Vigilante Justice

Fat Christy

I swore I'd never be one of those posters to post about news stories and look at me! For shame. Anyway, the below story got me thinking a bit about the legal system and vigilante justice. What are your thoughts on it?

In a way, I sort of felt sorry for the guy that was attacked in this situation. Granted, I don't know anything about his case only that he is a child sex offender. Should it be the responsibility of our legal system alone to deal with criminals?

Vigilante justice or in layman terms 'An eye for an eye' wouldn't be something I would agree with, but if something happened to my family or my friends, I think my morals would go out the window. I'm quite an over protective person and the thoughts of someone hurting my family or friends fills me with dread. I don't think I'd leave a rock un-turned in my quest to find the culprit. The sentences given out to murderers and rapists in this country and others can be sickeningly lenient. I'd prefer a justice system with harsher sentences. At the same time though, I would be totally against the death penalty. Does that make me a hypocrite?

Linky to article: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/local-mob-that-beat-up-convicted-child-rapist-in-dublin-were-concerned-parents-31289340.html

I hope this is okay here.

AlphaRed

Why should the government have the monopoly on violence?

bodice ripper

Thread title is an oxymoron.

Sheep Lover

I like bating this one eyed guy i know after he looks at my sister. Is that the same?

anncoates

For once in these stories, the guy actually looks like a cartoon pervert

Fat Christy

bodice ripper wrote: »

Thread title is an oxymoron.

I didn't know what else to put.

I believe in the principle of retribution, but not by a mob. I'm not sure the latter should even need elaboration. Obviously the penal system should be organised, professional, and evenhanded.

dilallio

What happens when the vigilantes are wrong or idiots?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society

Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "paedophile", it emerged yesterday.
Dr Yvette Cloete, a specialist registrar in paediatric medicine at the Royal Gwent hospital in Newport, was forced to flee her house after vandals daubed it with graffiti in the middle of the night.
The word "paedo" was written across the front porch and door of the house she shared with her brother in the village of St Brides, south Wales.

Fat Christy

Re-reading my OP, there's at least 3 separate issues. Man I'm sh*t at trying to explain things....

RedemptionZ

No I don't agree with vigilante justice, because everyone should have the right to a fair trial, if people don't like the sentence handed out then campaign for harsher/different sentences. Beating the guy up because the justice system failed to punish him adequately isn't going to fix the justice system and people like him will consistently get 'soft' sentences, whatever people consider soft sentences to be.

With regards to that case, it's one of those things where nobody wants a child rapist living in their area, but ultimately they do have to live somewhere. I'd rather have the guy housed, he's on the sex offender register I assume so the Garda will know what he's up to. I mean ultimately beating him up isn't going to un-rape the child. If he's hanging round schools then call the police.

whiskeyman

Fat Christy wrote: »

Re-reading my OP, there's at least 3 separate issues. Man I'm sh*t at trying to explain things....

I'd ban you 'vigilante style' if I could...

One eyed Jack

Sheep Lover wrote: »

I like bating this one eyed guy i know after he looks at my sister. Is that the same?

I hope not...

DoYouEvenLift

"How would I feel if this was done to me or someone in my family?" is how judges should decide their sentences. That way I'm sure there wouldn't be child molesters and murderers getting such lenient sentences.

MathDebater

"He had been seen in the local shop with kids' DVDs and with kids' games in his hands, I don't understand how that is not breaking regulations of his parole.

"There is transitional housing for women and kids from abusive relationships just 50 feet away from where he was living."

The convicted criminal was also staying only a short walk away from a local crèche and playgroup.

Probably shouldn't have been resttled there in the first place.

5rtytry56

Fat Christy wrote: »

Re-reading my OP, there's at least 3 separate issues. Man I'm sh*t at trying to explain things....

It's called the 'gugleguy syndrome' from a guy who used to post here.

Buona Fortuna

Fat Christy wrote: »

Re-reading my OP, there's at least 3 separate issues. Man I'm sh*t at trying to explain things....

We've got jackets for that.

My 2cents . I have no sympathy for Ward and don't give a second thought for any $hit coming his way.

Our justice system is broken. Heard today on the radio of a guy being released from prison today who had killed a Gard in 2009 (iirc). He'd already absconded from an open prison ffs.

But I don't like or agree with people taking the law into their own hands. You only have to read some of the nuttier threads on here.

Mob justice is no justice at all.

DoYouEvenLift

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

"How would I feel if this was done to me or someone in my family?" is how judges should decide their sentences.

