Guy avoids prison for slashing another guy's face

take everything

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/student-avoids-jail-for-drunken-assault-with-glass-3333890.html

This seems insane.
How do you avoid prison after slashing another guy's face after 20 pints.
I'm not a Joe Duffy type but i genuinely can't get my head around this.

Edit: Not sure if it's OK to copy the story.

upstairs for coffee

"Eamon Leahy (27) said he had 20 drinks – shots, pints and about seven cocktails – before carrying out the assault." - THIS IS NO EXCUSE

"The court heard Leahy had five previous convictions, including four public order offences. Counsel said his client wanted to express his deep remorse and shame and had brought €4,000 to court." - :mad:

Shryke

Should have brought the guy a new face.

mcwinning

Our whole legal system is a neverending torrent of ineptitude.

dodderangler

Sure he would've gotten bout 2 years of he killed him
Irish system is so fcuked up

3ndahalfof6

so a guy and a guy eh.

take everything

3ndahalfof6 wrote: »

so a guy and a guy eh.

Yes.
2 guys.

Shryke

eh

GLaDOS

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

and had brought €4,000 to court." - :mad:

Recent trend of buying your way out of prison continues it would seem

Tom_Cruise

Time the victim took justice into his own hands .

Kind of puts to bed the theory that only women get away with this crap.

Should be locked up, and forfeit everything he has in compensation. So should the girl who bottled a guy in the face and got a suspended sentence.

My name is URL

The fact that he had prior convictions should have ensured that he was sent to prison. I think Ireland should introduce a 3 strikes system similar to that of the US.

madma

this is almost identical to that other story of that girl... both are 27 and bought are trinity students and both smashed a glass into the victims face...weird.

Heroditas

Trinity students, eh? Tsk tsk.

charlemont

If he was caught with a few ounces of Hash/Weed he would have been locked up. Some joke of a system.

Similar to that woman that glassed the barman in the face causing him to have a scar on his nose. Convicted of assault but no prison sentence afaik.

woodoo

Our justice system and the UK's justice system is crap. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4709030/X-Factor-hopeful-avoids-jail-despite-having-glassed-her-boyfriend.html

It must be the common law system. Its crap.

jaffacakesyum

Deleted User wrote: »

Similar to that woman that glassed the barman in the face causing him to have a scar on his nose. Convicted of assault but no prison sentence afaik.

Yup, and hopefully this will prove that the other case wasn't a matter of "she's a woman, that's why she got an easy sentence" :rolleyes:

These things happen all the time and justice is never done, it's a disgrace but what do you expect from this country.

I know Ireland's economy is fúcked but I would probably be one of the few to actually support money being set aside to build a new prison in Ireland so that overcrowding can't be an excuse for these pathetic sentences.

sock puppet

Heroditas wrote: »

Trinity students, eh? Tsk tsk.

That's how we roll.

Wild_Dogger

I had the exact same happen me in the late 90's.

Thought I lost my eye , and my face was slashed open so wide that they were looking for part of my nose on the floor.

Offender was a family friend of a high ranking guard.
When it went to court, his chief character witness was one of the highest ranking Gardai in the state and claimed he had known the offender since he was a child etc.

The judge (who had barred media from the court) couldn't thank this gaurd enough for taking time from his job to stand by the offender.

Not surprisingly he got a 3 year suspended sentence. But handed over €5000 that his dad gave him.

I was rightly fooked by the system !

Dont know if the mod will let me name the people here , but am happy to disclose it all (gaurds names + offender etc) for verification.

To the credit of one, one inspector I dealt with was completely honest and helpful.
But I was warned off contacting the inspector again as he had come down on the other guard who was not pursuing the case properly.

notnumber

Deleted User wrote: »

Similar to that woman that glassed the barman in the face causing him to have a scar on his nose. Convicted of assault but no prison sentence afaik.

he has prior form which it makes it an even worse let off.

Panrich

Wild_Dogger wrote: »

I had the exact same happen me in the late 90's.

Thought I lost my eye , and my face was slashed open so wide that they were looking for part of my nose on the floor.

Offender was a family friend of a high ranking guard.
When it went to court, his chief character witness was one of the highest ranking Gardai in the state and claimed he had known the offender since he was a child etc.

The judge (who had barred media from the court) couldn't thank this gaurd enough for taking time from his job to stand by the offender.

Not surprisingly he got a 3 year suspended sentence. But handed over €5000 that his dad gave him.

I was rightly fooked by the system !

Dont know if the mod will let me name the people here , but am happy to disclose it all (gaurds names + offender etc) for verification.

