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

Sentencing, Murder and Hate Crimes

Options
245

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 994 ✭✭✭rightmove


    Guy who worked in first bar was gay btw - missed that bit



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,821 ✭✭✭irishproduce


    Was this thread set up in response to the Sligo incidents this week? There is no thread about the murders?

    The reporting by RTE is suggesting some form of hate crime is going on here, I am confused. The minister just this afternoon referenced a difficult week for LGBT in relation to the murders.

    Are we to interpret from this reporting that these two men were gay and were murdered for that reason? I am not making light of it, just trying to read between the lines. There is also reference to meeting people online. Piecing this together then, are we dealing with a murderer who is lurking on gay cruising sites and has lured two men to their deaths? We have a problem if that is what is going on and that needs to be nipped quickly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,973 ✭✭✭DoctorEdgeWild


    In no way am I denying the impact of crime. Never have done, never will.

    But in asking a justice system to consider the impacts of crime as a primary or important, we create a hirearchy of victims.


    To illustrate my point:

    You get beaten up for being seen kissing a man, by some homophobic scumbags, you recover physically, recover mentally, move on with your life after a couple of weeks.

    Same night, I get beaten up for being seen kissing a man, by some other homophobic scumbags, I recover physically, but suffer from problems leaving me unable to form nice relationships, withdraw emotionally and generally have a pretty bad time for many years.


    Would I be right in saying that you see me as more of a victim than you in that scenario? Despite the fact that the crimes were identical. I think that's where we probably diverge in our views of how justice should be done.



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,636 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Not all murders are equal and if your law is like US law then somewhere in your sentencing laws there is a line about a punishment being something along the lines of "sufficient, but no greater than necessary" - sentencing law takes into account that not all crimes are truly equal and that severity of crimes must match the punishment and so there is a grading scale of crime and punishment. Sentencing enhancements are one part of that philosophy, eg. Murder is punishable by up to life in prison, an enhancement is the death penalty if the victim is a police officer, etc.; murder for premeditation (1st degree murder) and murder for prejudice (hate crimes) are other types of enhancement. While I imagine many younger civilizations simply had mandatory death penalties etc. for most crimes, clearly modern sensibility is to be more precise and proportional.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Politicians will talk and give sympathies but they and the justice system in this country condone violence and crime by the lack of sentencing and resources put against policing here.

    We all hear of cases of people committing further crimes despite 60/70 charges already. By allowing that,they're giving carte blanche for criminals to go further as they're not being punished.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    So much judgement akin to victim blaming in the description of scenario 1.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,970 ✭✭✭RoTelly


    Yes the thread was set up as I was confused as to why the MoJ and the media would some how consider a hate Murder (though she was also talking about the Rugby Player was beaten up at the weekend) different to Murder.

    and to be honest, I don't think her bill will in anyway help the levels of crime that we see.

    and it seems to me that on the one hand people want tougher sentence when it comes to so-called "hate crime" but lighter sentencing for all other crime, to such an extend that we should do away with prisons and jails in the modern era. I don't think this makes any sense.

    but regardless of this ....

    IMO the MoJ has jumped on 2 (though the murders maybe unrelated) crimes in order to sell her Hate Crime Bill and to avoid any criticism of her and her department and the failure of both to tackle crime in any real way.


    ______

    Just one more thing .... when did they return that car

    Yesterday



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,019 ✭✭✭trashcan


    I’m not surprised you are confused. What’s with all the coy reporting on the RTE news ? They seem to be going out of their way to say something, without actually coming out ( no pun intended) and saying it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,445 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    The reporting by RTE is suggesting some form of hate crime is going on here, I am confused.

    they were a full 10 minutes in to the story on the news before they mentioned that it might have been a homophobic attack



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    Oh get lost, you insufferable prig!!

    Being annoying is not an excuse for murder, manslaughter or even common assault. THAT was my point.

    Gay people have as much right to be irritating pricks as anyone else. It does not justify their being assaulted for it.

    The problem with bringing in a classification of "hate" crime with the implication that it can be ranked above similar crimes because of the motivation of the perpetrator's prejudices actually trivialises and belittles people.

