Man remanded for attacking Judge.

Jimlh86

Now this guy if the papers are to be believed isn't a nice guy, but his solicitor pointed out that he has NO previous convictions!

Now I understand the evidence is strong in the case and we can't have people attacking judges, but how can that be justified when prolific burglars with a list of previous for the same offences walk out of court every day?

ezra_pound

Jimlh86 wrote: »

Now this guy if the papers are to be believed isn't a nice guy, but his solicitor pointed out that he has NO previous convictions!

Now I understand the evidence is strong in the case and we can't have people attacking judges, but how can that be justified when prolific burglars with a list of previous for the same offences walk out of court every day?

How can what be justified? It's not clear what you're suggesting.

Jimlh86

ezra_pound wrote: »

How can what be justified? It's not clear what you're suggesting.

Ok.. A guy attacks a judge her injuries were not serious, he was dealt with under Section 3 non fatal offences. I say fair enough a lot of similiar cases would have been Section 2 but grand. He's charged and taken straight to court? A lot of similiar cases, would have got station bail! Hes remanded in custody with no previous convictions or bench warrants come off it?!! What I'm saying is far worse criminals are not dealt with in this robust way but because a Judge is the victim it's taken more seriously? BULL!!! What about all the ordinary Joe Soaps who are victims of far worse things and they don't get this Justice??

pablo128

It was reported on a news article that he suffers from Aspergers syndrome too.

Jimlh86

Look I'm not saying that he shouldn't have been dealt with this way I'm not familiar with the case but surely if the courts have the capabilities of dealing with this case in this manner then they can deal with actual career criminals who cause immeasurable pain and suffering to ordinary decent people the same no bull**** way?

Arbiter of Good Taste

Jimlh86 wrote: »

Ok.. A guy attacks a judge her injuries were not serious, he was dealt with under Section 3 non fatal offences. I say fair enough a lot of similiar cases would have been Section 2 but grand. He's charged and taken straight to court? A lot of similiar cases, would have got station bail! Hes remanded in custody with no previous convictions or bench warrants come off it?!! What I'm saying is far worse criminals are not dealt with in this robust way but because a Judge is the victim it's taken more seriously? BULL!!! What about all the ordinary Joe Soaps who are victims of far worse things and they don't get this Justice??

Because attacks on certain sectors - the police and judiciary for example- should be dealt with more harshly. Otherwise there will be a complete deterioration of law and order if they are in fear of doing their jobs

Jimlh86

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

Because attacks on certain sectors - the police and judiciary for example- should be dealt with more harshly. Otherwise there will be a complete deterioration of law and order if they are in fear of doing their jobs

I am a Garda iv been punched, kicked, spat at, threatened on and off duty rammed by a jeep while trying to stop it, driven at twice, and I can tell you none of these instances have been dealt with even close to this!

Clearlier

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

Because attacks on certain sectors - the police and judiciary for example- should be dealt with more harshly. Otherwise there will be a complete deterioration of law and order if they are in fear of doing their jobs

This has got it. He didn't attack a person because of who they were. He attacked attacked a judge in a court room. That's essentially an attack on the judicial system. This is way more serious than attacking somebody on the street. A civil society is only as strong as its judicial system.

Stheno

The Gardai apparently objected to bail as he has no fixed abode following the protection order issued on Friday.

pablo128

Stheno wrote: »

The Gardai apparently objected to bail as he has no fixed abode following the protection order issued on Friday.

I'm not overly familiar with the bail system. Does anyone who is homeless get remanded in custody as soon as they are charged with something?

Clive Bisquette

Jimlh86 wrote: »

I am a Garda iv been punched, kicked, spat at, threatened on and off duty rammed by a jeep while trying to stop it, driven at twice, and I can tell you none of these instances have been dealt with even close to this!

Agree Jim ..absolutely right.

But in this case the guy was clearly unhinged and probably not totally responsible for his actions.

Well done on the difficult job you do ...

Jimlh86

Stheno wrote: »

The Gardai apparently objected to bail as he has no fixed abode following the protection order issued on Friday.

Yeah that's an issue for bail but I've sen many solicitors get around it in the past!

I agree with that poster that in no civilised society can you have members of the Judicary attacked in court but if you were seeing the devastation that crime was causing good people you would wonder why all cases can't be treated as serious by the courts!

Stheno

pablo128 wrote: »

I'm not overly familiar with the bail system. Does anyone who is homeless get remanded in custody as soon as they are charged with something?