No, that's comparable with allowing victims to sentence people.

The law should strike a balance between revenge and rehabilitation, and no victim or their family would be capable of striking that balance in a fair manner.

MathDebater wrote: »

Probably shouldn't have been resettled there in the first place.

No matter where you go in Ireland, you'll never be far from a playground, or a park, or a school, or an estate full of kids.

Some of the claims about his activity (seen peeking through windows, caught buying children's toys) are a little fishy. They sound like they were pulled straight from a hysterical facebook page.

In any case, as long as Ward is free, I don't think he can really be secluded from children, ideal though that would be.

Ken Shamrock

Fat Christy wrote: »

I swore I'd never be one of those posters to post about news stories and look at me! For shame. Anyway, the below story got me thinking a bit about the legal system and vigilante justice. What are your thoughts on it?

In a way, I sort of felt sorry for the guy that was attacked in this situation. Granted, I don't know anything about his case only that he is a child sex offender. Should it be the responsibility of our legal system alone to deal with criminals?

Vigilante justice or in layman terms 'An eye for an eye' wouldn't be something I would agree with, but if something happened to my family or my friends, I think my morals would go out the window. I'm quite an over protective person and the thoughts of someone hurting my family or friends fills me with dread. I don't think I'd leave a rock un-turned in my quest to find the culprit. The sentences given out to murderers and rapists in this country and others can be sickeningly lenient. I'd prefer a justice system with harsher sentences. At the same time though, I would be totally against the death penalty. Does that make me a hypocrite?

Linky to article: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/local-mob-that-beat-up-convicted-child-rapist-in-dublin-were-concerned-parents-31289340.html

I hope this is okay here.

How in the name of Christ could anyone feel sorry for a convicted rapist/Paedo?

whupdedo

Sheep Lover wrote: »

I like bating this one eyed guy i know after he looks at my sister. Is that the same?

Masterbating to your sister you mean

Fat Christy

Bob.Carcass wrote: »

How in the name of Christ could anyone feel sorry for a convicted rapist/Paedo?

I said 'sort of'. And then there's the rest of my OP.

AlekSmart

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No, that's comparable with allowing victims to sentence people.

The law should strike a balance between revenge and rehabilitation, and no victim or their family would be capable of striking that balance in a fair manner.

Perhaps the greater issue here is what leeway Irelands Citizens are prepared to give our Superior Courts in their interpretation of appropriate sentencing.

Reading through this account from the Court of Criminal Appeal,I would suggest that reasonable and fair minded people would have a case for seeking a fuller explanation from at least Three Senior Judges.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/burglars-pursued-by-robbed-homeowner-until-gardai-stopped-them-have-sentences-reduced-31289516.html

James Cash (28), of Boot Road, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Thomas Wall (23) of Neilstwon Cottages, Clondalkin, Dublin 22 and William Wall (32), of Blacktrench, Newbridge, Co Kildare were found guilty at Cork Circuit Criminal Court on four counts of burglary committed in the Cork City area on December 1 and 2 2012.

Cash and William Wall lost appeals against conviction last month but all three men today successfully appealed their sentences. A new sentence of four years imprisonment with the final 21 months suspended was imposed on Cash while the Walls were both given four years with two suspended.

Cash was sentenced to seven years imprisonment with one suspended while the Walls were both sentenced to seven years imprisonment with the final two suspended by Judge Seán Ó Donnabháin on February 4 2014.

Speaking on behalf of the Court of Appeal, Mr Justice George Birmingham said William Wall, a married man with two children, had no previous convictions for anything of this nature and it was his first time in custody.

Again, Thomas Wall had no “significant previous convictions,” the judge said.

Cash was “to a significant extent different”. He came before the courts with 37 previous convictions some of which were for burglary. He hadn't actually served a sentence but a number of sentences had been suspened.

From my laymans perspective,I would suggest that Judge Seán Ó Donnabháin was 100% accurate in the sentence he imposed.

I would most certainly question the judgement and motives of the Judges comprising this Court of Appeal.

The reasons advanced by Mr Justice Birmingham,speaking on behalf of Mr Justice Garrett Sheehan and Mr Justice Alan Mahon to my layman's ears,do not sound credible or reasonable...In fact I would consider them irrational,and counter to the rights of NON Criminally inclined citizens to safe enjoyment of their property and life.

