Harsh sentence

Chesty08

Extremely harsh.

There has to be much more to it than

"he said she was falling asleep when Doran came into the room and got into her bed and touched her vagina.

He said to her “show me your clit” and then got up and walked out."

which to him "took him a minute to realise the woman was not his girlfriend"


I'm not saying it is okay to do what he done or touch anyone but surely if "she trusted him like a brother" and knew his real character then going to court & waiving anonymity would not be what you would do.

Feisar

Chesty08 wrote: »

Extremely harsh.

There has to be much more to it than

"he said she was falling asleep when Doran came into the room and got into her bed and touched her vagina.

He said to her “show me your clit” and then got up and walked out."

which to him "took him a minute to realise the woman was not his girlfriend"


I'm not saying it is okay to do what he done or touch anyone but surely if "she trusted him like a brother" and knew his real character then going to court & waiving anonymity would not be what you would do.

Which would lead one to believe there is more to the story

jiltloop

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Sometimes there’s no difference. A close friend of mine dumped a newish boyfriend (not brand new, maybe six months in or so) because she awoke one morning to find him fondling her intimately. Relationship over. She (and we, her friends) was repulsed. In this case, I see no difference in the detail of whether they were in a relationship or not. She felt violated. Full stop.

That's fair enough, but some people have different relationship parameters. My fiancée and I would have no problems having a sleepy fondle or initiating sex through intimate touching while the other is asleep. It's one of life's simple pleasures on a weekend morning!

So to state carte blanche that touching your partner intimately while they're asleep is assault with no room for nuance is frankly ridiculous.

For the record I've no problem with the conviction in the OP but having read through the thread and seeing some people condemning any touching of one's partner while they're asleep as assault no matter what I felt I had to disagree because I'm quite confident I'm not someone who is capable of a sexual assault.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

GreeBo wrote: »

Its certainly possible, but we have to go on what we have in the article on here and to me at least, that means take him at his word.

Believing him or not, some here seem to think that the sentence should wholly be based on the impact to the victim and intent shouldn't come into it. I disagree.

Well, we’re all working with little information. The people who were there and heard all the evidence found him guilty.

I supported the verdict in the Belfast rape case and I support this verdict too.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

jiltloop wrote: »

That's fair enough, but some people have different relationship parameters. My fiancée and I would have no problems having a sleepy fondle or initiating sex through intimate touching while the other is asleep. It's one of life's simple pleasures on a weekend morning!

So to state carte blanche that touching your partner intimately while they're asleep is assault with no room for nuance is frankly ridiculous.

For the record I've no problem with the conviction in the OP but having read through the thread and seeing some people condemning any touching of one's partner while they're asleep as assault no matter what I felt I had to disagree because I'm quite confident I'm not someone who is capable of a sexual assault.

Important note: it wasn’t a “sleepy fondle”. She was asleep. Drooling on the pillow, REM, dreaming about being a Viking asleep. She eventually woke because I guess even when fully asleep, you can be woken by something and I’m guessing fingers inside a vagina might do it. I’ve had sleepy morning sex. Sleepy as in awake.

Like, you’d really stick your hands intimate places on your fully asleep partner?

You might think I’m not considering nuance but I can safely say, of the women I know and have known, a good chunk would be thoroughly creeped out by that. And the only way you find out if it’s okay or not is by doing it.

GreeBo

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Important note: it wasn’t a “sleepy fondle”. She was asleep. Drooling on the pillow, REM, dreaming about being a Viking asleep. She eventually woke because I guess even when fully asleep, you can be woken by something and I’m guessing fingers inside a vagina might do it. I’ve had sleepy morning sex. Sleepy as in awake.

You are answering general posts using details from this specific case.

Like, you’d really stick your hands intimate places on your fully asleep partner?

Yes.

You might think I’m not considering nuance but I can safely say, of the women I know and have known, a good chunk would be thoroughly creeped out by that. And the only way you find out if it’s okay or not is by doing it.

Again, it totally depends on intent.
If their goal is to initiate sex, then I dont see it as being any different than the multitude of other ways people initiate sex.

If its solely for personal gratification then I dont see it as any different than initiating rape.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

GreeBo wrote: »

You are answering general posts using details from this specific case.

Aaah, no, I was actually talking about the example I gave earlier in the thread of a friend who dumped a boyfriend who was fingering her while she was asleep.

I don’t think the woman involved in this case was asleep.

The thread develop from just discussing the case.

Kidchameleon

Its a very harsh sentence IMHO. If I was on that jury, I would have found him not guilty. Reason being, it sounds like they all had way too much to drink and as such, he could well have made an honest mistake ie. gotten into the wrong bed. The man's fiance would know if he was in the habit of getting into bed and rubbing her genitals, whispering "show me your clit". It would be interesting to know if the relationship is still ongoing.


