2012 ROK Cyclist death crash verdict

Axel Lamp

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/student-23-found-guilty-of-dangerous-driving-causing-death-of-fatheroffour-paud-oleary-31082563.html

Brilliant news. Hopefully this will give some bit of closure to the family who suffered greatly over the last few years.

Previous thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88964927

check_six

That story makes me so angry. This Shane Fitzgerald fella went out of his way to skip the country and dispose of the car involved in the crash in the UK after he'd left the guy to die in a ditch after hitting him while blitzed drunk. Utterly reprehensible behaviour after what some would claim was an "accident". I hope none of his family aided him in his getaway.

Orion

"Judge Thomas E O'Donnell adjourned sentencing until April 22 and directed that a probation report be prepared"

Why would probation even be considered? He killed a man and then skipped the country to avoid responsibility.

Lumen

Orion wrote: »

"Judge Thomas E O'Donnell adjourned sentencing until April 22 and directed that a probation report be prepared"

Why would probation even be considered? He killed a man and then skipped the country to avoid responsibility.

Leave Judge O'Donnell alone!

http://www.sin.ie/2013/03/07/circuit-court-judge-calls-for-formation-of-sentencing-council/

Poor lamb.

laraghrider

Orion wrote: »

"Judge Thomas E O'Donnell adjourned sentencing until April 22 and directed that a probation report be prepared"

Why would probation even be considered? He killed a man and then skipped the country to avoid responsibility.

Because he was found guilty of reckless driving which caused death. He wasn't found guilty of murder or manslaughter. A 2 year suspended sentence with a 10 year driving ban beckons.

the world wonders

Orion wrote: »

Why would probation even be considered?

A "probation report" doesn't mean that a jail sentence is not likely. If the judge doesn't take the probation report into account properly then there is a danger of the sentence being overturned on appeal -- see this similar case for an example.

Kalman

Orion wrote: »

"Judge Thomas E O'Donnell adjourned sentencing until April 22 and directed that a probation report be prepared"

Why would probation even be considered? He killed a man and then skipped the country to avoid responsibility.

Should be banned from driving for life!

Hi Ho

Great credit to the Gardaí here - the local guys were really committed to the case and went about it in a real professional way.

Beasty

I've deleted a post and several follow-ups. This is a very serious topic - please do not post hearsay or speculate over possible facts of the case

Any questions please PM me - do not respond in-thread

Thanks

Axel Lamp

Hi Ho wrote: »

Great credit to the Gardaí here - the local guys were really committed to the case and went about it in a real professional way.

Yip. Great dedication by them.

I hope those who allegedly disposed of the vehicle are apprehended if possible.

Limestone1

Axel Lamp wrote: »

Yip. Great dedication by them.

I hope those who allegedly disposed of the vehicle are apprehended if possible.

in itself not a crime

Unknown Soldier

Limestone1 wrote: »

in itself not a crime

It is.

If proved it was with knowledge of the incident.

Well done to the GDA's who brought this to a conclusion.

RobFowl

Well done to the Gardai and some degree of closure for the family.
Really feel for the poor mans wife and kids.

Axel Lamp

Limestone1 wrote: »

in itself not a crime

Is it not? Perverting the course of justice or something like that?

Unknown Soldier

RobFowl wrote: »

Well done to the Gardai and some degree of closure for the family.
Really feel for the poor mans wife and kids.

+1

Heart on sleeve here, but after seeing the news over the last few weeks and seeing the accused on the news, leaving court? I found it upsetting.

IMO not a slight bit of remorse and quite frankly, even though I am not the best specimen of humanity, I hope he some day understands what he did.

It didn't look like he did.


This case is mostly why I am now seeing more value in cycling with a group rather than solo

ford2600

Truly awful event, today's verdict might give some limited closure to the family.

A father, husband, brother and friend is gone for good because of the selfishness, wrecklessness of another.

Over 40 years ago, a little while before I was born, my uncle was killed in very similar circumstances from a bike by a young man driving drunk at night.

While not in any way to excuse either men, in hindsight the young man of 1972 who killed my uncle, is still paying the price and will never have any closure. He also ran at time, and was never prosecuted.

When I was his age he was at time of event, and playing for the same GAA team he was a star player for(for whom he never played again after event) he made his first attempt at a drunken apology. 25 years after the event.

Of course Paud O'Leary's family have to deal for the rest of their days with someone who is missing who shouldn't be. I hope they find strength to deal with that pain and loss.

Just to add well done to the Gardai. Difficult case to get a result in.

a148pro

Lumen wrote: »

Leave Judge O'Donnell alone!

http://www.sin.ie/2013/03/07/circuit-court-judge-calls-for-formation-of-sentencing-council/

Poor lamb.

Delighted to hear this verdict, appalled and gutted for the family. I hope they have some sense of vindication now, however small consolation that may be.

FWIW this judge is a well known triathlete so any criticism that he may be out of touch would be misplaced here. Let's leave him make his own mind up shall we.

griffin100

Six and a half years with the last 18 months suspended. Not nearly enough but at least he'll spend some time in prison.

dastardly00

Fitzgerald was sentenced to six-and-a-half years in prison with the final 18 months suspended and was disqualified from driving for ten years

No way near enough of a driving ban either.

Johnny Jukebox

Not nearly long enough considering his lack of remorse and attempts to evade responsibility.

And why not banned from driving for life ?

JBokeh

I'd have thought he'd have been given a lot worse than what he got for being a child about it and buggering off trying to cover it up.

I wonder what he would have got if he went about it the proper way?

DirkVoodoo

JBokeh wrote: »

I'd have thought he'd have been given a lot worse than what he got for being a child about it and buggering off trying to cover it up.

I wonder what he would have got if he went about it the proper way?

It seems like the message from the justice system is that if you want to kill someone and serve the least time possible, use a car.

I'm glad that his family have got some justice, but not nearly enough. How can someone like that ever be allowed behind the wheel of a car again???

godtabh

18 months suspended. With good time he'll probably be out in a couple of months. Shocking given the circumstances

Stheno

godtabh wrote: »

18 months suspended. With good time he'll probably be out in a couple of months. Shocking given the circumstances

He got six and a half years with the last year and a half suspended

Even with time off for good behaviour he'll spend four years in prison

He got a heavier sentence than the driver in Donegal who killed eight people

Beasty

I've deleted one post. Please do not make factually inaccurate statements to support your arguments. Any questions PM me or one of the other mods - do not respond in-thread

Thanks

TonyStark

Limestone1 wrote: »

in itself not a crime

Perverting the course of justice is.

godtabh

Stheno wrote: »

He got six and a half years with the last year and a half suspended

Even with time off for good behaviour he'll spend four years in prison

He got a heavier sentence than the driver in Donegal who killed eight people

I was being sarcastics

deandean

completely inadequate sentence IMO when I consider all the circumstances and the man's behaviour.

I hope the DPP will appeal the leniency of the sentence

efb

I think the sentence is as good as can be hoped for. I'm sure his lawyers tried to downgrade the charge

michael999999

After hearing the victim impact statement from Mr O Learys wife, this scumbag should have been jailed for at least ten years.

Let's hope the investigation hasn't ended here, someone had to dispose of the Jeep and get him to the ferry!

ROK ON

michael999999 wrote: »

After hearing the victim impact statement from Mr O Learys wife, this scumbag should have been jailed for at least ten years.

Let's hope the investigation hasn't ended here, someone had to dispose of the Jeep and get him to the ferry!

From the outset this case has had a whiff of collusion about this. The guilty man vanished but was never reported as missing by family or friends. The vehicle has never been recovered. Where did this guy get funds to suddenly leave the state and travel across the world - that took at least a bit of planning.

The sentence is very disappointing and does not appear to be in any way proportionate to the crime - FFS a guy got three years for tax evasion after declaring garlic were actually apples.
What is the average sentence in this type of case and what are the ranges that judges can apply?

wonga77

I would say this is a very disapointing end to the case in some ways. I know a member of Pauds family, the nicest most honest obliging man you could meet, that family have gone through such a tough time that I cant even imagine and it is they who have the life sentence.
If the guilty party had just manned up and accepted responsibility then maybe he could be forgiven but the way he went about it is shocking, get rid of the evidence, skip the country and those who helped him should be ashamed.
Once again a shocking inconsistancy in our judicial system and a very lenient punishment all things considered. For a start he should never be able to possess a driving licence again. Theres so many things Id like to say about this but I dont fancy a red card.
At least its finally done for the victims family and they dont have court procedures etc to go through again

Also, the guards deserve huge praise for the way they handled this, it was obvious from the beginning that they had an idea who did it but they bided their time and caught him. Kudos to them

Axel Lamp

michael999999 wrote: »

Let's hope the investigation hasn't ended here, someone had to dispose of the Jeep and get him to the ferry!

