Our crazy judiciary

Sultan of Bling

Read in the independent that a 16 year old pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting 4 women and a 14 year old girl and received a suspended sentence.

What the f**k is going on in this country?

Surely the DPP will appeal the leniency of this sentence and please god get this piece of vermin of the streets.

MarkAnthony

Well thought out and sourced post.

Crazy that we have a mechanism for appealing if things go wrong in either direction (who knows if that's the case here I've no idea what you're talking about) which you allude to in your own three line post!

Pro Hoc Vice

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Well thought out and sourced post.

Crazy that we have a mechanism for appealing if things go wrong in either direction (who knows if that's the case here I've no idea what you're talking about) which you allude to in your own three line post!

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/suspended-sentence-for-boy-16-who-sexually-assaulted-four-women-and-a-teenager-34709650.html

Is the case I assume. The kid sounds disturbed.

MarkAnthony

What purpose does a custodial sentence serve in this case OP? Let's assume it makes society a safer place, not that I concede that point, but let's assume it does. Is he more or less likely to reoffend when he's out given the abuse and lack of treatment he'll likely face inside or would it be better that the benefit of the myriad of professionals working with the lad didn't come down in the last shower. What do we do when hes out in X months years? I can think of better uses for €100,000 a year tbh.

Our crazy Judiciary eh? Showing compassion and trying to resolve things. Mental I tell you Joe.

scoey

You`re not going to get anywhere with this topic on boards. I just want to say that I also felt sick when I read that news article. To fully suspend a sentence in the case of someone who sexually assaulted several innocent women going about their daily lives, some of whom were with their children at the time, is an absolute disgrace and shows a complete lack of regard for the likely awful effect the experience has had on them.
It`s difficult to really say anything without being labelled as one derogatory term or another.
Those who speak in favour of the rights of criminals are well versed in the art of shaming and distracting from relevant discussion in topics like this, and I don`t want to get into it.

I just hope we as a society have enough people left who feel sick when they read about judgements like this.

There are too many people in Ireland who don`t consider the effects of such crimes on the innocent victims or society as a whole until it effects someone directly related to them and are too eager to consider the plight of the perpetrator who is undoubedly according to their defense full of remose/in therapy/clean for 6 weeks/in some sort of education/in some other way having had a miraculous revelation and in the process of turning their life around by the time they show up in court.

MarkAnthony

I do love the fact that as soon as you take the opposing view, flippantly with me I grant you, you're Perry Mason, Alan Shore and Matlock incarnate.

Some of us are aware of the failings of the state in this regard and don't believe it's the place of the judiciary to try and reconcile these shortcomings. Prison is the very last place a 16 year old with obvious and significant mental issues belongs. The Judge in this case was satisfied that the treatment and supervision he was getting were sufficient. This won't have been the first case, of this type, this Judge was involved in.

As for considering the effects of crime on people I assure you that's in the forefront of my mind. I'd much prefer this lad is helped and no one else is sexually assaulted rather than him being released in a few months/years time and find that he's escalated to the point he has a 15 year old girl up in the Dublin mountains for two days doing God knows what.

scoey

MarkAnthony wrote: »

What purpose does a custodial sentence serve in this case OP? Let's assume it makes society a safer place, not that I concede that point, but let's assume it does. Is he more or less likely to reoffend when he's out given the abuse and lack of treatment he'll likely face inside or would it be better that the benefit of the myriad of professionals working with the lad didn't come down in the last shower. What do we do when hes out in X months years? I can think of better uses for 100,000 a year tbh.

Our crazy Judiciary eh? Showing compassion and trying to resolve things. Mental I tell you Joe.

Well, here`s a good example of what I was talking about.
This poster basically doesn`t believe that multiple sexual assaults are worthy of a custodial sentence or any punishment other than a suspended sentence. Believes that the criminal is just a mixed up young man who needs to speak to professionals as opposed to bear the indignity of prison.
Signs off with the old boards.ie shaming tactic of implying that anyone who believes otherwise is akin to those who spill their tales of woe over the phone to Joe Duffy.

This is how so many discussions on this site are silenced (if not by mod intervention first) , right down to the Joe Duffy reference.

hullaballoo

Mod: Scoey, please read the posts and respond to the points made rather than making up things to suit your agenda.

I have to say that I can't see this thread lasting too long. It starts out as a witch hunt with a fairly inflammatory title. It can't continue that way because this forum is for reasoned legal debate, with reference to actual legal principles and ideals.

It isn't as though there aren't myriad other forums to choose from where everyone will agree with you emphatically that the whole legal system is wrong, no matter what.

MarkAnthony

scoey wrote: »

Well, here`s a good example of what I was talking about.
This poster basically doesn`t believe that multiple sexual assaults are worthy of a custodial sentence or any punishment other than a suspended sentence. Believes that the criminal is just a mixed up young man who needs to speak to professionals as opposed to bear the indignity of prison.
Signs off with the old boards.ie shaming tactic of implying that anyone who believes otherwise is akin to those who spill their tales of woe over the phone to Joe Duffy.

This is how so many discussions on this site are silenced (if not by mod intervention first) , right down to the Joe Duffy reference.

If the OP wanted an Echo chamber he would have posted in After Hours. While I admit by flippant nature rubs people up the wrong way that's just something you have to deal with when you're unwilling to engage with the issues. You'll see my attitude change significantly if the posting style of the OP warrants it, and sometimes not which is why I get the occasional slap about the chops from mods. These threads hardly every get silenced either here or in AH which is a testament to the excellent moderation on this site as I'm sure these train wrecks take a huge amount of observation and reading of complete bollocks - I include myself whole heartedly in that indictment.

I'd be delighted to see this youngman go to prison, ideally for an indeterminate sentence and he stay there for as long as it was thought he needed to by professionals in the field. The fact is our prison system is an absolute disaster due to it being political suicide for anyone to trying and fix it. The Judge in this case would have known what was the best course of action, if he didn't then as the OP even pointed out the DPP can appeal.

This is pure hypothesis and conjecture on my part but knowing one or two prosecution juniors I suspect even the DPPs side knew what the best outcome was here. Pure speculation there and God only knows what goes through the mind of Senior Counsel.

When you've had the benefit of sitting in the DC for even a few weeks here and there and you see a case of a kid screaming as they're lead up from the cell begging to go to the Joy rather than Pats as someone is 'going to look after them in the Joy' you begin to dig a little deeper. I have nothing but sympathy for the women in these cases but making the assessment that the Judiciary is Crazy or that anyone who takes the opposing view is out to shame people, other than for crap posts which don't engage with the issues, doesn't help anyone.

An honest question - do you believe that the women in this case would have got any satisfaction in seeing this guy go away for even 8 months? What sentence do you think was appropriate?

Johnboy1951

Two of the victims were reported as aged 14 & 19

The younger one reported as a "... teenage girl"
The older one "a 19-year-old woman"
The perpetrator was referred to as a teenager.

Depending on the reader the descriptions can determine an 'attitude' to the perpetrator and victims.

He might have been referred to a 'young man'.
The 14 year old might have been referred to as a 'child', and/or the 19 year old as a 'teenage girl'.

I would really like to see adherence to some form of acceptable descriptions, so that the reporting does not unduly bias readers - either way.

Nermal

MarkAnthony wrote: »

What do we do when hes out in X months years?

Why do we have to let him out again? Just keep him locked up. Society will be safer this way. Even if it costs €100,000 per year (it won't - this has to be balanced against the costs of keeping him on the street) it's worth it.

MarkAnthony wrote: »

An honest question - do you believe that the women in this case would have got any satisfaction in seeing this guy go away for even 8 months?

No - but if it was me, I'd be somewhat satisfied knowing he would never see the outside of a prison again.

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Some of us are aware of the failings of the state in this regard and don't believe it's the place of the judiciary to try and reconcile these shortcomings.

The one 'failing' here is not the state, it's the perp!

MarkAnthony

Nermal wrote: »

Why do we have to let him out again? Just keep him locked up. Society will be safer this way. Even if it costs €100,000 per year (it won't - this has to be balanced against the costs of keeping him on the street) it's worth it.

Because that's the way the system works. I've stated I'd be more than happy to see him get an indeterminate sentence and proper care. That said are you willing to pay a 90% tax rate on earnings over €100K? With lower rates of tax probably being in the 35% and 75% ranges. That's about what it would take to sort out the social problems in Ireland.

Nermal wrote: »

No - but if it was me, I'd be somewhat satisfied knowing he would never see the outside of a prison again.

Retribution is a valid aim of a penal system. However when the man on the Omnibus is allowed to make this the main aim you end up with an awful mess, something approaching the US system.

Nermal wrote: »

The one 'failing' here is not the state, it's the perp!