The increasingly eccentric,sometimes bizzarre judgements of the Court of Appeal and quite often,the Supreme Court itself would appear to be have the welfare of the Criminal at heart.....I,for noe,would welcome a learned Judges explanation as to why this should be ?

lizzyman

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

"How would I feel if this was done to me or someone in my family?" is how judges should decide their sentences. That way I'm sure there wouldn't be child molesters and murderers getting such lenient sentences.

Absolutely not. The whole point is that the judge is neutral and decides the sentence based on the case and the evidence before him. Judges would not be allowed rule on a case where their family members are involved.

Fat Christy

dilallio wrote: »

What happens when the vigilantes are wrong or idiots?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society

O.o

I would expect something like that to happen in America, not Wales. Mother of divine Christ!

AlekSmart

AlekSmart wrote: »

The increasingly eccentric,sometimes bizzarre judgements of the Court of Appeal and quite often,the Supreme Court itself would appear to be have the welfare of the Criminal at heart.....I,for noe,would welcome a learned Judges explanation as to why this should be ?

I don't know how 'eccentric' they are are, although any man caught sauntering near the Phoenix Park in a wig & frock certainly meets the description.

I was responding to a more basic point. However eccentric they are, judges shouldn't be putting themselves in the shoes of anyone except a good-natured bystander.

Sheep Lover

whupdedo wrote: »

Masterbating to your sister you mean

Stop labelling me, man.

AudreyHepburn

I don't like the idea of Vigilante Justice because I can't see how becoming violent makes you any better than the person you are attacking.

Although I waive that viewpoint for anyone who lays a hand on a child or the elderly...if you do that imo you forfeit the right to be treated as human.

I just feel that there is a lot of scope for such a system to be abused - beating up a child molester is one thing but what happens when that is extending to include anyone and everyone who has ever done you wrong? What happens when innocent people who are wrongly accused of crimes starting getting hurt?

Everyone has the right to a fair trial. Lynch mobs solve nothing imo.

captbarnacles

I felt sorry for him. Didn't want to and it annoyed me that I did.

frostyjacks

Nothing wrong with a bit of street justice every now and then. The law only punishes people after they commit the crime, in cases like this it's best to get the punishment in beforehand.

K4t

Animals.

Rather than travelling to a Garda station to share their grievances, or holding a community meeting to inform the neighborhood of the situation and perhaps setting out a strategy, they decided that the best cause of action was to physically assault the man? I'll just quote one of the comments under the article - I'd be more concerned for them as parents.

Fat Christy

captbarnacles wrote: »

I felt sorry for him. Didn't want to and it annoyed me that I did.

Yeah, I was the same.

I hope everyone involved is identified and prosecuted for assault.

K4t

Deleted User wrote: »

I hope everyone involved is identified and prosecuted for assault.

Or instead perhaps chased around a field and given a few slaps? -that is the kind of society those people want to live in after all.

K4t

K4t wrote: »

Or instead perhaps chased around a field and given a few slaps? -that is the kind of society those people want to live in after all.

More like a few schlaps.

diomed

Concerned parents = do not pass go, do not collect 200 hours community service.

ThinkProgress

I would be very tempted in that situation to do the same... What are officials thinking when they re-house these sick individuals?

The officials who made that decision deserve a few thumps around their heads too! gobsh*tes!

riffmongous

I dont like the idea of it.. but in cases where the person has been convicted and then received a small sentence and been set free early, as in a few cases that came to attention recently, I have thought if it would really be such a bad thing

Fat Christy

riffmongous wrote: »

I dont like the idea of it.. but in cases where the person has been convicted and then received a small sentence and been set free early, as in a few cases that came to attention recently, I have thought if it would really be such a bad thing

Sometimes, I've half wished they would get a good going over when they did end up in prison....

:-/

I'm sure none of them see the contradiction inherent in expressing their disapproval at his acts of violence by engaging in a mass act of violence of their own.

It wasn't necessary to beat him up, they could have protested and lobbied to have him moved but that wouldn't have sated the mob mentality.

It makes me uncomfortable, as does feeling sorry for him.

Grayson

frostyjacks wrote: »

Nothing wrong with a bit of street justice every now and then. The law only punishes people after they commit the crime, in cases like this it's best to get the punishment in beforehand.

He had been punished by the law after the crime was comitted

Sand

Honestly, unless you're going to make these crimes punishable by death, or imprisonment until death then society needs to find some mechanism for release and rehabilitation. Otherwise we'll end up living in the sort of terrorised, stupid, hysterical society Brass Eye so correctly took the piss out of in that infamous Paedogeddon episode. "Sheets of flame, dancing to the beat of primitive animal justice. One man kebabbed, hundreds scarred forever by the shared blood ritual. And yet, an astonishing sense of community here now. A positive atmosphere, a sense of a job well done. A shared sigh of relief, very much like the bizarre euphoria at the end of an hours vomiting."

The article itself is very sly with remarks like "The convicted criminal was also staying only a short walk away from a local crèche and playgroup". In any urban area, is any location more than a short walk away from a local creche or playgroup? There's absolutely no evidence this guy attacked any child or was planning to attack any child. Its just basically ugly mob justice deciding that a potential, academic threat to their child justifies them roaming the streets attacking people. Where the does that sort of mentality end?

frostyjacks

Have to laugh at all the bleeding hearts here shedding tears for a paedophile.

Ha ha ha.

Reserve your sympathy for his victims.

Sand

frostyjacks wrote: »

Have to laugh at all the bleeding hearts here shedding tears for a paedophile.

Ha ha ha.

Reserve your sympathy for his victims.

Are you in favour of the death penalty for any sexual crimes against children?

frostyjacks

Sand wrote: »

Are you in favour of the death penalty for any sexual crimes against children?

I'd rather see castration. But either way is fine with me, our sentancing is way too soft in this country.

Sand

So a 15 year old girl who has sex with a 14 year old should be put to death and/or castrated? Should the 14 year old also be put to death and/or castrated just to be sure they wont harm another child?

323

frostyjacks wrote: »

Have to laugh at all the bleeding hearts here shedding tears for a paedophile.

Ha ha ha.

Reserve your sympathy for his victims.

Spot on.

Sand wrote: »

Are you in favour of the death penalty for any sexual crimes against children?

No.
But a sentence measured in decades would be a start Followed by chemical castration before being released.

frostyjacks

Sand wrote: »

So a 15 year old girl who has sex with a 14 year old should be put to death and/or castrated? Should the 14 year old also be put to death and/or castrated just to be sure they wont harm another child?

Tell you what, that poor paedophile is probably searching for somewhere new to live after that trimming. Why don't you take him in if you're so concerned about his wellbeing?

themandan6611

MathDebater wrote: »

Probably shouldn't have been resttled there.

re-settled, lol good one, do you think he is jewish or something ?

Sand

frostyjacks wrote: »

Tell you what, that poor paedophile is probably searching for somewhere new to live after that trimming. Why don't you take him in if you're so concerned about his wellbeing?

I'll take that as you acknowledging that justice and the law can be a little more complicated than some mob dealing out beatings to whoever they dislike.

ThinkProgress

Sand wrote: »

So a 15 year old girl who has sex with a 14 year old should be put to death and/or castrated? Should the 14 year old also be put to death and/or castrated just to be sure they wont harm another child?

This is a stupid point... really really stupid.

There is a BIG difference between a 35 year old 6ft 6inch male raping a child, and the scenario you describe above.

There are degrees of punishment to fit the gravity of the crime.

Most crimes like this man's, I would support 20 years-to-life in prison and chemical castration. Depending on the brutality of the crime or if he was guilty of multiple cases... the death penalty could be appropriate imo.

Allowing someone that dangerous to roam freely and booze himself up in a local pub is just insanity. This man is just as dangerous as a convicted murderer. Sexual predators ruin people's lives.

RedemptionZ

frostyjacks wrote: »

Have to laugh at all the bleeding hearts here shedding tears for a paedophile.

Ha ha ha.

Reserve your sympathy for his victims.

Idiotic way of looking at it. Are his victims supposed to feel better about being abused because he was beaten up? What exactly did it achieve? They were still abused. The consequences of what happened won't go away. What you call shedding tears is actually just looking at the event from a logical viewpoint.

I expect you to respond in daily mail style emotive language and once again try to insinuate that we're pedo sympathisers...

RedemptionZ

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Most crimes like this man's, I would support 20 years-to-life in prison and chemical castration. Depending on the brutality of the crime or if he was guilty of multiple cases... the death penalty could be appropriate imo

That's too expensive and inefficient. If you were going to go down that route you'd have to have the death penalty, which opens up a whole other can of worms. Also why not castrate him initially and then give him a few years in a prison facility where specialists can try to help him, because clearly anyone who molests children is ****ed up in the head. If he's deemed safe let him out, he won't have a libido anyway. This 20 to life and then castration just screams make him suffer as opposed to actually helping make society safer, which should be the point of prison imo.