They won't have to look very far to find that alleged culprit. Alas the lack of evidence i.e. the grey landcruiser, means an arrest is unlikely.

It's very well known who disposed of it.

ted1

Stheno wrote: »

He got six and a half years with the last year and a half suspended

Even with time off for good behaviour he'll spend four years in prison

He got a heavier sentence than the driver in Donegal who killed eight people

Did the driver in Donegal skip the country? Did he leave the people dead at the side of a road without even calling it in? This tool has shown no remorse. It's a joke of s sentence. I

Duiske

efb wrote: »

I think the sentence is as good as can be hoped for. I'm sure his lawyers tried to downgrade the charge

When you look into the sentence though, it doesn't seem so good. With good behavior, the suspended part of the sentence and it being backdated a month, he could be out in 3yrs 7mths. He is also entitled to apply for restoration of his licence once 2/3rds of the ban has elapsed, so could be back on the road in 6.5yrs. It's at the judges discretion though, so hopefully the facts of the case will make restoration unlikely.

dobman88

An absolute joke of a sentence. And a minimal driving ban! Completely ridiculous. I'm from the same village as Paud and the upset and grief that this caused to his family and to our community is unbelievable. The fact he tried to run just makes it a whole lot worse. The family or Gardai will not be giving up yet. As Pauds wife said, they have a life sentence. This lad will be free soon.

a148pro

ROK ON wrote: »

What is the average sentence in this type of case and what are the ranges that judges can apply?

Max is ten years, average is between 3 - 6 depending on the circumstances. This is actually a reasonably long sentence, there have been few longer and where they were imposed there were multiple deaths and / or deliberate dangerous driving

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/CF903DCA1FDEC76C802573B4005FC1A4

Fundamentally, leaving aside the absolutely appalling and despicable way he acted after the crash and in pleading not guilty, it should be recalled that he presumably didn't go out with the intention of hurting someone, these were consequences of his drunkenness. Hence there's no point in banning him driving for ever. At some point he will be released and will need to drive to work and its in society's interests that he do.

None of this gainsays the appalling loss experienced by his family and four kids, and the extra damage above that that must have been done by his conduct after the accident.

ROK ON

I accept that the individual didn't intend to kill the victim. He is responsible for (1) driving while drunk, (2) killing while drunk, (3) leaving the crime scene, (4) planning to evade arrest, (5) evading arrest and (6) destruction of evidence.
This man has shown contempt for life and justice. In my opinion I would be less dissatisfied if he was handed the maximum sentence with a more significant driving ban. I am happy to pay my taxes to ensure that non accidental killers remain in prison for a full jail sentence. This was not planned but was not an accident either.

Roger Hassenforder

Deserves more than what he got.
The attempt to get away with it, and cover-up presumably with assistance; the apparent lack of remorse. Has he even apologised?

A family is without their dad, because some little bollix ran him over while drunk, left him to die/dead on a road and then legged it to Australia. I'd like to think if it was my son, I'd march him down to the Gardai face the consequences.

Fair dues to the local Gardai in getting him.

michael999999

a148pro wrote: »

Max is ten years, average is between 3 - 6 depending on the circumstances. This is actually a reasonably long sentence, there have been few longer and where they were imposed there were multiple deaths and / or deliberate dangerous driving

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/CF903DCA1FDEC76C802573B4005FC1A4

Fundamentally, leaving aside the absolutely appalling and despicable way he acted after the crash and in pleading not guilty, it should be recalled that he presumably didn't go out with the intention of hurting someone, these were consequences of his drunkenness. Hence there's no point in banning him driving for ever. At some point he will be released and will need to drive to work and its in society's interests that he do.