Crime is committed for a number of reasons and there will always be crime - perversely society needs crime, see Durkheim's work. In this case it's almost certainly a mental issue. How the state treats it's weakest is reflective of the people that make it up.

MarkAnthony

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Two of the victims were reported as aged 14 & 19

The younger one reported as a "... teenage girl"
The older one "a 19-year-old woman"
The perpetrator was referred to as a teenager.

Depending on the reader the descriptions can determine an 'attitude' to the perpetrator and victims.

He might have been referred to a 'young man'.
The 14 year old might have been referred to as a 'child', and/or the 19 year old as a 'teenage girl'.

I would really like to see adherence to some form of acceptable descriptions, so that the reporting does not unduly bias readers - either way.

In addition to this the use of the phrase 'sexual assault' always gets the juices flowing and the fitch forks out.

Nermal

MarkAnthony wrote: »

How the state treats it's weakest is reflective of the people that make it up.

The weakest in our society are the victims of crime, not the perpetrators.

I don't care about the reasons why this guy is assaulting people. I just know he won't do it while he's locked up. So keep him locked up.

MarkAnthony

Nermal wrote: »

The weakest in our society are the victims of crime, not the perpetrators.

I don't care about the reasons why this guy is assaulting people. I just know he won't do it while he's locked up. So keep him locked up.

While that attitude prevails we'll never sort out issues with crime in this country. People will continue to vote for the talking head 'that's tough on crime' and we'll continue down the same path we've been on for years with very poor results.

At the end of the day it's your vote and your right. The one thing I'd ask you to bear in mind is, anyone who says they're going to give longer sentences is a liar. It's got to the point that even Judges are aware there's no more room and sentences are, IMHO, reflecting that in serious cases where the person should have been locked up for an extended period.

Paz-CCFC

Nermal wrote: »

The weakest in our society are the victims of crime, not the perpetrators.

I don't care about the reasons why this guy is assaulting people. I just know he won't do it while he's locked up. So keep him locked up.

That's a bizarre attitude. If we know the reasons as to why this boy and others like him commit crimes, we could use the information to get to people in the future before they actually commit any wrongdoings. Don't you want to prevent these types of crimes from happening?

Nermal

MarkAnthony wrote: »

While that attitude prevails we'll never sort out issues with crime in this country. People will continue to vote for the talking head 'that's tough on crime' and we'll continue down the same path we've been on for years with very poor results.

Sorry, this is what you think the 'tough on crime' path looks like? Repeated sexual assaults being deemed worthy of suspended sentences?

I would dearly love to vote for a party that would actually be tough on crime. Unfortunately there aren't any.

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

If we know the reasons as to why this boy and others like him commit crimes, we could use the information to get to people in the future before they actually commit any wrongdoings.

The best predictor of future wrongdoing is past wrongdoing. We have all the 'information' we need, our judiciary and politicians simply refuse to act on it.

If this guy had been given life for any of his eight previous offences (at least two of which appear to have been knife-related) four sexual assaults would not have happened.

Nermal

MarkAnthony wrote: »

It's got to the point that even Judges are aware there's no more room and sentences are, IMHO, reflecting that in serious cases where the person should have been locked up for an extended period.

Reflects rather badly on the judges, doesn't it? Provision of prison places is not their responsibility. They should hand out the appropriate sentence. It's not up to them to ensure it's carried out.

Pro Hoc Vice

Nermal wrote: »

Reflects rather badly on the judges, doesn't it? Provision of prison places is not their responsibility. They should hand out the appropriate sentence. It's not up to them to ensure it's carried out.

Judges know that the more they send in the more come out early.

MarkAnthony

Nermal wrote: »

Reflects rather badly on the judges, doesn't it? Provision of prison places is not their responsibility. They should hand out the appropriate sentence. It's not up to them to ensure it's carried out.

It's worse than that, arguably there is a major separation of powers issue here. Some would argue that there are an increasing number of rights cases decided with the resources of the State playing an all too important role in the decision making process.

Valid criticism aside it doesn't change the fact an appropriate sentence was handed out in the instant case.

4ensic15

Nermal wrote: »

The weakest in our society are the victims of crime, not the perpetrators.

I don't care about the reasons why this guy is assaulting people. I just know he won't do it while he's locked up. So keep him locked up.

He won't do it either if he is killed. Why not just kill him?

Canadel

scoey wrote: »

Those who speak in favour of the rights of criminals are well versed in the art of shaming and distracting from relevant discussion in topics like this, and I don`t want to get into it.

Citizens in a democracy...