Jimlh86 wrote: »

Yeah that's an issue for bail but I've sen many solicitors get around it in the past!

I agree with that poster that in no civilised society can you have members of the Judicary attacked in court but if you were seeing the devastation that crime was causing good people you would wonder why all cases can't be treated as serious by the courts!

I imagine that in this case a psychiatric evaluation will be required. Not easy to do if someone is homeless and in a disturbed state.

Jimlh86

Stheno wrote: »

I imagine that in this case a psychiatric evaluation will be required. Not easy to do if someone is homeless and in a disturbed state.

No many homeless people are given bail they can often give a family member or friends address which if Gardai can verify I.e that person is willing to let them stay there and this suffices. Then residing there is a condition on the bail so Gardai can ensure conditions are being met

Jimlh86

And yes Stheno it may be psychiatric reports may be needed, I'm not disagreeing with him getting remanded but instead the fact that organised career criminals when caught aren't dealt with I'm the same fashion!!

Old Bill

I don't see why we should have respect for Judges in this country because most of them are corrupt.

If a Judge gives a Paedophile a suspended sentence then they deserve to be attacked IMO.

We wouldn't have half as much crime in this country if the Judges didn't keep giving known Scumbags suspended sentences.

The Gentleman who allegedly attacked the Judge sounds like a decent man who was pushed too far. Nobody has the right to takeaway children from a loving parent.

Galway K9

Jimlh86 wrote: »

I am a Garda iv been punched, kicked, spat at, threatened on and off duty rammed by a jeep while trying to stop it, driven at twice, and I can tell you none of these instances have been dealt with even close to this!

You've some restraint. I would have lost it at the jeep ramming lol

Jimlh86

Galway K9 wrote: »

You've some restraint. I would have lost it at the jeep ramming lol

Ha ha I did but a ford focus vs a Mitsubishi l200 isn't much of a competition! To be fair the lad was never caught after he was picked up by a second stolen jeep so not much a judge could do there! But others have been caught and haven't been dealt with IMO by the courts!

Arbiter of Good Taste

Old Bill wrote: »

I don't see why we should have respect for Judges in this country because most of them are corrupt.

If a Judge gives a Paedophile a suspended sentence then they deserve to be attacked IMO.

We wouldn't have half as much crime in this country if the Judges didn't keep giving known Scumbags suspended sentences.

The Gentleman who allegedly attacked the Judge sounds like a decent man who was pushed too far. Nobody has the right to takeaway children from a loving parent.

He sounds like a decent role model for his children :rolleyes:

Jimlh86

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

He sounds like a decent role model for his children :rolleyes:

I agree!! This kind of thing isn't helpful

Old Bill

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

He sounds like a decent role model for his children :rolleyes:

That man is willing to fight for his children unlike many single dads.

The Judge had no right what soever to take his children away.

Diamond Doll

Old Bill wrote: »

That man is willing to fight for his children unlike many single dads.

The Judge had no right what soever to take his children away.

What? :pac:

He was a grown disabled adult, the case was about him and his parents, he wasn't/isn't a single dad.

If you're going to make such statements, please read about the case first!

feargale

Old Bill wrote: »

I don't see why we should have respect for Judges in this country because most of them are corrupt.

Source, please.

Old Bill wrote: »

If a Judge gives a Paedophile a suspended sentence then they deserve to be attacked IMO.

Judges make mistakes. Does your boss physically attack you when you make a mistake? Perhaps he does. Perhaps that's why your post is worthy of a damaged person.

Old Bill wrote: »

The Gentleman who allegedly attacked the Judge sounds like a decent man who was pushed too far. Nobody has the right to takeaway children from a loving parent.

You didn't hear the evidence. Is "The Gentleman" a friend or relative of yours?

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

He sounds like a decent role model for his children

Who? Old Bill or "The Gentleman"?

Old Bill

feargale wrote: »

Judges make mistakes. Does your boss physically attack you when you make a mistake? Perhaps he does. Perhaps that's why your post is worthy of a damaged person.

They don't make mistakes they sympathise with Paedophiles and other degenerates.

In England there was a case of a Judge who released a "man" who raped a bady.

It's Judges like that who deserve a good kicking.

HeidiHeidi

Old Bill wrote: »

That man is willing to fight for his children unlike many single dads.

The Judge had no right what soever to take his children away.

Do you even know what this thread is actually about???

Old Bill

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Do you even know what this thread is actually about???

