Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Waterford killing

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    archer22
    Registered Users Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


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


  • Options
    #33
    Your Face
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,277 ✭✭✭Your Face


    archer22 wrote: »
    Give the Brazilian a reward and let him go back home to his family.

    He got his reward.


  • Options
    #34
    archer22
    Registered Users Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Your Face wrote: »
    He got his reward.

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


  • Options
    #35
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,114 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #36
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    archer22
    Registered Users Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #38
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,634 Mod ✭✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #39
    Oldtree
    Registered Users Posts: 8,104 ✭✭✭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 :)


  • Options
    #40
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,114 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #41
    Your Face
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,277 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Pedro K
    Registered Users Posts: 1,197 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #43
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,114 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #44
    BrokenArrows
    Registered Users Posts: 7,500 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    BrokenArrows wrote: »

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

    Yeah. Because that always helps. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #46
    sonic85
    Registered Users Posts: 4,213 ✭✭✭sonic85


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


  • Options
    #47
    Alan_Ganley
    Registered Users Posts: 30 ✭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.


  • Options
    #48
    Dr Crayfish
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #49
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #50
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #51
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,331 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement