Waterford killing

Atoms for Peace

Just saw this story on the six one where a Brazilian man was sentenced to 8 years for manslaughter. He committed the act in self defence after being attacked and racially abused twice by two coked up thugs, on his way home from working a night shift.
To me this sentence is way too harsh considering the circumstances.

"Man given eight-year prison term for Waterford killing"

Read the headline OP ffs

Atoms for Peace

Deleted User wrote: »

"Man given eight-year prison term for Waterford killing"

Read the headline OP ffs

, Stupid concurrent sentencing:pac:.

Galwayguy35

They beat him twice but he seems to have got the 8 year sentence because he then went after them with a knife after they had left the scene.

Galwayguy35

Although the fella who died sounds like a right scumbag.

Manic Moran

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

They beat him twice but he seems to have got the 8 year sentence because he then went after them with a knife after they had left the scene.

If that's the case, this seems a reasonable judgement.

gambithh

Manic Moran wrote: »

If that's the case, this seems a reasonable judgement.

How is it? Poor brazillian guy with out a word of english who came here to work going in the door of his apartment is attacked by two thugs with numerous previous convictions high on cocaine (according to RTE news this evening) For the second time!

Yes he did go too far by going after them with a knife after by if that was you how can you say how you would react?

Should have been a susended sentence.Feel sorry for brazillian guy and his family,the other got what he deserved.

This is the gentleman in question

https://www.thesun.ie/archives/irish-news/232185/violent-drug-dealer-stabbed-to-death-on-waterford-street/

darkdubh

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Although the fella who died sounds like a right scumbag.

Agreed, and his buddy. I think under the circumstances the verdict and sentence was correct though as it went beyond self defense.

Galwayguy35

Manic Moran wrote: »

If that's the case, this seems a reasonable judgement.

I felt sorry for the poor guy, he was racially abused and beaten twice by those 2 thugs but the judge said that it's the fact that he then went after them after that left him with no choice but to sentence him to 8 years.

arayess

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Just saw this story on the six one where a Brazilian man was sentenced to 8 years for manslaughter. He committed the act in self defence after being attacked and racially abused twice by two coked up thugs, on his way home from working a night shift.
To me this sentence is way too harsh considering the circumstances.

he didn't though stop misleading people

he went after them with a knife for revenge - the threat had gone so had the self defence excuse.

the provocation by the two "victims" is what saved him from a murder conviction

Your Face

I wonder what the OPs opinion of this would be if the convicted was Irish.

gw80

gambithh wrote: »

How is it? Poor brazillian guy with out a word of english who came here to work going in the door of his apartment is attacked by two thugs with numerous previous convictions high on cocaine (according to RTE news this evening) For the second time!

Yes he did go too far by going after them with a knife after by if that was you how can you say how you would react?

Should have been a susended sentence.Feel sorry for brazillian guy and his family,the other got what he deserved.

This is the gentleman in question

https://www.thesun.ie/archives/irish-news/232185/violent-drug-dealer-stabbed-to-death-on-waterford-street/

Raheen is in co wexford

scopper

8 years for killing someone is maybe as low as a judge can get it, I'm sure he wanted it to be as short as possible, within reason. But he did it all the same.

Tigger

Manic Moran wrote: »

If that's the case, this seems a reasonable judgement.

As the Poet DMX said. you don't start nothing ; there won't be nothing.

three years wou;d be enough i think

Harry Palmr

James Banville is no loss a drug snorting piece of **** but the judge had to take account of the Brazilians actions or it's a dangerous precedent.

Atoms for Peace

Your Face wrote: »

I wonder what the OPs opinion of this would be if the convicted was Irish.

It would be exactly the same, he should have only been charged with producing a weapon. The incident was initialised by the "victim" who should therefore hold the majority of responsibility.

NewbridgeIR

That other guy who instigated the assault wasn't charged with anything. Doesn't seem right.

They must have run out of suspended sentences in the court.

Retaliation to being attacked should always carry a lighter sentence.

Retaliation to being attacked twice should carry an even lighter one.

server down

NewbridgeIR wrote: »

That other guy who instigated the assault wasn't charged with anything. Doesn't seem right.

They must have run out of suspended sentences in the court.

Retaliation to being attacked should always carry a lighter sentence.

Retaliation to being attacked twice should carry an even lighter one.

It was a light enough sentence. He’ll be out in about 4-5 years (he’s served one probably because he couldn’t get bail)

McCrack

Harry Palmr wrote: »

James Banville is no loss a drug snorting piece of **** but the judge had to take account of the Brazilians actions or it's a dangerous precedent.

Scumbag or not every life gone is a loss to someone.

McCrack

McCrack wrote: »

Scumbag or not every life gone is a loss to someone.

Those scumbags who are attacking people can end someones life with one punch. The Brazilian lad made our streets safer if you ask me. Anyone who just goes around attack people for no reason deserve to be put down.

Your Face

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

It would be exactly the same, he should have only been charged with producing a weapon. The incident was initialised by the "victim" who should therefore hold the majority of responsibility.

Are you married to him or something?

worded

Working night shift gives you a kind of jet lag and he was beaten twice. Poor lad must have had some adrennelin rush

Had the Brazilian a family to support here ?

Harry Palmr

McCrack wrote: »

Scumbag or not every life gone is a loss to someone.

I agree, that's why I think it was right the other victim was also punished.

Das Reich

I am Brazilian and got disgusted by the result. The man just made a favour to the society. If I were someone in the government I would take all the children from those druged people and give it to right families. In Ireland the state protect to much the druged they have everything for free.

Omackeral

worded wrote: »

Working night shift gives you a kind of jet lag and he was beaten twice. Poor lad must have had some adrennelin rush

Had the Brazilian a family to support here ?

Says in the article that he has no family here. Just came over here to work. The judge acknowledged he was a hard worker. Awful waste of two lives really, although I have no sympathy for the dead fella. If you go around assaulting people (more than once in this case) then they might just fight back.

What is it with idle scumbags targeting night shift workers? I recall some poor Polish guy being assaulted and killed in Coolock a few years ago ''for the buzz'' by a gang of scumbags. They literally said that in court See here . What the fcuk causes people to be like that?

wakka12

I feel very bad for the brazilian...he really had it tough. But how else are you supposed to sentence somebody who went out of their way to kill somebody? Laws have to be the same for everyone unfortunately. We can't just go around allowing murder if its somebody society doesn't like

Das Reich

And the problem is also that Brazilian government is so weak they really don't care about its citizens abroad, Brazilians are killed in Indonesia, Australia, USA, all countries and they do nothing, but a foreigner in Brazil is untouchable.

backspin.

I hope he appeals and is let out.

Mountainsandh

Omackeral wrote: »

What is it with idle scumbags targeting night shift workers? I recall some poor Polish guy being assaulted and killed in Coolock a few years ago ''for the buzz'' by a gang of scumbags. They literally said that in court See here . What the fcuk causes people to be like that?

Complete lack of empathy I think, itself a consequence of poor parenting IMO.

suicide_circus

He has done the state some service

Vic_08

wakka12 wrote: »

I feel very bad for the brazilian...he really had it tough. But how else are you supposed to sentence somebody who went out of their way to kill somebody? Laws have to be the same for everyone unfortunately. We can't just go around allowing murder if its somebody society doesn't like

Why not?

The idea that every life is precious and no distinction should be made based on the character of the victim simply ignores the reality that some members of our society are valueless thugs whose presence only makes our country as a whole worse.

IMO seeing as we refuse to actually lock dangerous offenders away to protect the rest of our communities, having previous for violent offences should make a person worth less as a victim.

Maybe the idea that you could be beaten or murdered with little or no punishment by anyone on the street will be a better deterrent for criminality than our current failed system.

archer22

Give the Brazilian a reward and let him go back home to his family.

Your Face

archer22 wrote: »

Give the Brazilian a reward and let him go back home to his family.

He got his reward.

archer22

Your Face wrote: »

He got his reward.

Yeah Ireland showed him that it values drugged up thugs more than decent hardworking people.

Mellor

Manic Moran wrote: »

If that's the case, this seems a reasonable judgement.

Mad to think that the judge making sentence would have more information than they can fit into a headline.

NewbridgeIR wrote: »

That other guy who instigated the assault wasn't charged with anything. Doesn't seem right.

They must have run out of suspended sentences in the court.

Retaliation to being attacked should always carry a lighter sentence.

Retaliation to being attacked twice should carry an even lighter one.