Yeah some people seem to think that Judges are above reproach.

HeidiHeidi

Old Bill wrote: »

Yeah some people seem to think that Judges are above reproach.

Do you know what the case was that this thread is about?

You do know it didn't involve any single fathers or any children?

wandatowell

Old Bill wrote: »

Yeah some people seem to think that Judges are above reproach.

Hard to justify attacking anyone. He'll get done for his crime and rightly so.

Arbiter of Good Taste

feargale wrote: »

Who? Old Bill or "The Gentleman"?

The "Gentleman". Obviously someone who will assault another person is totally appropriate to have in charge of minors

HeidiHeidi

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

The "Gentleman". Obviously someone who will assault another person is totally appropriate to have in charge of minors

Jesus.

There are no minors involved in this case!

3rdDegree

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Jesus.

There are no minors involved in this case!

I think there is no link to the story here, which is why people are making incorrect assumptions about the case. The case is about an adult male. His parents were applying for a protection order against him and during the course of the hearing, he attached the judge.

http://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2015/1212/753123-judge-attack/

dr.fuzzenstein

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Do you even know what this thread is actually about???

I was wondering that myself. Since there is no link to any article or any identifying information about what the hell this is about, we're all just guessing.

edit:
Thanks, 3rd degree. Now we know what we're at.

Acara

pablo128 wrote: »

It was reported on a news article that he suffers from Aspergers syndrome too.

Perhaps he should not have been in a court in the first place. Highly stressful places and stress for AS people really bad. He has a horrific disorder through no fault if his own, his folks cannot cope with his aggression ( and should be given supports other than court proceedings to cope with their son). Mental Health Services should be the ones before the Courts for letting this happen.

Acara

Clearlier wrote: »

This has got it. He didn't attack a person because of who they were. He attacked attacked a judge in a court room. That's essentially an attack on the judicial system. This is way more serious than attacking somebody on the street. A civil society is only as strong as its judicial system.

And what part of this do you honestly think a person with AS would understand?? His level of aggression would point to a complete lack of any legal capacity and my point is this individual and his family should not have to be put in these circumstances to get HELP. I am in the Special Needs Sector and his parents have had a life time if this aggression I know of SEN teachers who have had to endure exactly the same abuse as that Guard plus being bitten which is common in younger children with AS. They get on with their jobs.

Acara

Diamond Doll wrote: »

What? :pac:

He was a grown disabled adult, the case was about him and his parents, he wasn't/isn't a single dad.

If you're going to make such statements, please read about the case first!

Agree u r totally right

Acara

Acara wrote: »

Agree u r totally right

The Judge clearly has no knowledge of the symptoms of adult AS and how to deal with them. Why would she?? She is a legal expert NOT a medical one so where is the MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE in all of this.

Lux23

He should be remanded to a mental health facility, not a prison. He must have been terrified when he found out he was losing his home.

Acara

Lux23 wrote: »

He should be remanded to a mental health facility, not a prison. He must have been terrified when he found out he was losing his home.

Well said and you are completely right and have judged this with the humanity and wisdom the judge in question should have had. Apparently her Court was in absolute chaos before the incident and she had lost any control of her own Courtroom. If this happened on my classroom as a teacher I would loose my job why is she allowed to keep hers?

Lux23

Well that's going a bit too far, he is still responsible for attacking the judge, I don't like that kind of victim blaming. And what school teacher loses their job for crap in Ireland?

dr.fuzzenstein

Lux23 wrote: »

Well that's going a bit too far, he is still responsible for attacking the judge, I don't like that kind of victim blaming. And what school teacher loses their job for crap in Ireland?

And aspergers is by far not the catastrophic, debilitating condition people make it out to be. Otherwise you'd talk about autism. Its not like the guy is a fully blown mental patient that requires 24/7 care and supervision.

Acara

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

And aspergers is by far not the catastrophic, debilitating condition people make it out to be. Otherwise you'd talk about autism. Its not like the guy is a fully blown mental patient that requires 24/7 care and supervision.

At the severe end of the spectrum it is.

ezra_pound

Acara wrote: »

At the severe end of the spectrum it is.

So he should be exempt from getting a protection order imposed against him in relation to his parents' safety?

Acara

ezra_pound wrote: »

So he should be exempt from getting a protection order imposed against him in relation to his parents' safety?

