Harsh sentence

Dante7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There’s no disparity only where you go looking for it, and you’ll find it easy enough when you’re willing to ignore context which doesn’t fit with your particular narrative.

Nonsense. There is a huge disparity with sentencing. What sentence do you think Martin Nolan would have given?

One eyed Jack

Dante7 wrote: »

Nonsense. There is a huge disparity with sentencing. What sentence do you think Martin Nolan would have given?

There isn’t any huge disparity in sentencing. You’re just ignoring the facts. I have no idea what sentence Martin Nolan would give as the circumstances wouldn’t be the same. The case would be in front of a different Judge and perhaps the defendant may not have appeared so up his own hole that he showed no remorse and nothing but contempt for the victim and his actions, which showed he still doesn’t see what he did was in any way wrong or why his actions were wrong, or why he found himself in the dock.

Sentencing guidelines do exist, and the Judge ultimately has discretion in the sentencing they hand down, based upon the circumstances of any particular case and other factors such as mitigating and aggravating factors. In this case the Judge could have handed down a 5 year sentence for sexual assault, but chose to hand down a 2.5 year sentence, with the last 18 months suspended.

You call that harsh? I call it bloody lenient myself given the circumstances that we are aware of.

eagle eye

batgoat wrote:

Erm but most of them view it as acceptable behaviour. Also ye don't seem to view the lack of remorse to be an issue.

Well it says he made a statement to a Garda detailing what happened. If he did that then he must have remorse.
If there was no remorse he would hardly detail the events to a Garda.
As he did make a statement it appears that his not guilty plea was a technical one where he felt there was no intention on his part.
This is based on the information made available to us.

eagle eye

Whack1 wrote:

He didn't admit it in a statement to the Garda.

Thanks a is from the article linked in the op.
'Doran met with Gda Stears and told him he was drunk on the night and had gotten into the wrong bed and that it took him a minute to realise the woman was not his girlfriend'.

batgoat

eagle eye wrote: »

Well it says he made a statement to a Garda detailing what happened. If he did that then he must have remorse.
If there was no remorse he would hardly detail the events to a Garda.
As he did make a statement it appears that his not guilty plea was a technical one where he felt there was no intention on his part.
This is based on the information made available to us.

Eh, stating what happened is not an indication of remorse. He'd have gotten an even worse sentence if he lied to the gardaí about what happened. In addition, as previously pointed out, the statement of the judge indicates a lack of remorse.

GreeBo

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

My opinion is my opinion. You can take it or leave it. Nobody can force their opinion on anyone. But at the same time, taking issue with somebody’s opinion doesn’t mean the opinion-holder has to care. You take issue with my opinion. Grand? If you’re comfortable in your actions, what do you care what my opinions of those actions are?

What, you mean other than labelling people with a different opinion than you as sexual abusers?

Kimbot

Whack1 wrote: »

He didn't admit in his statement to Garda that he touched her vagina. He told Garda in his statement that he got into the bed, put his arm around her, realised he was in the wrong bed and got up and left the room. He also said in his statement to Garda that she never woke.

If she never woke, how did she know anything had happened?!

Was she asleep or falling asleep tho?

"She said she was falling asleep when Doran came into the room and got into her bed"

Kimbot

Whack1 wrote: »

She was asleep for literally seconds before he entered the room. The incident happened at 6.30/7am on Sunday morning, she had been awake from 8am the previous day.

Well that's not what's reported so how come you seem to know more?

eagle eye

batgoat wrote:

Eh, stating what happened is not an indication of remorse. He'd have gotten an even worse sentence if he lied to the gardaí about what happened. In addition, as previously pointed out, the statement of the judge indicates a lack of remorse.

She said that his failure to acknowledge his wrongdoing was an issue. She never mentioned remorse or that he lied or anything like that according to the article.

Boggles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Aah, people in this actual thread have said they do. Not to a waking, sleepy partner, to a FULLY asleep one. And have defended it. Apparently in the context of waking them for sex, it’s okay. Some of those people have thanked your post.

If you think people haven’t said they do that, you haven’t read the whole thread.

I’ll happily provide examples.

Please do.

bilbot79

batgoat wrote: »

As already pointed out, vagina implies internal. So he digitally penetrated a sleeping woman. That's not remotely reasonable and it's even worse because he doesn't recognise the impact of his actions.

Don't disagree with this but still the sentence seems harsh. This is a conversation about sentencing as opposed to the crime itself. He's guilty all day long but I don't think jail time is warranted on a first offence here

Boggles

bilbot79 wrote: »

Don't disagree with this but still the sentence seems harsh. This is a conversation about sentencing as opposed to the crime itself. He's guilty all day long but I don't think jail time is warranted on a first offence here

It's entirely his own fault he got a custodial sentence.

Apart from the crime itself, the judge looks at 3 main things before determining an appropriate sentence. He had the 2 "hardest" ones covered.

No previous record and long employment history.

The 3rd being remorse, the easiest one, because you can fake it.