If he attacked and stabbed him unprovoked he's be looking at 25 years.
So 8 years is significantly lighter, so it looks like took those circumstances into account

Deleted User wrote: »

Those scumbags who are attacking people can end someones life with one punch. The Brazilian lad made our streets safer if you ask me. Anyone who just goes around attack people for no reason deserve to be put down.

The net effect is that the streets are safer. But the Brazilian lad broke the law to do so. The guy who die is a scumbag, but the guy went went and got a knife so he could attack somebody is also a scumbag. I'd have that opinion of anyone who pulls a knife of someone.

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

It would be exactly the same, he should have only been charged with producing a weapon.

Considering he used the weapon, that would be a ridiculous charge.
The instigators were in the wrong. That doesn't give the victim to permission to kill someone.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

archer22 wrote: »

Yeah Ireland showed him that it values drugged up thugs more than decent hardworking people.

What complete horse shít. Nobody values drugged up thugs more than decent hardworking people. Absolute hyperbole.

You can't go around stabbing people because your angry. It wasn't self defense at that point.

archer22

Chase Drab Flute wrote: »

What complete horse shít. Nobody values drugged up thugs more than decent hardworking people. Absolute hyperbole.

You can't go around stabbing people because your angry. It wasn't self defense at that point.

It was, he had been attacked twice by them..strong possibility they would attack him again...either that night or the next night they saw him

riffmongous

archer22 wrote: »

[/B]

It was, he had been attacked twice by them..strong possibility they would attack him again...either that night or the next night they saw him

Yeah, they should have tried for a Nally style defence

Oldtree

archer22 wrote: »

[/B]

It was, he had been attacked twice by them..strong possibility they would attack him again...either that night or the next night they saw him

If he had waited for the next attack, taken the necessary precautions (carrying a multitool to work) to do what was necessary, he would be free now. It would have been somewhat similar to the nally case.

He must have been left feeling very afraid, alone and paranoid in a foreign country to do somthing like that.

Edit, pipped to the post

Mellor

archer22 wrote: »

[/B]

It was, he had been attacked twice by them..strong possibility they would attack him again...either that night or the next night they saw him

They might have. But preemptively attacking somebody with a knife is beyond the definition of self defense.

The fact he left and returned makes a huge difference legally I would imagine.

Your Face

archer22 wrote: »

Yeah Ireland showed him that it values drugged up thugs more than decent hardworking people.

Ireland showed him you cant get a knife and hunt people down.

Pedro K

Given that some of the people involved in kicking Dale Creighton to death in Tallaght got less than that, I think the sentence is extremely harsh.

Of the people who got 10 years for the killing above, some had suspensions of 5, 4 and 2.5 years. These are people who beat a man so badly his parents couldn't donate his organs, or touch him in the coffin when they got him home.

They held the lad up when he was barely conscious and beat him. They threw him down concrete steps, dragged him back up and continued to beat him.

Some of these people got less than this Brazilian man. The proximate cause of the whole incident is that this absolute scumbag and his scumbag mate, while coked up, decided to pick a fight and racially abused and attacked this man, twice. (and once at the man's home, no less.)

Had they not attacked him, Banville would still be alive.

Yes. He went after them after the initial (second) threat had died down, but by that stage they had come to his home and attacked him. Just because they left doesn't mean the threat is gone. The fight had already been over once and the Brazilian lad had gone home. I know I wouldn't be comfortable going to bed knowing two coked up stains know where I live and have already visited violence to my doorstep once.

I think 8 years is an extremely harsh sentence given all the mitigating circumstances. I hope it's successfully appealed.

Mellor

Pedro K wrote: »

Given that some of the people involved in kicking Dale Creighton to death in Tallaght got less than that, I think the sentence is extremely harsh.

Of the people who got 10 years for the killing above, some had suspensions of 5, 4 and 2.5 years. These are people who beat a man so badly his parents couldn't donate his organs, or touch him in the coffin when they got him home.

They held the lad up when he was barely conscious and beat him. They threw him down concrete steps, dragged him back up and continued to beat him.

That case has no bearing on this one though. If hey were handed light sentences, that's an issue but it doesn't mean that every manslaughter case in the next while need light sentences also.

Some of these people got less than this Brazilian man. The proximate cause of the whole incident is that this absolute scumbag and his scumbag mate, while coked up, decided to pick a fight and racially abused and attacked this man, twice. (and once at the man's home, no less.)

