Phoenix Park tragedy

OhHiMark

This first post asked what we can do to reform the justice system. I think this thread clearly illustrates why we, as lay people, should be let nowhere near reform of the justice system. There'd be firing squads on every street within a week.

bad2dabone

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I hope they do everything to rehabilitate this man. Dreadful tragedy

Is this a wind up? You hope the child killer gets help? What about the family of the murdered girl?

Wanderer78

Superhorse wrote: »

I hope he gets his head caved in in prison and dies a horrible slow painful death screaming for his mammy. Rehab will you ever feck off with that rubbish.

thats nice!

bad2dabone wrote: »

Is this a wind up? You hope the child killer gets help? What about the family of the murdered girl?

no its not a wind up. roughly 60% of inmates re-offend upon release. is this what we really want? yes i do hope the family is also getting help from this dreadful tragedy. i hope i never experience their pain.

wokingvoter

MarkAnthony wrote: »

I'm actually not sure. Irish hoods are generally pussies - there are some genuine hardmen out there for sure, I'd to think some of them would have done the decent thing in a case like this and blown their brains out if they'd done something like this, probably not.

The sad truth about these lads is they're borne out of the 'ah it's just kids', 'boys will be boys' and 'ah sure it'll be grand' so many idiots seem to raise their kids with. Pure neglect and no one to show them right from wrong.

Personally I'm willing to take the chance of feck all changing by making a few examples.

Don't forget "you can't watch them 24/7" and the old chestnut "there's nothin for them to do round here" topped of with "blah blah blah Gardai blah blah water meter installers blah blah Denis O'Brien blah blah bankers blah politicians blah shame on you"

bad2dabone

I hope he gets justice served to him. I don't believe he can be rehabilitated. He's utter scum

Guy:Incognito

clairek6 wrote: »

He should have been made pay it all back not spend two years in prison costing the state more, when there are scum like this man free after a couple of years.

The consequences of crime cant be to just "pay it back" . Theres practically no disincentive then. Do a crime, hold on to the proceeds for a bit in case you get caught and if you do you just say sorry and pay it back. If not, woohoo , free money. Seems like a risk well worth taking, especially for a crime where a lot of people seem to think is victimless and shouldnt really be an issue.

But if a politician fiddles the book then it's nothing short of the death penalty that'll do..............:rolleyes:

Eugene Norman

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

True. If I wanted to express remorse to someone I would do it in a private letter. No need to apologise to the mother through a public media. How would that make anything better?



Didn't the judge say he was bound by ptecedent in this case?

Do you have any idea how long 5 years is? The fact of having hurt the child would be enough for any normal person to reflect on what thyy had done. Teenagers are stupid and tend to take stupid risks. They don't really care as much about consequences the way fully grown adults do, so the deterrent effect would be minimal on other teenagers. Their brain changes as they grow older so there's no value to locking him up for 15- 20 years for that reason.

You could hope to rehabilitate him but that's not what prison is designed to do and as I said, people become more risk averse as they age. You could lock him up to protect society but that's dependant on knowing the likelihood of him doing something as dangerous, again.

I don't know what his sentence should be. But I know that picking figures out of the air and turning them into years in prison,is silly

This is almost a parody of pseud liberalism - really a psychotic contempt for ordinary people.

You actually ask "do we know how long 5 years is?"

Um, yes. I think everybody knows how long 5 years is.

As for teenagers taking risks what kind of absurd excuse is that for driving massively intoxicated at speed in a city centre and causing what other jurisdictions would call manslaughter and prison accordingly.

12Phase

bad2dabone wrote: »

Is this a wind up? You hope the child killer gets help? What about the family of the murdered girl?

While he did do something totally irresponsible, moronic and caused a death as a result. He didn't set out with the intent to murder someone.

He needs to think about what he did for a very long time and really should have to explain himself to the parents and family.

The custodial sentence isn't all that short either.

The 20 year driving ban is very appropriate and I sincerely hope it's stuck to. I would have thought a lifetime ban was warranted though.

You won't make the world a better place by torturing someome who does something totally crazy like this. Nor will you bring anyone back or even deter others.

The only thing that this case might do is maybe get some people to think before doing anything equally stupid.

There has to be some degree of logic, balance, rehabilitation and public good in a justice system in a civilised society. It's not about eye for an eye vengeful retribution.

12Phase

Eugene Norman wrote: »

This is almost a parody of pseud liberalism - really a psychotic contempt for ordinary people.

