drug dealer free.. has the world gone mad?

carzony

jesus I know lads 'bullied' into holding drugs and got tougher sentencing that this :eek:

AN out-of-work butcher caught with more than €137,000 of heroin in his van has been spared jail after a judge accepted he was acting under duress

Anthony Naughton (28), initially told gardai who stopped him that he was collecting bread to feed his horses.
But Naughton, of Muskerry Road, Ballyfermot, later pleaded guilty to possessing drugs for sale or supply at Steeples Apartment complex in Chapelizod in February 2012.
At Dublin Circuit Criminal Court, Judge Mary Ellen Ring said she accepted that he was acting under huge pressure from dangerous people.
She added the pressure was so intense, she felt she could take the unusual step of giving him a suspended six-year sentence with strict conditions.


Garda Adrian Eustace had told Cormac Quinn BL, prosecuting, that Naughton had pulled into a lane beside the Village Inn on Tyrconnell Road, after which a man came out and put a package in his van.
Gardai followed and stopped the car, but it took the defendant a while to come out. When he did, he was shaking and avoided answering questions.
He told officers there was noting inside the van. When they found the package, he said he had no idea what it was or how it had gotten there.



THREATENED
But after he was arrested, he said he had been "dabbling in coke" and had run up a bill.
He also claimed that he had been intimidated into holding the heroin, with gangsters breaking his jaw, vandalising his van and even threatening his parents.
Caroline Biggs SC, defending, said that there was "real evidence" of duress in the case and that her client had been desperately frightened.
"He was involved, but not willingly," she said, adding that he was now ashamed and remorseful of his role.
The court heard that he suffered "significant assaults" following the incident, and that one attack had left a scar over his eyebrow.


Naughton has 21 previous convictions for road traffic offences, the court heard. His family has no history of criminality, his lawyer added.
The defendant worked with a meat company for 10 years before setting up his own business, but he his now out of work.
He told gardai that he was now lucky to make €100 a week doing deliveries.
A psychiatric report showed that Naughton suffers from dyslexia and ADHD, but is willing and able to work.
hnews@herald.ie

Femme_Fatale

They had more evidence than you or I have, to indicate that the guy was intimidated into doing it. "Drug dealer free" is a misleading title as it indicates the dealing was of his own volition.

Holsten

Judge knows more than you, exactly.

What good would it do jailing him? Nothing. It would do nothing.

catallus

The judge was simply sending the correct message that people have more to fear from criminal enforcers than they do from the police, the courts and the rule of law.

marozz

The chap will be looking over his shoulder. Someone will be out to get him for "losing" that batch of heroin.

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

SamAK

May I be so bold as to suggest that prohibition and the war on drugs is solely responsible for this whole sorry fcuking mess?

kneemos

SamAK wrote: »

May I be so bold as to suggest that prohibition and the war on drugs is solely responsible for this whole sorry fcuking mess?

Breaking the law is the reason for the mess.

Femme_Fatale

They're saying the law in the first place is causing the mess actually.

SamAK wrote: »

May I be so bold as to suggest that prohibition and the war on drugs is solely responsible for this whole sorry fcuking mess?

Not the sole reason, but a huge part.

Amirani

kneemos wrote: »

Breaking the law is the reason for the mess.

Would you break the law to ensure the safety of your family?

Fr_Dougal

He must have given the Gardai a lot of names and other info to get off so lightly.

Elmo is a rat.

MrBobbyZ

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

They're saying the law in the first place is causing the mess actually.

Not the sole reason, but a huge part.

Agreed.

But isnt it the same with many of our laws.

Nemeses

NiallSparky wrote: »

Would you break the law to ensure the safety of your family?

I'm sure there must be other ways than breaking the law.

Tonto86

Holy ****, poor guys been through a lot and probably lot more to come.

Judge was damn right

Knob Longman

SamAK wrote: »

May I be so bold as to suggest that prohibition and the war on drugs is solely responsible for this whole sorry fcuking mess?