One of the men is dead, I think that's sufficient punishment tbh.
The other guy needs to be charged also.

Yes. He went after them after the initial (second) threat had died down, but by that stage they had come to his home and attacked him. Just because they left doesn't mean the threat is gone. The fight had already been over once and the Brazilian lad had gone home. I know I wouldn't be comfortable going to bed knowing two coked up stains know where I live and have already visited violence to my doorstep once.

I think 8 years is an extremely harsh sentence given all the mitigating circumstances. I hope it's successfully appealed.

It was 8 years because of the mitigating circumstances. If he just stabbed a junkie unprovoked, he'd be looking at a sentence 2-3 times as long. I fully agree that this lad didn't instigated this in the slightest. But the fact is he stabbed somebody.
To make an opinion on what the sentence should be, you need to consider hours and hours of evidence not just a summary in the paper.

BrokenArrows

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Just saw this story on the six one where a Brazilian man was sentenced to 8 years for manslaughter. He committed the act in self defence after being attacked and racially abused twice by two coked up thugs, on his way home from working a night shift.
To me this sentence is way too harsh considering the circumstances.

It sucks that he was assaulted and abused but the situation had ended.
He then chased after the guys, pulled a knife and killed one of them.

8 years sounds fine to me.

He had other options. I see no mention anywhere that he tried to call the police, so i have to assume he just wanted to take the law into his own hands.

BrokenArrows

BrokenArrows wrote: »

He had other options. I see no mention anywhere that he tried to call the police,

Yeah. Because that always helps. :rolleyes:

sonic85

Hope he gets released early. He's done us all a favour

Alan_Ganley

Just an observation.
I lived in Phibsboro many years ago as a teenager.
Just after Christmas I was walking home with my new Nike's on.
Two lads dragged me into a garden.
Slapped me round a bit.
Nicked my runners and legged it.
Now in the few hours after, I was stunned, angry, furious, sick etc etc.
If I had met them later I would have had a go, I think.
I actively searched them out for ages (weeks) after (teenage bravado).
So if a man is attacked twice by the same people, then it is safe to assume (dangerous word I know) he went through much worse.
Incl the thought "what happens to me next time?"
Or "what if they are armed next time?"
Or "what if I sort it out once and for all?"
I really feel that they placed him in a desperate situation.
Precedent is dangerous yes, but in both directions.
This sentence is too harsh.

Dr Crayfish

Omackeral wrote: »

What is it with idle scumbags targeting night shift workers? I recall some poor Polish guy being assaulted and killed in Coolock a few years ago ''for the buzz'' by a gang of scumbags. They literally said that in court See here . What the fcuk causes people to be like that?

Jesus, I forgot about that case. The murderer is from just around the corner from me, not a rough estate at all. Hope he rots in jail forever.

Harry Palmr

Vic_08 wrote: »

Maybe the idea that you could be beaten or murdered with little or no punishment by anyone on the street will be a better deterrent for criminality than our current failed system.

Now I'd have a hard think about this if I were you.

Consider a scene in which you and someone else (say a total skanger) get into an altercation and you are the one who strikes the first violent physical blow and are observed by a neutral observer who didn't witness the initial contact which was the skanger threatening to do terrible things to your [insert female family member here] having also called you everything under the sun with threats. He then strikes back, meanwhile the cops are called and you are both arrested but you "nice guy" are the one who lashed out first not the "waste of space" and so he gets a light sentence as you initiated the violence with no witness as to the context. It's just your word against his.

wakka12

Vic_08 wrote: »

Why not?

The idea that every life is precious and no distinction should be made based on the character of the victim simply ignores the reality that some members of our society are valueless thugs whose presence only makes our country as a whole worse.

IMO seeing as we refuse to actually lock dangerous offenders away to protect the rest of our communities, having previous for violent offences should make a person worth less as a victim.

Maybe the idea that you could be beaten or murdered with little or no punishment by anyone on the street will be a better deterrent for criminality than our current failed system.

Because a person being 'bad' or 'worthless' is completely subjective..what level of badness do you have to reach before everyones given the go ahead to murder you without consequence
Obviously no laws could be made surrounding this that would have any hope of working out successfully and so this man needed to go to jail for the murder he committed. Unfortunately

jimmycrackcorm

Padraig Bally got six years for what I consider similar circumstances, and in a retrial was set free.

I hope this guy gets similar.