The case is bizarre because the jury had absolutely no choice but to find him guilty IMO, even if they believed his version of events, mistaken identity is not an excuse for lack of consent.

Surely his legal team would have advised him to plead guilty, send in a long letter of apology and not take it to trial. He chose to take to trial where he chose not act contrite.

The question is why didn't he?

Either he is complete d1ckhead simpleton or as I suspect given the dynamics of the relationships involved, the glaring animosity grew from further events after that night.

In comparison to other sentences, yes it would appear harsh, but that was his fault ultimately.

Kidchameleon

Boggles wrote: »

Surely his legal team would have advised him to plead guilty..... The question is why didn't he?

Plead guilty to what? What was he charged with? Does anyone in this thread know the exact wording of the charge?


If the charge was knowingly assaulting the woman then why in the hell would he plead guilty to that if he believes he did not do it knowingly?

Boggles

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Plead guilty to what? What was he charged with? Does anyone in this thread know the exact wording of the charge?

Sexual Assault.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If the charge was knowingly assaulting the woman then why in the hell would he plead guilty to that if he believes he did not do it knowingly?

Because his legal team would have pointed out to him, that under law mistaken identity is not an excuse for lack of consent.

It's specifically defined in legislation.

---

Also a few people have said that "touching a vagina" is automatically digital penetration.

It isn't, I suggest looking at other similar court reporting.

jiltloop

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Boggles wrote: »

That is a bizarre thing to accuse anyone of.

Your boundaries are your boundaries, nobody is judging you either way. The reality is nobody cares what you or your partner get up to. You do understand that right?



I haven't seen one person suggest fingering a partner out of a deep sleep would be a clever thing to do.

You keep bringing it up based on an anecdote. Why do you continue to try and apply something to a conversation nobody is having?



Discussing likes and dislikes in relation to intimacy is a perfectly normal healthy thing do in a relationship, so it's not an absolute that a partner just tries something without discussing it beforehand.

But it does happen and in my experience if a partner tries something on me or vice-versa that we didn't "dig", then a simple "I'm not cool with that" suffices.

For me personally I understand people are fallible and the vast majority of them are not sexual deviants, so if a boundary is crossed I tend not to go apocalyptic and immediately issue divorce proceedings or P45's.

But like I said, that's me. Each to their own. It's none of my business what people do or do not get up to.

Aah, people in this actual thread have said they do. Not to a waking, sleepy partner, to a FULLY asleep one. And have defended it. Apparently in the context of waking them for sex, it’s okay. Some of those people have thanked your post.

If you think people haven’t said they do that, you haven’t read the whole thread.

I’ll happily provide examples. Unless they have gone back and edited. In which case, the editing timestamp will be telling.

Jiltloop reiterated after your post that I quoted here. He said this earlier in the thread too. He is quite literally saying his partner is fully asleep sometimes when he touches him/her. And the goal seems to be to initiate sex. How can you say you haven’t seen anyone say this on the thread? Unless you’re getting into technicalities about how far in the fingers go. Vagina, vulva, it’s all creepy to me.

jiltloop wrote: »

People in a loving and understanding relationship can touch each other intimately while asleep and it's completely normal as long as it's within those parameters. Your personal opinions or preferences are not enforceable on others as some kind of moral rule.

I have stated that for me and my partner waking each other up with sleepy intimate fondling is normal.

Your translation of this is that I wake my partner out of a deep sleep by inserting fingers in to her vagina??!!

This is why I usually don't offer an opinion in topics such as this, there's always someone to misrepresent it and then the debate breaks down from something that could be healthy and constructive to a pointless situation where one has to argue about what their position or argument is.

The fact is initially stated my opinion that certain carte blanche statements on this thread by 2 or 3 posters labelled perfectly normal behaviour between consenting adults in long term relationships as sexual abuse.

I'll bow out of this now because your tactics are not what I'd call a reasonable discussion.

Kidchameleon

Boggles wrote: »

Sexual Assault.

So one could be charged with sexual assault in Ireland even if there is no intent?

Boggles wrote: »

Because his legal team would have pointed out to him, that under law mistaken identity is not an excuse for lack of consent..

Yeah maybe if he had of worded things better he might have got the whole sentence suspended. I still think the victim impact statement is a load of crap though, nobody could be traumatized by that - a mistake that lasted the best part of a second.


Also, a bit of whataboutery but if the roles were reversed, and she grabbed his d*ck with intent and showed no remorse whilst he said he was traumatized, you can bet your life she would not see the inside of a jail. Equality indeed...

GreeBo

Pure speculation on my part but i wonder does any apparent lack of contrition result from how the victim may have responded afterwards.

E.g. if she started telling all and sundry that he had sexually abused her he might find it hard to act as remorseful as otherwise. Or even if she knew it was an accident but still registered it as an assault, if he was like a brother then she was like a sister to him. I'd expect a different reaction from a friend never mind a sister.