You actually ask "do we know how long 5 years is?"

Um, yes. I think everybody knows how long 5 years is.

As for teenagers taking risks what kind of absurd excuse is that for driving massively intoxicated at speed in a city centre and causing what other jurisdictions would call manslaughter and prison accordingly.

In most cases here manslaughter carries less than 10 years. In 37 out of 50 cases.

RIGHTisRIGHT

Wanderer78 wrote: »

thats nice!



no its not a wind up. roughly 60% of inmates re-offend upon release. is this what we really want? yes i do hope the family is also getting help from this dreadful tragedy. i hope i never experience their pain.

Reading this thread has me seeding with anger.
When I read liberal wish washy posts pondering what is the solution my first though would to disregard opinions like that.

This fella is total scum and prison does work because while he is in prison he is not out committing crime.
Not interested in the welfare of this scumbag or his family and while I hope he meets a nasty end in prison it would also serve to make our county a tiny bit safer.
I believe in God and I believe in Evil.

I do not believe in murder which is death dished out for Evil or selfish reasons.
I do believe in just punishment and I don't see why scum like this should be allowed to live.
What people on bolt sides of the debate here are missing is the issue is bigger then the poor innocent toddler or her heartbroken parents.

By letting heartless killers out you are making sure more innocent lives are lost to fulfill the bankrupted morals of our sick liberal society.

I am sure to many my post will seem like an incoherent rant but looking at the murder rate and the acts of total evil in out society they have increased hand in hand with the Liberal agenda.

bad2dabone

Honestly 12phase we're not going to agree on this. You're essentially saying "He didn't mean it!" and he needs to "think about what he's done" and "explain himself". I think sentencing killers to "Go and think about what you've done there" is bollox. Everyone knows that if you're high on drink and drugs speeding in a public places your going to kill someone. He has no excuse. He's killed that baby abs broken that family forever. He should forfeit his right to belong in society for a lot longer than 5 years. He'll be out in 3.

El_Duderino 09

thattequilagirl wrote:

It depends on what you think the justice system is about: punishment, deterrent or rehabilitation. I think it should be about all three. Ultimately there is no sentence that will give that family comfort. The man made a stupid and selfish decision to get ****ed up on drugs and drink and get behind the wheel of a car, but he's not a murderer, he had no intention to kill the poor child.

The justice system is supposed to have 5 pillars:
Punishment, deterrent, rehabilitation and restoritive justice to the victim/victim's family/society and public safety. Some people prefer to focus on the punishment. Some people think the punishment should double up as a deterrent and justice for the family. They will be disappointed with the results but they hill have plenty of new crimes to get irate about and propose gruesome punishment.

bad2dabone wrote:

Is this a wind up? You hope the child killer gets help? What about the family of the murdered girl?

It's not about the fella. Why are you so focused on him?

Eugene Norman

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The consequences of crime cant be to just "pay it back" . Theres practically no disincentive then. Do a crime, hold on to the proceeds for a bit in case you get caught and if you do you just say sorry and pay it back. If not, woohoo , free money. Seems like a risk well worth taking, especially for a crime where a lot of people seem to think is victimless and shouldnt really be an issue.

But if a politician fiddles the book then it's nothing short of the death penalty that'll do..............:rolleyes:

The difference in this case was that the state had absurd differences in import duties between garlic and other commodities. Presumably to protect EU countries industry. The morality of imposing that tax to the cost of local consumers is hardly obvious. The immorality of killing while driving a vechicle intoxicated is.

bad2dabone

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

It's not about the fella. Why are you so focused on him?

The poster I responded to expressed a wish that the criminal get help.

Eugene Norman

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The justice system is supposed to have 5 pillars:
Punishment, deterrent, rehabilitation and restoritive justice to the victim/victim's family/society and public safety. Some people prefer to focus on the punishment. Some people think the punishment should double up as a deterrent and justice for the family. They will be disappointed with the results but they hill have plenty of new crimes to get irate about and propose gruesome punishment.

The primary pillar is punishment. If it weren't we wouldn't even have different penalties for different crimes.

It's not about the fella. Why are you so focused on him?

of course it is.

El_Duderino 09

Eugene Norman wrote:

This is almost a parody of pseud liberalism - really a psychotic contempt for ordinary people.

Oh right. Misuse of words but, ok.

Eugene Norman wrote:

Um, yes. I think everybody knows how long 5 years is.