A protection order would not protect his parents in this situation because their son would not have the capacity to understand the meaning of such an order that's why he attacked a judge in the first case. Where were the mental health supports for him and his family.

feargale

Acara wrote: »

Well said and you are completely right and have judged this with the humanity and wisdom the judge in question should have had. Apparently her Court was in absolute chaos before the incident and she had lost any control of her own Courtroom. If this happened on my classroom as a teacher I would loose my job why is she allowed to keep hers?

When did a teacher last lose their job in this country?

ezra_pound

Acara wrote: »

A protection order would not protect his parents in this situation because their son would not have the capacity to understand the meaning of such an order that's why he attacked a judge in the first case. Where were the mental health supports for him and his family.

You're presuming a lot of things that you just don't know.

Unknown unknowns:

1. are the mental health services involved in this matter?
2. To what degree are they involved?
3. In what way is this man's disability a factor in his capacity to understand the meaning of a protection order?
4. Why did he attack the judge in the first place?
Edit:
... And 5. Should the mental health services be involved?

Knowns knowns:

1. The parents applied for a protection order.
2. The learned judge granted this from her examination of the facts before her and the application of the law relating to these facts.
3. The person in question assaulted the judge in the courtroom. If anything, this demonstrates the violent tendencies of the individual and the need for a protection order.

gctest50

Acara wrote: »

A protection order would not protect his parents in this situation because their son would not have the capacity to understand the meaning of such an order .............

That's not the point of it - if you contravene the protection order you are guilty of an offence

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1996/act/1/section/17/enacted/en/html#zza1y1996s17

17.—(1) A respondent who—

(a) contravenes a safety order, a barring order, an interim barring order or a protection order, or

(b) while a barring order or interim barring order is in force refuses to permit the applicant or any dependent person to enter in and remain in the place to which the order relates or does any act for the purpose of preventing the applicant or such dependent person from so doing,


shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or to both.

hullaballoo

Moderator: Old Bill, do not post in this thread again, please.

MarkAnthony

Just to point out that the 'capital' murder charge is still on the books with a 40 year mandatory for the murder of members of AGS. So there is some recognition there IMHO.

The_Minister

Acara wrote: »

A protection order would not protect his parents in this situation because their son would not have the capacity to understand the meaning of such an order that's why he attacked a judge in the first case. Where were the mental health supports for him and his family.

There is no reason to think he lacked mental capacity - he was not a ward of court, nor was he sectioned or sought to be sectioned.

He is a violent man with significant learning difficulties, but there is no evidence that he lacks mental capacity.

The_Minister

Jimlh86 wrote: »

Ok.. A guy attacks a judge her injuries were not serious, he was dealt with under Section 3 non fatal offences. I say fair enough a lot of similiar cases would have been Section 2 but grand. He's charged and taken straight to court? A lot of similiar cases, would have got station bail! Hes remanded in custody with no previous convictions or bench warrants come off it?!! What I'm saying is far worse criminals are not dealt with in this robust way but because a Judge is the victim it's taken more seriously? BULL!!! What about all the ordinary Joe Soaps who are victims of far worse things and they don't get this Justice??

There was a judge who got punched a while back and it wasn't dealt with in that special a fashion.
Why?
Because they weren't sitting as a judge at a time; they weren't attacked because or as a judge, but just happened to get caught up in something unfortunate.

It's being treated this seriously because an attack on a judge in a courtroom is an attack on justice. Whenever a matter is heard, someone loses, and justice will fall apart if they feel able to pop the judge in retaliation.

Attacks on judges, gardaí, even politicians (no matter how tempting) etc are more serious than a normal attack on a normal person, if they are attacked because they are judges, gardaí or politicians.

Jimlh86

The_Minister wrote: »

There was a judge who got punched a while back and it wasn't dealt with in that special a fashion.
Why?
Because they weren't sitting as a judge at a time; they weren't attacked because or as a judge, but just happened to get caught up in something unfortunate.

It's being treated this seriously because an attack on a judge in a courtroom is an attack on justice. Whenever a matter is heard, someone loses, and justice will fall apart if they feel able to pop the judge in retaliation.

Attacks on judges, gardaí, even politicians (no matter how tempting) etc are more serious than a normal attack on a normal person, if they are attacked because they are judges, gardaí or politicians.

Oh I completely agree that it should be dealt with in this manner as should any unprovoked attack, my point is that very serious charges are before the court everyday involving offenders with ridiculous amounts of previous convictions and they are being let out in bail! Which the often reoffend on! It's just when you see the devastation they leave behind it's frustrating!