None of this gainsays the appalling loss experienced by his family and four kids, and the extra damage above that that must have been done by his conduct after the accident.

No, he should never again be allowed drive. He got into that jeep out of he's head on drink, and hit and killed an innocent father. Who he left in a ditch to die. Without even calling an ambulance.

Hes vermin.

a148pro

ROK ON wrote: »

In my opinion I would be less dissatisfied if he was handed the maximum sentence with a more significant driving ban. I am happy to pay my taxes to ensure that non accidental killers remain in prison for a full jail sentence.

It seems odd reasoning but people rarely get the absolute maximum sentence because there could be a hypothetical worse case, multiple deaths, a previous conviction for similar stuff, deliberate boy racer type driving while sober. Also he was young and young people are fcking eejits as we all remember, its hard to hold them to the same standards as adults you have to have some leeway for a 20 year old to do something they realise later was really irresponsible. I know I have.

Re the taxes the reality is to build more prisons we have to close schools and hospitals. Have you been in an A&E recently?

Instead we are filling our prisons with hordes of drug couriers, most of whom are ordinary joe soaps with drug or financial problems, so politicians a few years ago could maintain they were being tough on drugs.

There's no right answer here. I can fully sympathize with anyone who might want to just liquidize this guy and take his organs. But once we agree we cannot proceed on this basis it has to be a rational process thereafter.

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Deserves more than what he got.
The attempt to get away with it, and cover-up presumably with assistance; the apparent lack of remorse. Has he even apologised?

A family is without their dad, because some little bollix ran him over while drunk, left him to die/dead on a road and then legged it to Australia. I'd like to think if it was my son, I'd march him down to the Gardai face the consequences.

Fair dues to the local Gardai in getting him.

I completely agree, I think its disgusting and there are obviously people out there who helped him

ted1

a148pro wrote: »

Max is ten years, average is between 3 - 6 depending on the circumstances. This is actually a reasonably long sentence, there have been few longer and where they were imposed there were multiple deaths and / or deliberate dangerous driving

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/CF903DCA1FDEC76C802573B4005FC1A4

Fundamentally, leaving aside the absolutely appalling and despicable way he acted after the crash and in pleading not guilty, it should be recalled that he presumably didn't go out with the intention of hurting someone, these were consequences of his drunkenness. Hence there's no point in banning him driving for ever. At some point he will be released and will need to drive to work and its in society's interests that he do.

None of this gainsays the appalling loss experienced by his family and four kids, and the extra damage above that that must have been done by his conduct after the accident.

He went out with the intention to drink and drive. That is premeditated, anyone who drinks and drive should be trialled as such

griffin100

There was an interview on the radio this evening with a Kerry journalist who was at the hearing today. It made me want to puke to hear how his defence council listed the various reasons why his sentence should be lessened. Apparently he never set out to kill someone and sure he was only young and what young person has never made a mistake?

Apparently after he was found guilty he finally accepted that he had done was wrong and was remorseful - whoopy fcukin do - once found guilty he became remorseful.

One thing that really got to me, lots of the reports I have read talked of him 'knocking' this man off his bike, according to the reporter from the court today he didn't knock him off his bike, he ploughed into him and drove him through a hedge into a field and then left him there to die the b@stard.

A clubmate of mine was killed by a driver whilst out training two years ago. He left four kids and a wife. I've seen the devastation this type of killing causes to a family and a community. I'm delighted this scumbag is locked away, but it'll never bring a father back to his kids.

Hmmzis

a148pro wrote: »

Max is ten years, average is between 3 - 6 depending on the circumstances. This is actually a reasonably long sentence, there have been few longer and where they were imposed there were multiple deaths and / or deliberate dangerous driving

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/0/CF903DCA1FDEC76C802573B4005FC1A4

Fundamentally, leaving aside the absolutely appalling and despicable way he acted after the crash and in pleading not guilty, it should be recalled that he presumably didn't go out with the intention of hurting someone, these were consequences of his drunkenness. Hence there's no point in banning him driving for ever. At some point he will be released and will need to drive to work and its in society's interests that he do.

None of this gainsays the appalling loss experienced by his family and four kids, and the extra damage above that that must have been done by his conduct after the accident.