To the credit of one, one inspector I dealt with was completely honest and helpful.
But I was warned off contacting the inspector again as he had come down on the other guard who was not pursuing the case properly.

That's a sickening story. Cnuts

hatrickpatrick

Another one? This is complete bullsh!t. Is there any actual explanation for the number of non-sentences for serious assaults?

EDIT: This is actually making my blood boil, I'm seriously contemplating writing a letter to Minister Shatter with a list of links to these articles and asking if there's any logical reason for it. Wonder what he'd say...

Duck Soup

In other news, a Trinity student from a good family was convicted of putting an entire orphanage of disabled children through a wood-chipper. He was given 3 hours community service and told "Say hello to your father for me when see him, will you Fintan?" by the judge.

Holsten

My name is URL wrote: »

The fact that he had prior convictions should have ensured that he was sent to prison. I think Ireland should introduce a 3 strikes system similar to that of the US.

3 strikes is a joke, you know with that law 3 small time crimes can land you in jail for life? So you rob something small 3 times - life. You get caught with weed 3 times - life.

the purple tin

You can get away with a lot in this country if you play the hoary 'problem with alcohol' card and promise to seek treatment etc.
See it a lot in the court pages 'usually a decent person blah blah, only violent when he drinks blah blah, is determined to turn over a new leaf blah. I bet most of the people who dodge gaol in this fashion are out getting hammered that night to celebrate.

My name is URL

Holsten wrote: »

3 strikes is a joke, you know with that law 3 small time crimes can land you in jail for life? So you rob something small 3 times - life. You get caught with weed 3 times - life.

I just said that something similar should be introduced here.. not that we should send people away for life for committing petty crimes =p

This guy had 5 previous convictions for public order offenses... it's absurd that he has managed to escape a prison term for this latest crime. With the real threat of a mandatory sentence, idiots like him would think twice before getting drunk enough to viciously assault someone.

the purple tin

Holsten wrote: »

3 strikes is a joke, you know with that law 3 small time crimes can land you in jail for life? So you rob something small 3 times - life. You get caught with weed 3 times - life.

Most states only use the 3 strikes system for felony crimes which would be more serious crime.

Madam_X

At least this maniac got a steeper sentence:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/1221/breaking37.html

the purple tin

Madam_X wrote: »

At least this maniac got a steeper sentence:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/1221/breaking37.html[/QUOTE]
Not half steep enough as far as I'm concerned.

hatrickpatrick

Serious assault causing harm should carry a mandatory sentence period, previous convictions or not. If you greviously injure someone through a deliberate act of violence, you do time, regardless of any other factors.

Sounds extreme, but what's ALSO extreme is the ridiculous amount of violent crime in this country...

Holsten

My name is URL wrote: »

This guy had 5 previous convictions for public order offenses... it's absurd that he has managed to escape a prison term for this latest crime. With the real threat of a mandatory sentence, idiots like him would think twice before getting drunk enough to viciously assault someone.

No, harsher or mandatory sentences wouldn't have any effect, when people commit crimes they never believe they'll be caught, so the punishment means very little.

the purple tin wrote: »

Most states only use the 3 strikes system for felony crimes which would be more serious crime.

I wouldn't say so, prosecutors can easily bump up a misdemeanor charge to a felony.

K.Flyer

The Irish Judicial system in our country is a total farce. There is NO deterrent for the scumbags and low lifes of this country to stop them doing what they do best and making other peoples lives a misery.
Suspended sentences, Concurrent sentencing and general letting people get away with murder because they came up with a great excuse (usually alcohol).
In other countries they do not want to hear any if that bull**** from offenders, citing unfortunate background, alcohol or other f#@king excuses.
In Spain, for example, if you are arrested on a serious assault charge you are held in custody untill your day in court, which could take up to a year.
Think how much safer our streets would be if there were more prison space and much longer no bull**** prison sentences, then there might be some detterent, then people might think twice before commiting a crime.
To the Dept if Justice... Grow some BALLS and deal with the problem.

woodoo

Wild_Dogger wrote: »

I had the exact same happen me in the late 90's.

Thought I lost my eye , and my face was slashed open so wide that they were looking for part of my nose on the floor.

Offender was a family friend of a high ranking guard.
When it went to court, his chief character witness was one of the highest ranking Gardai in the state and claimed he had known the offender since he was a child etc.

The judge (who had barred media from the court) couldn't thank this gaurd enough for taking time from his job to stand by the offender.

Not surprisingly he got a 3 year suspended sentence. But handed over €5000 that his dad gave him.

I was rightly fooked by the system !