Am I the only person who feels that the victim impact statement is VERY over the top? I mean come on, she is traumatized and had her life derailed by a rub of her genitals? I don't believe that for a second. Sure it wouldn't be pleasant but its not a life changing situation (and I say that as someone who has had their genitals groped by a stranger) Another thing about the statement that irk's me is the way she says her fiends fiance was "like a brother". Who describes their best friends fiance like a brother? I don't buy it.


On balance I would say the guy did not intend to do what he did - He has never been in trouble, has shown himself to be an honorable man to the point that he was engaged to a woman. He was in his own house, with friends and family, if he intended to do what he did, he knew he would DEFINITELY get caught. Why would he risk such a thing at his own engagement party? It make no sense.


An equally likely scenario could be the the "victim" was jealous of the upcoming nuptials and wanted to throw a spanner in the works. After all, it all boils down to her word against his.

Why does any criminal risk everything? To get what they want.

Oh there's a huge gulf of difference between being safely asleep in bed after a night out and having someone grab your stuff in public when you're wide awake. Awful as that is and as unacceptable as that is. There's a big difference between someone you don't know doing it and someone you thought was like a brother breaking your trust and climbing into bed and sexually assaulting you. She's entitled to her trauma. Besides, the case isn't about her, it's about him. The guilty guy. She's the victim here.

A jury heard ALL the evidences and decided that he knew what he was doing and committed sexual assault, but it's almost comical how people can confidently decide that not only is the guy an innocent victim of alcohol and circumstance, but that the victim is an over the top snowflake too.

Somehow I doubt you ever questioned a not guilty verdict in a sex assault case, but you have no problem disbelieving a guilty verdict.

Reviews and Books Galore

Grayson wrote: »

Consent can be implied. If I walk up to a random woman and kiss her, it's a type of assault. If you kiss your wife then it's not because it's something you do every day. You can assume that she will consent bec

I'm pretty sure that goes against the notion if consent. It's not something that is similar to a blank cheque.

As a sidenote, how are sex offenders treated in Irish prisons?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Its a very harsh sentence IMHO. If I was on that jury, I would have found him not guilty. Reason being, it sounds like they all had way too much to drink and as such, he could well have made an honest mistake ie. gotten into the wrong bed. The man's fiance would know if he was in the habit of getting into bed and rubbing her genitals, whispering "show me your clit". It would be interesting to know if the relationship is still ongoing.


Am I the only person who feels that the victim impact statement is VERY over the top? I mean come on, she is traumatized and had her life derailed by a rub of her genitals? I don't believe that for a second. Sure it wouldn't be pleasant but its not a life changing situation (and I say that as someone who has had their genitals groped by a stranger) Another thing about the statement that irk's me is the way she says her fiends fiance was "like a brother". Who describes their best friends fiance like a brother? I don't buy it.


On balance I would say the guy did not intend to do what he did - He has never been in trouble, has shown himself to be an honorable man to the point that he was engaged to a woman. He was in his own house, with friends and family, if he intended to do what he did, he knew he would DEFINITELY get caught. Why would he risk such a thing at his own engagement party? It make no sense.


An equally likely scenario could be the the "victim" was jealous of the upcoming nuptials and wanted to throw a spanner in the works. After all, it all boils down to her word against his.

Earlier in the thread, I described something similar that happened to me. I’m very sure the guy who did it to me had never been in trouble in any way. And he was actually on the verge of finishing a postgraduate diploma in counselling. Yup, this guy was hoping to become a counsellor. But he still did what he did. What does it matter if this guy had never been in trouble before? If he did what he was charged with - and the jury seems to think he did - is it lessened for the victim by it being the first time he did it?

And to you, it’s “equally likely” that this woman brought this case out of envy? Give me strength.

Boggles

Candie wrote: »

A jury heard ALL the evidences and decided that he knew what he was doing and committed sexual assault,

I imagine a Jury could fully believe his version of events and still find him guilty of sexual assault.

IMO the jury had no choice, it was sexual assault, accidental or not. I would guess his legal advice told him to plead guilty.

But I do have a hunch that the events that night weren't the sole reason for the trial.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

I imagine a Jury could fully believe his version of events and still find him guilty of sexual assault.

IMO the jury had no choice, it was sexual assault, accidental or not. I would guess his legal advice told him to plead guilty.

But I do have a hunch that the events that night weren't the sole reason for the trial.

Sorry but no. For him to be found guilty they would need to establish intent. If he did not intend to assault her and thought she was his girlfriend and they believed that story, they can not convict.

If someone takes something from a store but it is obviously an accident, they can't be convicted of shoplifting because intent isn't there.

He's convicted because the jury believed he assaulted the girl, and he intended to do so.

Boggles

Candie wrote: »

For him to be found guilty they would need to establish intent.

