irish courts. And are you knee jerking therefore by blaming the Irish court system in the wrong, on this particular point.

HeyThereDeliah

Curly Judge wrote: »

Maybe it doesn't apply in this case but I have seen enough of these "ring a rosey" abusive relationships to realise how much police time is wasted in these "domestics".
Drink seems to have played a very important part in this trailer trash "Romeo and Juliet".

I agree lots of time is wasted on some domestics because the victim will return to the abuser no matter how much help is offered and yes alcohol is usually a big factor in these incidents.

if she goes back to him on his release then she only has herself to blame for the next beating.

Tombo2001

Curly Judge wrote: »

Maybe it doesn't apply in this case but I have seen enough of these "ring a rosey" abusive relationships to realise how much police time is wasted in these "domestics".
Drink seems to have played a very important part in this trailer trash "Romeo and Juliet".

What do you mean, "you've seen enough of them".....

I really think that alcohol is never ever a mitigating factor....and is never an excuse.

"It wouldnt have happened if I wasnt drunk"

You were drunk and it did happen.

And to say that she is responsible for any reason at all is wrong. She may be dumb, she may be naive, but that doesnt mean its her own fault.

whomitconcerns

its an interesting thought, different prisons with less comfort than local prisons for non nationals, and there is some merit in it.

For instance I am currently in Romania and not planning on doing anything illegal, however even if I was, I can tell you right now I would not want to risk it here as the prison system is scary to say the list!

I would have to say its similar in a lot of countries, ie I am sure there is no Irish drug dealer wants to go to prison in Thailand for drugs etc. But they will risk it in Ireland with Irish jails!

So although probably impossible there is some merit in making a less "helpful" prison system for immigrants...but unfortunately it comes across as racist to even suggest it...ah well

HeyThereDeliah

Tombo2001 wrote: »

What do you mean, "you've seen enough of them".....

I really think that alcohol is never ever a mitigating factor....and is never an excuse.

"It wouldnt have happened if I wasnt drunk"

You were drunk and it did happen.

And to say that she is responsible for any reason at all is wrong. She may be dumb, she may be naive, but that doesnt mean its her own fault.

They were both drinking at the time, no excuse for him to hit her at all.
she has to accept some responsibility if he has done this before to her, getting away might not be easy but staying and accepting his behaviour is her choice.