Boggles

GreeBo wrote: »

Pure speculation on my part but i wonder does any apparent lack of contrition result from how the victim may have responded afterwards.

Similarly TBF it could also be how he acted afterwards.

Also I would suggest that his defense all though plausible IMO, may not actually be true.

He could have well chanced his arm while his Fiancé was passed out in another room, also plausible.

Court reporting by the media is by and large a shambles, if the case was more salacious or involved someone famous we'd have full transcripts.

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

So one could be charged with sexual assault in Ireland even if there is no intent?





Yeah maybe if he had of worded things better he might have got the whole sentence suspended. I still think the victim impact statement is a load of crap though, nobody could be traumatized by that - a mistake that lasted the best part of a second.


Also, a bit of whataboutery but if the roles were reversed, and she grabbed his d*ck with intent and showed no remorse whilst he said he was traumatized, you can bet your life she would not see the inside of a jail. Equality indeed...

Your lack of even trying to empathise with the victim is pretty shameful tbh. Waking with a supposed friend with their hands on your genitals can easily be traumatising. That could easily make a person far less trusting of friends in general and events like that do tend to stick with you. So that's a long term impact. Just because you would apparently be fine is not the baseline.

Kidchameleon

batgoat wrote: »

Your lack of even trying to empathise with the victim is pretty shameful tbh.

I don't need to try, I have been there. Its not that big of a deal, sure, I was pissed off but that's about as far as it went. I can tell from the victim impact statement that she is simply baying for blood, now that is shameful because the guy is now going to spend a year in jail (where his chances of being actually raped increase). He will be on the sex offenders register. His life is ruined over an honest mistake a snowflakes fee fee's.

Robert Wolfe

I once woke to find myself fingering my sleeping girlfriend. Completely involuntary. Sexsomnia is a real thing.

Kidchameleon

Robert Wolfe wrote: »

I once woke to find myself fingering my sleeping girlfriend. Completely involuntary. Sexsomnia is a real thing.

According to many people on here and members of the judiciary you are a sex offender.

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I don't need to try, I have been there. Its not that big of a deal, sure, I was pissed off but that's about as far as it went. I can tell from the victim impact statement that she is simply baying for blood, now that is shameful because the guy is now going to spend a year in jail (where his chances of being actually raped increase). He will be on the sex offenders register. His life is ruined over an honest mistake a snowflakes fee fee's.

Your single experience is not how everyone responds to such an event. She did not invent the trauma and you're literally smearing the victim. You've invented so many things about her motivation already... Eg the jealous friend nonsense.

Robert Wolfe

Kidchameleon wrote: »

According to many people on here and members of the judiciary you are a sex offender.

I know, which is why I never told my gf.

eagle eye

batgoat wrote:

Your single experience is not how everyone responds to such an event. She did not invent the trauma and you're literally smearing the victim. You've invented so many things about her motivation already... Eg the jealous friend nonsense.

Look, we don't have all the information. Based on the information we do have it seems a very harsh sentence.
Based on the information we have it does seem she is going way ott.

It's entirely possible that there is a lot more to it but we don't know that.

I'm not condoning his actions either and it's quite possible that this particular girl is sensitive enough to be highly traumatised by this. Every case is different.

All we are doing is having a conversation based on the information given to us.

batgoat

Except you don't even seem to view his pretty apparent lack of remorse to be an issue... This fed into his sentence. He is responsible for it going to trial. Lack of intent does not make it not a crime...

GreeBo

Boggles wrote: »

Similarly TBF it could also be how he acted afterwards.

Also I would suggest that his defense all though plausible IMO, may not actually be true.

He could have well chanced his arm while his Fiancé was passed out in another room, also plausible.

Court reporting by the media is by and large a shambles, if the case was more salacious or involved someone famous we'd have full transcripts.

I'd false rape accusations are rare, i think your scenario is eve rarer tbf.
Why would you assume he is lying?

batgoat

GreeBo wrote: »

I'd false rape accusations are rare, i think your scenario is eve rarer tbf.
Why would you assume he is lying?

A complete lack of remorse isn't exactly a great sign of his moral compass.

GreeBo

batgoat wrote: »

A complete lack of remorse isn't exactly a great sign of his moral compass.

I didn't realise a moral compass was something that could get one imprisoned.

If someone accused me of lying and told anyone who would listen that i sexually abused them, culminating in me in court, I'm not die how much their feelings would bother me, especially if it was my "sister"

batgoat

GreeBo wrote: »

I didn't realise a moral compass was something that could get one imprisoned.

If someone accused me of lying and told anyone who would listen that i sexually abused them, culminating in me in court, I'm not die how much their feelings would bother me, especially if it was my "sister"

It would impact how long you'd be facing in jail. Pleading not guilty and making no effort to recognise impact upon the victim, will result in harsher sentence.

Apollo1080 wrote: »

What's the basis for saying he lacked remorse outside of someone else saying he lacked remorse?

How many accounts are you on at this stage?