I pretty sure in sexual assault cases it's consent that needs to be established.

She didn't obviously.

Whether it is an accident or not is moot.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Dies anybody know the law exactly?

Kidchameleon

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

And to you, it’s “equally likely” that this woman brought this case out of envy? Give me strength.

People commit murder because of jealousy all the time. There's a high profile case going on in Ireland as we speak...


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/farmer-50-murdered-love-rival-in-attempt-to-rekindle-affair-court-told-37752653.html


False rape accusations are also far too common


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/woman-given-suspended-sentence-for-making-false-rape-claim-1.3704619


These two stories are just the tip of the iceberg so no, I will not "give you strength".

Kidchameleon

Candie wrote: »

Sorry but no. For him to be found guilty they would need to establish intent.

I'm honestly struggling to figure out how intent could be established & what kind of additional evidence the jury were privy to. Up until the "assault", the woman considered him like a brother & trusted him to marry his best friend so he evidently never did anything to lead up to this situation

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

People commit murder because of jealousy all the time. There's a high profile case going on in Ireland as we speak...


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/farmer-50-murdered-love-rival-in-attempt-to-rekindle-affair-court-told-37752653.html


False rape accusations are also far too common


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/woman-given-suspended-sentence-for-making-false-rape-claim-1.3704619

These two stories are just the tip of the iceberg so no, I will not "give you strength".

False rape accusations actually tend to be incredibly rare, finding one doesn't make them common. Accusations rarely make it to trial if they're false.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45565684

Secondly, he admitted to doing this. She was in bed asleep, yet you're attributing blame to her for reporting a crime. There's nothing false about it and victims are psychologically evaluated. So maybe don't invent ****.

ceadaoin.

False rape accusations are not any more common than false accusations of other crimes.
That is, the rate is incredibly low. I don't know where the idea comes from that they are rampant.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

An equally likely scenario could be the the "victim" was jealous of the upcoming nuptials and wanted to throw a spanner in the works. After all, it all boils down to her word against his.

I mean ffs, some people tie themselves in knots to make the victim (usually a woman) to blame. Yeah like that scenario is likely. Your prejudice is showing there.

Sick of the rape and sexual assault apologists on this site tbh.

Jmsg

batgoat wrote: »

False rape accusations actually tend to be incredibly rare, finding one doesn't make them common. Accusations rarely make it to trial if they're false.


Secondly, he admitted to doing this. She was in bed asleep, yet you're attributing blame to her for reporting a crime. There's nothing false about it and victims are psychologically evaluated. So maybe don't invent ****.

But by false rape allegations you mean a situation where an allegation is put forth where sexual contact hadn't occurred, rather than had occurred but the claim of it being rape is dubious.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Kidchameleon wrote: »

People commit murder because of jealousy all the time. There's a high profile case going on in Ireland as we speak...


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/farmer-50-murdered-love-rival-in-attempt-to-rekindle-affair-court-told-37752653.html


False rape accusations are also far too common


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/woman-given-suspended-sentence-for-making-false-rape-claim-1.3704619


These two stories are just the tip of the iceberg so no, I will not "give you strength".

Actually no, false rape accusations are very rare. As for the other example and applying to this case, is there any indication that the women were love rivals? Or that the complainant was envious? Any indication at all? In what way are those two examples “the tip of the iceberg”?

So, yup, give me strength. Bringing envy into it made you sound ridiculous. Own it.

batgoat

It's genuinely concerning that a person has reregged multiple times to express some incredibly warped views.

One eyed Jack

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Its a very harsh sentence IMHO. If I was on that jury, I would have found him not guilty. Reason being, it sounds like they all had way too much to drink and as such, he could well have made an honest mistake ie. gotten into the wrong bed. The man's fiance would know if he was in the habit of getting into bed and rubbing her genitals, whispering "show me your clit". It would be interesting to know if the relationship is still ongoing.

You would have found him not guilty without hearing all the evidence presented against him? Colour me shocked :rolleyes: He could have made an honest mistake, and no doubt that would have been presented in his defence seeing as he was pleading not guilty to the charges against him. The jury however, who actually heard all the evidence presented in the case, found it to be an unreasonable assumption under the circumstances that there was the possibility of him making an honest mistake.

Am I the only person who feels that the victim impact statement is VERY over the top? I mean come on, she is traumatized and had her life derailed by a rub of her genitals? I don't believe that for a second. Sure it wouldn't be pleasant but its not a life changing situation (and I say that as someone who has had their genitals groped by a stranger) Another thing about the statement that irk's me is the way she says her fiends fiance was "like a brother". Who describes their best friends fiance like a brother? I don't buy it.