Read what this pompous scumbag has to say...
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/call-for-longer-prison-sentences-for-drug-users-1.1659701

SamAK

kneemos wrote: »

Breaking the law is the reason for the mess.

Have you ever considered that the laws are just not working and it's time for a new approach?


Of course not, that would invoke cognitive dissonance, and probably Ad hominem.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

SamAK wrote: »

May I be so bold as to suggest that prohibition and the war on drugs is solely responsible for this whole sorry fcuking mess?

Decriminalise/legalise weed absolutely.

Setting up crack factories or selling heroin in your local spar absolutely not.

Holsten

Knob Longman wrote: »

Read what this pompous scumbag has to say...
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/call-for-longer-prison-sentences-for-drug-users-1.1659701

Oh my god... the stupidity is just mind boggling! We've been locking up people for years and years due to drugs and nothing has changed. War was lost before it began.

Even the almighty anti-drug USA are legalizing. It's insane.

kneemos

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

They're saying the law in the first place is causing the mess actually.

Not the sole reason, but a huge part.

Well now that's just an opinion
Others would say it's a inecessary law.
If it had been auto parts or somebody's jewelry I presume there would be no question of making such things legal?

kneemos

Holsten wrote: »

Oh my god... the stupidity is just mind boggling! We've been locking up people for years and years due to drugs and nothing has changed. War was lost before it began.

Even the almighty anti-drug USA are legalizing. It's insane.

We've being locking up burglars for years as well.

SamAK

kneemos wrote: »

If it had been auto parts or somebody's jewelry I presume there would be no question of making such things legal?

Ask any dealer if they would like drugs to be legalized so that they can do their job without fear of prosecution, and they would laugh in your face. Suppliers do not want the laws to change.

The financial rewards for supplying most drugs on the black market are absolutely huge. Bigger than breaking into someones house and stealing their auto parts or jewelry.

It is this financial incentive that motivates people to intimidate and threaten, to hurt and kill. Money is a great motivator. Nasty people get rich, and it snowballs from there.

Banning something pushes the price through the roof. And as we've seen over the past 40 years or so, laws have done NOTHING to stop people from wanting to experience different states of mind.


There are no 'one size fits all' solutions to this. I don't have all the answers. But the evidence is staring us all in the face. Our current approach is just not working.

It's time to think of something different. Why can't we discuss it? Why the taboo?

It is quite possible to entertain an idea without having to accept it!

catallus

SamAK wrote: »

Banning something pushes the price through the roof. And as we've seen over the past 40 years or so, laws have done NOTHING to stop people from wanting to experience different states of mind.

The laws have worked perfectly well to limit the damage done by drugs to a small section of society; legalising the stuff will only result in more people using drugs; this is the big question about the trial run of cannabis legalisation in Colorado; the suppliers know that the only way to make profit is to get more people taking the stuff; if other drugs were to be legalised then the same applies; in the case of the thread topic, heroin legalisation would be a marketeers wet dream. Of course the current suppliers don't want legalisation, why would they want open competition?

nxbyveromdwjpg

Knob Longman wrote: »

Read what this pompous scumbag has to say...
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/call-for-longer-prison-sentences-for-drug-users-1.1659701

ARRRGGHHHH

<facepalm>

sdanseo

NiallSparky wrote: »

Would you break the law to ensure the safety of your family?

I wouldn't "dabble in coke" so as create a situation where their safety was threatened.

Jailing him for the heroin might have been a mistake, but he should have done time purely for admitting doing cocaine and causing the entire debauchal to happen.

nxbyveromdwjpg

sdeire wrote: »

I wouldn't "dabble in coke" so as create a situation where their safety was threatened.

Jailing him for the heroin might have been a mistake, but he should have done time purely for admitting doing cocaine and causing the entire debauchal to happen.

And whats that going to achieve? Whats the end game here

timthumbni

carzony wrote: »

jesus I know lads 'bullied' into holding drugs and got tougher sentencing that this :eek:

Don't ever think that the legal system is there to protect society. They are rotten to the cord and probably cost more then bankers ever did. Legal aid in Norn iron is a joke. I'm assuming you have do thing similar down south.

