Justice wins out, eventually!

Sir Humphrey Appleby

So sex attacker Anthony Lyons, who thought he could buy his way out of a long prison sentence is going back to jail.
For how long has yet to be decided, but fair play to the DPP for appealing the case and fair play to the Court of Criminal Appeal for showing up how pathetic Judge Desmond Hogans original sentence was.


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/lyons-to-return-to-jail-for-sexual-assault-after-state-wins-appeal-of-sentence-1.1598822

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Proper order.

Mr Williams

He should be sent down for 20 years minimum.

dodderangler

Not good enough for a scumbag like that.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

dodderangler wrote: »

Not good enough for a scumbag like that.

In fairness, we don't what his sentence is going to be, but I doubt he will be so arrogant after it!

Boombastic

The Sunday world reported yesterday that he will be claiming the 'distress' of it all on him is punishment enough. They have pictures of him on some golf course in Dubai. I'm glad it is going to be looked at again. I hope the judge who originally suspended the 5.5 years is de-benched.


Hopefully this scum gets sent down for a long time

dodderangler

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

In fairness, we don't what his sentence is going to be, but I doubt he will be so arrogant after it!

Shouldn't be a sentence
Just leave the fcuker in there

camel jockey

Hopefully he won't flee the country in the meantime.

Boombastic

Can anyone translate the bolded sentence below in to English for me? Thanks


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/lyons-to-return-to-jail-for-sexual-assault-after-state-wins-appeal-of-sentence-1.1598822

Defence barrister Patrick Gageby SC said Lyons was the most unlikely person to have committed an offence like this. “He was a man who had never been in trouble of any kind,” he added.

“He was a man who was quite able to ask of gardai was there any suggestion of suspicion against him in relation to any other matter.

wp_rathead

Boombastic wrote: »

Can anyone translate the bolded sentence below in to English for me? Thanks


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/lyons-to-return-to-jail-for-sexual-assault-after-state-wins-appeal-of-sentence-1.1598822

Defence barrister Patrick Gageby SC said Lyons was the most unlikely person to have committed an offence like this. “He was a man who had never been in trouble of any kind,” he added.

“He was a man who was quite able to ask of gardai was there any suggestion of suspicion against him in relation to any other matter.

Basically a "I may have done X, but I never did A,B,C,D,E,F,G etc." argument..

Holsten

I find this messed up more so than his original sentence.

He served time in prison, released and now the judges feel they need to send him back due to mostly public opinion? Stupid.

Sending this man to jail will do nothing for his victim, nor for anyone else.

ShagNastii

It's that line you keep hearing in reports.

"He alleged that he was overcome with an urge probably brought on by a mixture of drink, cholesterol medication and cough syrup".

What a cop out from an utter scumbag.

poundapunnet

Holsten wrote: »

I find this messed up more so than his original sentence.

He served time in prison, released and now the judges feel they need to send him back due to mostly public opinion? Stupid.

Sending this man to jail will do nothing for his victim, nor for anyone else.

Could nip in the bud the implicit message that you can buy the right to rape.

Holsten

Holsten wrote: »

I find this messed up more so than his original sentence.

He served time in prison, released and now the judges feel they need to send him back due to mostly public opinion? Stupid.

Sending this man to jail will do nothing for his victim, nor for anyone else.

Yea it will. It's called justice, y'know, the punishment fitting the crime and all that malarkey.

cletus van damme

Mr Williams wrote: »

He should be sent down for 20 years minimum.

enlighten me?

I've read (and heard) in the media that he rugby tackled the lady to the ground and then groped her.
terrible behavior without a doubt but worthy of 20years?

come now - I usually hang 'em high like the rest of the rabble but unless you know something I don't, it seems unreasonable wanting 20years.

Tombi!

While this is obviously great news, how was it decided it was too lenient?
Did the accused appeal for a harsher sentence or how does it work?

cletus van damme

cletus van damme wrote: »

enlighten me?

I've read (and heard) in the media that he rugby tackled the lady to the ground and then groped her.
terrible behavior without a doubt but worthy of 20years?

come now - I usually hang 'em high like the rest of the rabble but unless you know something I don't, it seems unreasonable wanting 20years.

The report says he violently physically and sexually assaulted her. Tackles and gropes sound pretty innocuous compared to what it really was.