Probably not, but that’s not the point of the victim impact statement either. While you may not believe that an event such as being sexually assaulted in your sleep can have a devastating impact on the victim who up to that point trusted and treated her friends fiancé like a brother (Seriously? You’ve never heard of something that’s common among a group of friends? I find that hard to believe), your standards for yourself aren’t necessarily shared by other people, and so what may cause you no concern whatsoever, may possibly, and very likely would affect someone else who isn’t you. I’ve had my genitals groped too, many, many times over the years, while I was awake, while I was asleep, by strangers and by people I knew, and still, I could completely understand why someone who isn’t me would be traumatised by being sexually assaulted by someone whom in their own words, they trusted like a brother, while they were in such a vulnerable position. Brothers generally aren’t in the habit of fondling each others genitals, they protect each other from harm, which is more or less the point she was making with that statement.

On balance I would say the guy did not intend to do what he did - He has never been in trouble, has shown himself to be an honorable man to the point that he was engaged to a woman. He was in his own house, with friends and family, if he intended to do what he did, he knew he would DEFINITELY get caught. Why would he risk such a thing at his own engagement party? It make no sense.

Criminal behaviour generally doesn’t make any sense, usually because we have the benefit of hindsight after the person has been caught, when they weren’t expecting to be caught, let alone punished for their actions. He certainly was not honourable in the fact that he still denied he had done anything wrong, and as the Judge noted - he failed to acknowledge any wrongdoing which raised a question as to the level of insight he has into his offending. He still, like some posters here, doesn’t get that what he did was wrong, and why it was wrong. The sentence handed down by the Judge wasn’t severe enough to teach him a lesson, but the Judge is limited by what sentencing guidelines allow for. The maximum sentence for sexual assault is 10 years, so a 2.5 year sentence with the last 18 months suspended, meaning that he will only serve one year in jail (if even that), is entirely reasonable and appropriate given the circumstances in this particular case.

An equally likely scenario could be the the "victim" was jealous of the upcoming nuptials and wanted to throw a spanner in the works. After all, it all boils down to her word against his.

No it does not. There would have been evidence presented by the prosecution which would have to amount to a hell of a lot more than anything “just boiling down to her word against his”, and certainly you have no basis whatsoever for your scenario which isn’t at all equally likely seeing as there is no evidence at all in which you can base that assumption. You literally just pulled it out of your ass and expected it to fly. It doesn’t, it’s beyond stupid. I could understand if it had been presented by the defence as evidence to attack the credibility of the victim, but we have nothing to suggest that was the case here at all.

ceadaoin.

And I think some people need a lesson in female anatomy. The vagina refers to inside. By using that term they seem to be implying that he inserted fingers inside her. Not a "grab" or a "feel" or whatever other minimising **** people are posting.

Give me strength is right.

crustybla

Jesus effing Christ on a bike.

Boggles

One eyed Jack wrote: »

He could have made an honest mistake, and no doubt that would have been presented in his defence seeing as he was pleading not guilty to the charges against him. The jury however, who actually heard all the evidence presented in the case, found it to be an unreasonable assumption under the circumstances that there was the possibility of him making an honest mistake.

They wouldn't have been allowed entertain his defense.

Mistaken identity is not allowed for under our legislation AFAIK.

That's why it baffling he didn't plead guilty and avoid a trial.

Demonique

Just because worse sexual crimes have received lesser sentences doesn't mean this sentence is harsh

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

batgoat wrote: »

It's genuinely concerning that a person has reregged multiple times to express some incredibly warped views.

I kinda find them funny. What will they say next?

bilbot79

Prejudiced female judge

I honestly think thats harsh. Never offended before. Unlikely but plausible that in his drunkenness he thought it was his girlfriend.

Very bad behaviour no doubt about that but I don't think jail time is warranted.

jiltloop

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

jiltloop wrote: »

That's fair enough, but some people have different relationship parameters. My fiancée and I would have no problems having a sleepy fondle or initiating sex through intimate touching while the other is asleep. It's one of life's simple pleasures on a weekend morning!

So to state carte blanche that touching your partner intimately while they're asleep is assault with no room for nuance is frankly ridiculous.

For the record I've no problem with the conviction in the OP but having read through the thread and seeing some people condemning any touching of one's partner while they're asleep as assault no matter what I felt I had to disagree because I'm quite confident I'm not someone who is capable of a sexual assault.

Important note: it wasn’t a “sleepy fondle”. She was asleep. Drooling on the pillow, REM, dreaming about being a Viking asleep. She eventually woke because I guess even when fully asleep, you can be woken by something and I’m guessing fingers inside a vagina might do it. I’ve had sleepy morning sex. Sleepy as in awake.

Like, you’d really stick your hands intimate places on your fully asleep partner?

You might think I’m not considering nuance but I can safely say, of the women I know and have known, a good chunk would be thoroughly creeped out by that. And the only way you find out if it’s okay or not is by doing it.

Well done for completely missing my point.