I ask because I do t see any correlation between years in prison and remorse, years in prison and justice to the family, years in prison and rehabilitation. Get the point? Plucking numbers of years out of the sky and saying he should serve X number of years in prison, I'd silly and completely misses the point. It's like the 'Derek Zoplander school for children who don't read good' needs to be at least 3 times as big as the scale model.

Eugene Norman wrote:

As for teenagers taking risks what kind of absurd excuse is that for driving massively intoxicated at speed in a city centre and causing what other jurisdictions would call manslaughter and prison accordingly.

Who excused anything? I poined out that years in prison given to this fella, won't matter a fig to a teenager who is getting in a car for the first time. Teenagers have an invincibility fallacy that means they won't see this guy's punishment as a deterrent to their own behaviour. Getting to them before they do something this stupid is the best ay to deter them.

Eugene Norman

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Oh right. Misuse of words but, ok.



I ask because I do t see any correlation between years in prison and remorse, years in prison and justice to the family, years in prison and rehabilitation. Get the point? Plucking numbers of years out of the sky and saying he should serve X number of years in prison, I'd silly and completely misses the point. It's like the 'Derek Zoplander school for children who don't read good' needs to be at least 3 times as big as the scale model.



Who excused anything? I poined out that years in prison given to this fella, won't matter a fig to a teenager who is getting in a car for the first time. Teenagers have an invincibility fallacy that means they won't see this guy's punishment as a deterrent to their own behaviour. Getting to them before they do something this stupid is the best ay to deter them.

If he got 25 years they might actually see it as a deterrent. And it might be an apt punishment.

(Not that it's just teenagers who joyride. That's a red herring.)

georgewickstaff

I have felt a real sadness since reading the victim impact statement last night. It is probably one of the most heartbreaking things I have ever read. How those poor people go on. It was an unspeakably evil act and while it is no consolation to the parents you would hope the sentence can be revisited.

El_Duderino 09

RIGHTisRIGHT wrote:

I am sure to many my post will seem like an incoherent rant but looking at the murder rate and the acts of total evil in out society they have increased hand in hand with the Liberal agenda.

It's consistent at least. It won't make things safer in general but it will make it safer by locking up one giu AFTER the child is dead and it will satisfy your obvious bloodlust.

bad2dabone wrote:

The poster I responded to expressed a wish that the criminal get help.

Rehabilitating the individual isn't about him, it's about making us all safer.

Eugene Norman wrote:

The primary pillar is punishment. If it weren't we wouldn't even have different penalties for different crimes.

It is. It doesn't actually work in a meaningful way though so it's worth reconsidering. The only thing it does well is project society from that one individual, whilst in prison. Minimal deterrent effect, no restoritive effect for the victim, minimal rehabilitation. Are you happy about punishment being the main focus?

Eugene Norman wrote:

of course it is.

Are you demonstrating my point on purpose or by accident?

I would have seen it as more about the family and society but...

thattequilagirl

RIGHTisRIGHT wrote: »

By letting heartless killers out you are making sure more innocent lives are lost to fulfill the bankrupted morals of our sick liberal society.

I am sure to many my post will seem like an incoherent rant but looking at the murder rate and the acts of total evil in out society they have increased hand in hand with the Liberal agenda.

You're creating a narrative that doesn't exist in this case. The man is not a heartless killer - the judge made it clear that he pleaded guilty early and showed deep remorse.

This wasn't murder, and has very little to do with the murder rate.

RIGHTisRIGHT

thattequilagirl wrote: »

You're creating a narrative that doesn't exist in this case. The man is not a heartless killer - the judge made it clear that he pleaded guilty early and showed deep remorse.

This wasn't murder, and has very little to do with the murder rate.

He is a killer fact and I have not seen any evidence of heart he fled the scene.
A bottle of vodka contain he was banned from driving no tax no insurance and he was joyriding is a public park.
Plus a string of convictions.

I never called it a murder I said he was a heartless killer and I stand over that.

OhHiMark

RIGHTisRIGHT wrote: »

Reading this thread has me seeding with anger.
When I read liberal wish washy posts pondering what is the solution my first though would to disregard opinions like that.

This fella is total scum and prison does work because while he is in prison he is not out committing crime.
Not interested in the welfare of this scumbag or his family and while I hope he meets a nasty end in prison it would also serve to make our county a tiny bit safer.
I believe in God and I believe in Evil.