I hate lawyers/solicitors etc with a passion. It's one of the biggest scams going.

Femme_Fatale

timthumbni wrote: »

Don't ever think that the legal system is there to protect society.

I will ta.

They are rotten to the cord and probably cost more then bankers ever did. Legal aid in Norn iron is a joke. I'm assuming you have do thing similar down south.

I hate lawyers/solicitors etc with a passion. It's one of the biggest scams going.

Silly tarring tbh. My brother and his wife are solicitors just doing their job and raising their child and living their lives. Must tell them they're rotten to the core and part of a scam.

Why oh why must so many of you Boards folks decide to apply the behaviour of a minority to everyone in that group?
Is it really so difficult not to analyse things a bit further?
This place should have higher standards than TheJournal.ie, Independent.ie comments and even Facebook. FFS.

BillyMitchel

For the amount it is slightly taking the piss and also because of the drug it is. But that whole I was forced and frightened is getting old.

His fingerprints probably weren't on the bags of heroin too which would have also gone for him and backed up his story. I think I'd nearly rather prison because he has to walk around after been caught with serious amounts of heroin and someone is out of pocket and going to be looking for their money. One of the main dealers gets arrested in the near future who do you think they will blame?

End of the day - he's focked

kneemos

SamAK wrote: »

Ask any dealer if they would like drugs to be legalized so that they can do their job without fear of prosecution, and they would laugh in your face. Suppliers do not want the laws to change.

The financial rewards for supplying most drugs on the black market are absolutely huge. Bigger than breaking into someones house and stealing their auto parts or jewelry.

It is this financial incentive that motivates people to intimidate and threaten, to hurt and kill. Money is a great motivator. Nasty people get rich, and it snowballs from there.

Banning something pushes the price through the roof. And as we've seen over the past 40 years or so, laws have done NOTHING to stop people from wanting to experience different states of mind.


There are no 'one size fits all' solutions to this. I don't have all the answers. But the evidence is staring us all in the face. Our current approach is just not working.

It's time to think of something different. Why can't we discuss it? Why the taboo?

It is quite possible to entertain an idea without having to accept it!

Criminals will disappear if they legalise drugs?

WilyCoyote

Deploy an FCA Special Forces Unit to Afghanistan with a scorched earth policy on the poppy fields. This will be a twin win win scenario ........ cutting off the funding for the Taliban and keeping Europe high (thanks to prevailing wind).

periodictable

Why not just shoot the pushers and dealers? It would be interesting to see how willing these sons of bitches would be to risk their lives.

catallus

And the users too.

RDM_83 again

Whatever about the arguments about the war on failing as its currently structured we're talking about heroin here, this isn't weed or pills or even coke, it is without argument a debilitating and harmful drug. Yes there is functional addicts but even in those cases it impacts on their lives its not the same as having a glass of wine or the occasional spliff.

We can look at the Swiss model or even the Portuguese one but neither of them are that applicable to Ireland, Switzerland has a very different culture to here with a relation to social responsibility and social attitudes in general, people also don't realise that the Swiss option also wasn't that soft either involving the shipping home of addicts and confinement. The involuntary "repatriation" being a very important element.

In terms of Portugal yes the system appears to have worked there but Portugal was starting from an extremely low base in terms of treatment and harm prevention before it initiated de-criminalization.

If we move to make heroin de-criminalized here it has to be made an unappealing option because we only have to look at how heroin use can explode in smaller towns and cities when it becomes more widely available to see that there is a significant amount of people that will try it if its available.

goose2005

Locking him up could reduce the availability of heroin in Ireland by as much as 0.00%.

end of the road

kneemos wrote: »

Breaking the law is the reason for the mess.

a pointless law that was never going to work

SamAK

kneemos wrote: »

Criminals will disappear if they legalise drugs?

I don't quite see how you managed to extract that idea from my comment..! I didn't suggest anything like that.