Since when is being drunk while killing somehow lessening ones guilt? If anything it's more incriminatory. Otherwise this becomes a perfectly legal excuse for assault and/or murder: "Sorry judge, didn't mean to stab the fella, was just blind drunk and didn't control myself..."

ford2600

Hmmzis wrote: »

Since when is being drunk while killing somehow lessening ones guilt? If anything it's more incriminatory. Otherwise this becomes a perfectly legal excuse for assault and/or murder: "Sorry judge, didn't mean to stab the fella, was just blind drunk and didn't control myself..."

I'm in 100% agreement with you but take a trip in a district court of your choice and count how many times drink is used as an excuse. Not sure if it is uniquely Irish thing but in many countries it would be unheard of to use as an excuse for driving causing death, assault, sexual assault or whatever.

As a student in the USA 20 yrs ago I worked security in a NY Irish bar. Every weekend night there would be at least one drunk asleep/unconscious in a cubicle. Among us the Irish staff it was just part of a night.

The abhorrence/disgust/dismay at which the Middle Eastern cleaners looked at the drunks finally opened my eyes to our diseased thinking when it comes alcohol. It is all pervasive, it is naive not to expect it in our court system.

a148pro

Hmmzis wrote: »

Since when is being drunk while killing somehow lessening ones guilt? If anything it's more incriminatory. Otherwise this becomes a perfectly legal excuse for assault and/or murder: "Sorry judge, didn't mean to stab the fella, was just blind drunk and didn't control myself..."

It's not and in dangerous driving cases it's considered an aggravating factor.

However such a person is necessarily less culpable than someone who goes out, sober, with the specific and direct intention of killing someone.

CramCycle

a148pro wrote: »

However such a person is necessarily less culpable than someone who goes out, sober, with the specific and direct intention of killing someone.

But, and I could be wrong, that is a different crime with a different charge.

My issue is that he didn't get the maximum, hopefully it will be reviewed.

When someone runs from an accident, and then when caught, does not receive the maximum sentence for the crime, it sends a message that running is a reasonable response to an accident.

rollingscone

CramCycle wrote: »

But, and I could be wrong, that is a different crime with a different charge.

My issue is that he didn't get the maximum, hopefully it will be reviewed.

When someone runs from an accident, and then when caught, does not receive the maximum sentence for the crime, it sends a message that running is a reasonable response to an accident.

it's an increasingly common one. Possibly the single ugliest aspect of our car culture is that driving is regarded as a right by the majority.

That's why there are services advertising the best insurance prices for people with expired driving bans and people comfortably paying huge premiums out of their cut of questionable injury claims.

from listening to outraged parents ranting about how unfair it is that their precious innocent baby is paying higher premiums because of that pedestrian who maliciously threw themselves under baby's car we seem alarmingly close to the utter impunity for dangerous drivers reported in the US.

BoardsMember

rollingscone wrote: »

it's an increasingly common one. Possibly the single ugliest aspect of our car culture is that driving is regarded as a right by the majority.

That's why there are services advertising the best insurance prices for people with expired driving bans and people comfortably paying huge premiums out of their cut of questionable injury claims.

from listening to outraged parents ranting about how unfair it is that their precious innocent baby is paying higher premiums because of that pedestrian who maliciously threw themselves under baby's car we seem alarmingly close to the utter impunity for dangerous drivers reported in the US.

Surely everyone has a right to drive, just as they do to cycle, as long as they have a license.

NiallBoo

Question: Does the driving ban start now or once he gets out of prison?

If he gets out in 5 years and can apply for his licence back in less than seven then might he only get a 2 year driving ban?

DirkVoodoo

BoardsMember wrote: »

Surely everyone has a right to drive, just as they do to cycle, as long as they have a license.

They do. Much like everyone has the right to have children. But if you prove yourself to be an unfit parent they are fairly good at taking your children off you.

Everyone makes mistakes. But this was a mistake that is hammered home in advertising campaigns, everyone knows the dangers/risks and ultimate stupidity of even attempting to drive after drinking. And this guy wasn't even borderline, he was plastered. And yet still got behind the wheel of a car.

How that doesn't spell out: "Not fit to drive, ever!" is beyond me.