I do not believe in murder which is death dished out for Evil or selfish reasons.
I do believe in just punishment and I don't see why scum like this should be allowed to live.
What people on bolt sides of the debate here are missing is the issue is bigger then the poor innocent toddler or her heartbroken parents.

By letting heartless killers out you are making sure more innocent lives are lost to fulfill the bankrupted morals of our sick liberal society.

I am sure to many my post will seem like an incoherent rant but looking at the murder rate and the acts of total evil in out society they have increased hand in hand with the Liberal agenda.

Crime rates have been on a continuous downslope for years now. Damn liberals.

El_Duderino 09

Eugene Norman wrote:

If he got 25 years they might actually see it as a deterrent. And it might be an apt punishment.

What's the significance of 25 years? Can you break it down into units of deterrence year or something like that? Or did you pluck it from thin air?

Eugene Norman wrote:

(Not that it's just teenagers who joyride. That's a red herring.)

You're right. But that's probably when they start and it's probably the best time to catch them and instill in them the way to drive. You'll never catch them all but it's the best time to get them so you can prevent this type of behaviour. Dangerous driving has dropped like a stone in recent decades. We all drive completely differently to our parents and grand parents and I'd say it has bugger all to do with sentences given to people we neve heard about.

RIGHTisRIGHT

OhHiMark wrote: »

Crime rates have been on a continuous downslope for years now. Damn liberals.

Not serious crime.
Things like this story assaults and gangland murders are par for the course now.

thattequilagirl

RIGHTisRIGHT wrote: »

He is a killer fact and I have not seen any evidence of heart he fled the scene.
A bottle of vodka contain he was banned from driving no tax no insurance and he was joyriding is a public park.
Plus a string of convictions.

I never called it a murder I said he was a heartless killer and I stand over that.

You mentioned the murder rate in your post.

In seriousness, the man did not set out to kill the little girl. He has a child the same age, and the judge's ruling stated that as a result of that, he didn't undervalue the life of the child. He expressed deep remorse also according to the judge.

I am going to trust the judge's opinion, since he knows a lot more about it than I do.

thattequilagirl

RIGHTisRIGHT wrote: »

Not serious crime.
Things like this story assaults and gangland murders are par for the course now.

According to who?

lawred2

The flying mouse wrote: »

Vanessa's father and friends were in court but the court heard her mother, Kasia, did not feel able to attend the hearing.

In a victim impact statement, she said their lives had been centred around their daughter, who was a sociable, friendly, happy and active child.

She said she saw Vanessa being hit by the car.

In one moment they were happy, playing and enjoying themselves in the park, she said. In the next, she heard loud music, a loud engine and everything happened so quickly.

She said she could not do anything but watch as her baby was taken away from her.

Every day was a nightmare and even to breath was difficult, she said.

She added that their hearts would always be broken as a part of both of them died with Vanessa.

She said she hoped that Vanessa's death would be a strong message to everyone to never drink or take drugs when driving.

After his son was led away to begin his sentence, Lane's father told Vanessa's family that he wanted to apologise to them.

90kmh the rat estimates he was travelling at.

You can be damn sure it was more than that.

He'll have been feral scum for years - untouched and unchallenged by our soft touch society. These things are inevitable.

HensVassal

lawlolawl wrote: »

This guy shouldn't see the outside of a prison cell for the rest of his life.

Make an example of him. I don't care what any pants-wetting liberals say, this "person" is absolutely irredeemable garbage (priors) and should just be kept away from normal society.

But of course, this is Ireland, we let people rack up multiple convictions until they kill someone and then we put them away for a laughable amount of time because boo-****ing-hoo the perpetrator is the real victim because he had a hard life and his mam didn't love him and someone looked at him funny once and excuses, excuses, excuses

Build. More. Prisons.

Oh boy!

RIGHTisRIGHT

RIGHTisRIGHT wrote: »

Not serious crime.
Things like this story assaults and gangland murders are par for the course now.

I suspect FAR more were killed by drink drivers in the 80s and 90s.

I live in South Kerry. All my peers did it. And worse, there'd be 6 and 7 crammed into little Starlets, with the protection of a sardine can. And there were a few horrific incidents with 3 and 4 being wiped out in single car incidents.

HensVassal

Boulevardier wrote: »

On another point, I cannot see why cars should be so un-restricted in the park. Why isn't there a minibus service which can take people around the park and offer an alternative?

So every responsible, safe and conscientious driver should be banned from driving through the Phoenix Park because of this idiot?