Dont know if the mod will let me name the people here , but am happy to disclose it all (gaurds names + offender etc) for verification.

To the credit of one, one inspector I dealt with was completely honest and helpful.
But I was warned off contacting the inspector again as he had come down on the other guard who was not pursuing the case properly.

Well if the guy was convicted in an irish court you are perfectly entitled to name him i'd think. He got away very lightly there. Suspended sentence. Crazy.

Pottler

This poor outcome scenario goes across the board. A well known local scally was caught red-handed in the course of his nocturnal activities. He turned up in court, with a glowing reference from his "employer" (which was news to me that he worked there), claimed it was a one off mistake and slip in judgement and walked out with probation act.

Considering the amount it cost to catch and prosecute him, the large quantity of stuff he was err, borrowing from the state owned enterprise and the fact all he ever does is the exact same thing, how the hell does the court in its wisdom decide that the probation acts should be applied for this "one off" slip in judgement?? I think it is a joke. Some poor git will go in for not paying their TV licence fine and get jailed for it. Utter joke of a system and it must wreck your average Gardas head.

Grayson

My name is URL wrote: »

I just said that something similar should be introduced here.. not that we should send people away for life for committing petty crimes =p

This guy had 5 previous convictions for public order offenses... it's absurd that he has managed to escape a prison term for this latest crime. With the real threat of a mandatory sentence, idiots like him would think twice before getting drunk enough to viciously assault someone.

mandatory sentancing is a bad idea. Simply because there wull be cases where people with minor offenses will be sent to prison. A better system is a list of realistic guidlines that judges can follow

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Yup, and hopefully this will prove that the other case wasn't a matter of "she's a woman, that's why she got an easy sentence" :rolleyes:

If you look back at that thread, most people were saying that the sentance would be greater if a man did it to a woman. In this case, a man assaulted a man. So it's not the same thing.

hatrickpatrick

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Yup, and hopefully this will prove that the other case wasn't a matter of "she's a woman, that's why she got an easy sentence" :rolleyes:

To be honest, that viewpoint was strong because the assailant actually said it to her victim when he tried to defend himself. "You can't touch me, I'm a girl" or something like that.

I don't think people would have been quite as furious with regard to the gender thing if not for that oh so ladylike quote :rolleyes:

I'm serious about sending that letter though. When does the Oireachtas resume after the Christmas break?

K.Flyer

Grayson wrote: »

mandatory sentancing is a bad idea. Simply because there wull be cases where people with minor offenses will be sent to prison.

Mandatory Sentencing is a good idea.
By simply laying out the rules of
"If You Do This Type Of Crime You Get This Type Of Time" No Excuses.
This should make a big difference to the way some people would think before doing something wrong, in the same way you know that if your caught drinking and driving you know you will get a ban and points and all that goes with it.
It will resurrect the old mantra,
"If You Cant Handle The Time, Dont Do The Crime"

jaffacakesyum

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

To be honest, that viewpoint was strong because the assailant actually said it to her victim when he tried to defend himself. "You can't touch me, I'm a girl" or something like that.

I don't think people would have been quite as furious with regard to the gender thing if not for that oh so ladylike quote :rolleyes:

I'm serious about sending that letter though. When does the Oireachtas resume after the Christmas break?

But that's BS. No doubt about it the women sounded like a spoilt b1tch who believed she could do anything she wanted with no consequences because she was a woman attacking a man. But that's not how the judges viewed it (necessarily) - it had no bearing on the sentencing that she was a woman, which is what everyone was saying. There are countless cases of men attacking women or men attacking men who get fúck all too. Just because the individual herself seems sexist doesn't mean the justice system is.

.jacksparrow.

It's time for people like this,to be brought up the Wicklow mountains for a lesson.

jaffacakesyum

Grayson wrote: »

If you look back at that thread, most people were saying that the sentance would be greater if a man did it to a woman. In this case, a man assaulted a man. So it's not the same thing.

But there are tons of cases of men assaulting women who get suspended sentences.

I think people just want to believe it would be worse if a man attacked a woman, which is ironically in a way sexist too :pac:

My name is URL

Grayson wrote: »

mandatory sentancing is a bad idea. Simply because there wull be cases where people with minor offenses will be sent to prison. A better system is a list of realistic guidlines that judges can follow

It depends on how such a system is implemented, and what crimes would constitute a 'strike'. Mandatory sentencing for those convicted of 3 violent assaults / burglaries etc. can only act as a deterrent.

I wouldn't be in support of system in which someone is automatically locked up the same amount of time for committing menial non-violent crimes as those who repeatedly commit crimes against other people.