I agree that 20 years is overkill, but it wasn't just a tackle and grope. That girl must have been terrified. Don't forget, for all she knew she was about to be raped and killed. The trauma of that will probably take her the next 20 years to learn to live with.

cletus van damme

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

While this is obviously great news, how was it decided it was too lenient?
Did the accused appeal for a harsher sentence or how does it work?

The DPP brings that type of challenge (and did in this case).

Tbh harsh as it sounds if the victim (not just in this case) could challenge the courts we'd have an endless cycle of challenges.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Boombastic wrote: »

Can anyone translate the bolded sentence below in to English for me? Thanks


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/lyons-to-return-to-jail-for-sexual-assault-after-state-wins-appeal-of-sentence-1.1598822

Defence barrister Patrick Gageby SC said Lyons was the most unlikely person to have committed an offence like this. “He was a man who had never been in trouble of any kind,” he added.

“He was a man who was quite able to ask of gardai was there any suggestion of suspicion against him in relation to any other matter.

I know what that sounds like!

Tombi!

Now that I think of it, was this the man who apparently followed the woman down the road or something? She was trying to get her boyfriend on the phone because she was obviously scared.

Tombi!

cletus van damme wrote: »

The DPP brings that type of challenge (and did in this case).

Tbh harsh as it sounds if the victim (not just in this case) could challenge the courts we'd have an endless cycle of challenges.

Ah, so the DPP is sort of a neutral party that intervenes if they think justice wasn't done properly?

Grayson

cletus van damme wrote: »

enlighten me?

I've read (and heard) in the media that he rugby tackled the lady to the ground and then groped her.
terrible behavior without a doubt but worthy of 20years?

come now - I usually hang 'em high like the rest of the rabble but unless you know something I don't, it seems unreasonable wanting 20years.

I agree. the original sentence was lenient, but 20 years is excessive.

one thing though, he was fined 75k and that was to be given to the victim right?. I hope they don't remove that and she still gets it. Money doesn't solve a lot of problems but a lack of it can make things harder. If she doesn't want it she can give it to charity, but it'd be nice for her to have the option.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

While this is obviously great news, how was it decided it was too lenient?
Did the accused appeal for a harsher sentence or how does it work?

The Director of Public Prosecutions appealed the leniency of the sentence, and he is not the accused, he is the convicted.

force eleven

The streets are safer again for a while.

cletus van damme

cletus van damme wrote: »

The DPP brings that type of challenge (and did in this case).

Tbh harsh as it sounds if the victim (not just in this case) could challenge the courts we'd have an endless cycle of challenges.

I think if it onus was on the victim, the trauma of reliving the situation again would be enough to discourage a fair proportion. It's best the DPP does it on behalf of society, not just the victim, anyway.

Holsten

I wonder if she could choose, take the 75k and his current sentence stands, or no 75k and he gets re-sentenced.

Holsten

force eleven wrote: »

The streets are safer again for a while.

You cannot be serious?!?!?!?!?! Hahaha!

Tombi!

Holsten wrote: »

I wonder if she could choose, take the 75k and his current sentence stands, or no 75k and he gets re-sentenced.

I'd wager she'd take the sentence, TBH. The peace of mind someone like that is locked up is better than 75K to a lot of victims.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

I agree. the original sentence was lenient, but 20 years is excessive.

one thing though, he was fined 75k and that was to be given to the victim right?. I hope they don't remove that and she still gets it. Money doesn't solve a lot of problems but a lack of it can make things harder. If she doesn't want it she can give it to charity, but it'd be nice for her to have the option.

It would be nice for her to be able to access any medical help she needs to deal with the aftermath privately, rather than wait many months for psychological or psychiatric help on the public service. That's where the money might be very useful to her.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Grayson wrote: »

I agree. the original sentence was lenient, but 20 years is excessive.

one thing though, he was fined 75k and that was to be given to the victim right?. I hope they don't remove that and she still gets it. Money doesn't solve a lot of problems but a lack of it can make things harder. If she doesn't want it she can give it to charity, but it'd be nice for her to have the option.

She refused to accept it and had made it known to the original sentencing court that she would not accept it.
The original sentencing judge ignored her views and chose to let the bollix buy his way to freedom anyway!

Holsten

Holsten wrote: »

I wonder if she could choose, take the 75k and his current sentence stands, or no 75k and he gets re-sentenced.

Holsten wrote: »

You cannot be serious?!?!?!?!?! Hahaha!

Spell your point out. It's too subtle for me to make out.