I'm trying to get the idea across that reducing the value of illegal substances would go a long way towards reducing the profits, power and resources of criminals that don't give a flying fcuk about anything other than making money. Is this not a logical thought?

As it stands we have the following situation:

Dealers do not care if you're under 18, so no I.D required. If it's illegal, there's money to be made, so of course we end up in a position where all a kid wants is a bag of weed, and Mr. Dealer says 'hey, i've got these pills, want to try them?'

This blows the anti-drug 'gateway' theory out of the water. The only reason people have access to harder drugs(let's remember that not all drugs are equal, Cannabis is NOT the same as heroin) is because of blanket prohibition.

And, i'm sure we've all seen the occasional news reports about people being taken ill or dying from contaminated drugs, be it dirty pills or Cannabis weighed down with sand, powdered glass or lead pellets(no i'm not joking, in my younger days I was unlucky enough to come across the glass weed, it's horrifying). Again, the sole reason this happens is because of the aforementioned criminals that just do not give a damn about consumer safety. They are in it for the exorbitant profit.

I'm not here to try and win an argument, i'm here to discuss ways of reducing harm, controlling quality of product and taking resources out of the hands of dangerous people. No plan would be perfect, but why wouldn't it necessarily be less damaging and costly to society than our current system?

I'm all for legalizing and taxing weed, because it's by far the most benign of all 'controlled' drugs. But....different substances are a different story. Like I said earlier, I don't claim to have an answer for everything.

end of the road

catallus wrote: »

The laws have worked perfectly well to limit the damage done by drugs to a small section of society;

they haven't though, those who wouldn't take drugs wouldn't if legal more then likely, the laws do nothing at a cost of trillions for nothing in return, the section of society on drugs is a lot bigger then either of us would believe

catallus wrote: »

legalising the stuff will only result in more people using drugs;

then again it may not, if it did it would really be only for a little bit. but indefinitely no, and even at that it would be people who would probably start using at some stage anyway.

end of the road

WilyCoyote wrote: »

Deploy an FCA Special Forces Unit to Afghanistan with a scorched earth policy on the poppy fields. This will be a twin win win scenario ........ cutting off the funding for the Taliban and keeping Europe high (thanks to prevailing wind).

was actually done and i believe still is being done, but has failed to achieve anything

Amirani

catallus wrote: »

legalising the stuff will only result in more people using drugs

Where's the evidence that this is the case?

RDM_83 again

NiallSparky wrote: »

Where's the evidence that this is the case?

Its definitely a risk though, at the peak of the head shop craze you could see queues of literally hundreds of people outside some of the city centre ones when the pubs closed and I know from my friends quite a few were buying them who wouldn't normally buy speed or coke.

SeanW

kneemos wrote: »

We've being locking up burglars for years as well.

A burglar has actually done something to someone else, i.e. broke into someones house.

Bit different to smoking a spliff, no?

kneemos

SeanW wrote: »

A burglar has actually done something to someone else, i.e. broke into someones house.

Bit different to smoking a spliff, no?

Both break the law.

Stavros Murphy

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

He must have given the Gardai a lot of names and other info to get off so lightly.

Elmo is a rat.

Really? Stating guff like that could well get someone battered or killed.

SamAK

SeanW wrote: »

A burglar has actually done something to someone else, i.e. broke into someones house.

Bit different to smoking a spliff, no?

kneemos wrote: »

Both break the law.

And who is the victim of this most heinous crime of spliff smoking?

We aren't debating IF someone broke the law or not, we're debating whether the law is justified in its persecution of otherwise law-abiding citizens. And we seem to be going a bit off topic, sorry OP!

Also, kneemos, i'd appreciate it if you'd actually respond to some of the points i'm making, rather than taking the easy way out and resorting to the old chestnut of 'breaking the law is bad'.

kneemos

SamAK wrote: »

And who is the victim of this most heinous crime of spliff smoking?

We aren't debating IF someone broke the law or not, we're debating whether the law is justified in its persecution of otherwise law-abiding citizens. And we seem to be going a bit off topic, sorry OP!

Also, kneemos, i'd appreciate it if you'd actually respond to some of the points i'm making, rather than taking the easy way out and resorting to the old chestnut of 'breaking the law is bad'.

How is breaking the law not bad?

Law abiding citizens don't get "persucated"until they break the law.You can't pick and choose the ones you don't agree with.

Femme_Fatale

kneemos wrote: »

How is breaking the law not bad?

When it's not harming anyone. I don't agree with people who feel compelled to "sock it to the man" about everything, but neither do I agree with blind acceptance and questioning nothing because "that's just the way it is."

SamAK

kneemos wrote: »

How is breaking the law not bad?

Ever heard of civil disobedience, activism, dissent or protest? Do these words not mean anything to you?

“One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” - Martin Luther King

“Protest beyond the law is not a departure from democracy; it is absolutely essential to it.”
― Howard Zinn

“It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen.”
― Aristotle

If you can't work it out, then I'm not sure where we go from here. The fact that you still choose not to challenge any of the perfectly valid points I made earlier speaks volumes.

SamAK

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

neither do I agree with blind acceptance and questioning nothing because "that's just the way it is."

kneemos

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

When it's not harming anyone. I don't agree with people who feel compelled to "sock it to the man" about everything, but neither do I agree with blind acceptance and questioning nothing because "that's just the way it is."

Selling drugs does harm people .

Drugs of any sort have all sorts of financial,social,physical and mental health consequences.

timthumbni

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I will ta.

Silly tarring tbh. My brother and his wife are solicitors just doing their job and raising their child and living their lives. Must tell them they're rotten to the core and part of a scam.

Why oh why must so many of you Boards folks decide to apply the behaviour of a minority to everyone in that group?
Is it really so difficult not to analyse things a bit further?
This place should have higher standards than TheJournal.ie, Independent.ie comments and even Facebook. FFS.

I am speaking from my personal experience with lawyers. Legal aid is a scam. Maybe your relatives are dead on but that is not the point. They may be just doing their job but what of it? The legal profession is rotten to the core. A friend of mine was advised by her solicitor to say her ex husband was a big drinker and beat her when he was drunk. As he was neither she told the lawyer to feck off. They said they advised all clients to say this to paint their ex in a bad light.

Ambulance chasers describes them perfectly. All IMO of course.

kneemos

SamAK wrote: »

I don't quite see how you managed to extract that idea from my comment..! I didn't suggest anything like that.


I'm trying to get the idea across that reducing the value of illegal substances would go a long way towards reducing the profits, power and resources of criminals that don't give a flying fcuk about anything other than making money. Is this not a logical thought?

As it stands we have the following situation:

Dealers do not care if you're under 18, so no I.D required. If it's illegal, there's money to be made, so of course we end up in a position where all a kid wants is a bag of weed, and Mr. Dealer says 'hey, i've got these pills, want to try them?'

This blows the anti-drug 'gateway' theory out of the water. The only reason people have access to harder drugs(let's remember that not all drugs are equal, Cannabis is NOT the same as heroin) is because of blanket prohibition.

And, i'm sure we've all seen the occasional news reports about people being taken ill or dying from contaminated drugs, be it dirty pills or Cannabis weighed down with sand, powdered glass or lead pellets(no i'm not joking, in my younger days I was unlucky enough to come across the glass weed, it's horrifying). Again, the sole reason this happens is because of the aforementioned criminals that just do not give a damn about consumer safety. They are in it for the exorbitant profit.

I'm not here to try and win an argument, i'm here to discuss ways of reducing harm, controlling quality of product and taking resources out of the hands of dangerous people. No plan would be perfect, but why wouldn't it necessarily be less damaging and costly to society than our current system?

I'm all for legalizing and taxing weed, because it's by far the most benign of all 'controlled' drugs. But....different substances are a dirdfferent story. Like I said earlier, I don't claim to have an answer for everything.

Sounds reasonable.