    Here's another scenario: Drunken Cork/Kerry/Clare/Galway hurling/football fan on the LUAS on all-Ireland weekend, slobbering out loud about his team's innate superiority to everyone else and singing his song of support, whether it's Rose of Tralee/The West's Awake/De Banks/etc irritates someone into punching his lights out so that a fight erupts in which he gets killed.

    Is the puncher justified? No. Of course not.

    Is it fair or relevant to inquire into the sexuality of the victim in order to determine whether it could be a "hate crime" or just an "ordinary" crime?

    No. That would be stupid. But if it makes a material difference to the severity of the crime or the sentence, then this is just the sort of enquiry that would have to be made.

    Kicking someone's teeth in or smashing a bottle over somebody's head is the essential crime. Asking whether the motivation was "hate-based" or not is impertinent. And unnecessary.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,233 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    it appears that the people who bang on the most about hate crimes tend to be weak when it comes to general justice and policing so it seems more like power play. In law there is already the concept of Mens rea or intention behind a crime.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,415 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    mens rea is used in determining guilt. hate crime legislation is for determining sentencing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,233 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    but its redundant as it cant have any deterrence effect.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,415 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    you can say that about most of the criminal justice system. The purpose is appropriate sentencing. it achieves that aim.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,233 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Anyone that commits a serious crime of any sort has generally committed a series of crimes leading up to it , and looking into these crimes will tend show unwarranted leniency etc. There is an "80/20" principal at play. You want it statistically to be safer going about your business then look into habitual criminals and longer sentences.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,415 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail




  • Registered Users Posts: 26,503 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    This may be true of other crimes but, in fact, it's much less true of murder. A lot of murders happen in families where there may be seriously dysfunctional relationships over a long period, but no actual criminality until someone snaps and it all kicks off. Then there are murders where a row outside a pub escalates; drink or other intoxicants may be involved. Frequently the perpetrator has no criminal record.

    Of course there are also murders associated with criminality - gang murders, for instance, and murders arising out, e.g., robberies gone wrong. The perpetrators of these often do have criminal records.

    There's no evidence at all that what you term "unwarranted leniency" in previous sentencing increases the likelihood of further crimes being committed. There are various factors that have statistical links to criminality or increased criminality, but this isn't one. And the matter has been exhaustively investigated, because populist right-wing politicians frequently enter into office convinced that it is one, and looking for verification so that the they can tailor sentencing legislation accordingly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,226 ✭✭✭plodder


    Personally, I'd be in favour of hate crime legislation. If you can show that a particular crime was targeted at a protected group because of their protected characteristic, then that makes it worse than being chosen randomly. But, you have to prove that aspect in addition to the crime itself. It isn't just assumed because it happened to this person, as opposed to someone else.

    What concerns me slightly is the sentencing end of it, and mandatory minimum sentences imposed by law, as opposed to tariffs set by a judge which I think are a good idea. It's a lot more meaningful for a judge to able to say you have to serve a minimum of 25 years, rather than a life sentence being imposed by law, which could end up being only 12 years.

    Another aspect came up yesterday with an FG TD initiating a private members bill that will impose a two year mandatory sentence for assaulting a front line worker. The trouble with this is you will get people (eg victims and prosecutors) considering - does this assault actually warrant 2 years in prison? So, you'll get victims maybe deciding not to press charges, or maybe the DPP deciding the same thing. It's far better to have that question answered in an open court, independently by a judge, imo.



  • Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭whatchagonnado


    If sentences worked as a deterrent, the US would have stopped executing people years ago, etc.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,970 ✭✭✭RoTelly


    Whatchagonnado a criminals gonna crime.

    Maybe start sending them to rehab courses.

    So you've killed someone what next?

    How to overcoming killing people a holistic approach?

    So you've killed your children, 10 steps to coping without them because you killed them.


    ______

    Just one more thing .... when did they return that car

    Yesterday



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,445 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    Is there any official reporting on the nature of the killings, have seen rumors but nothing from RTE



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 23,379 CMod ✭✭✭✭Ten of Swords


    Mod - Do not discuss the Sligo murders, the case is before the courts right now



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,411 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    Yesterday the killer of the Conservative MP David Amess was handed down a whole life sentence. A whole life sentence means he will never be considered for parole and will spend his whole life in prison till the day he dies.

    How anyone can say they are against whole life sentences is beyond me. The idea that this guy should be given an opportunity to reform and if so potentially released is to me, and I've chosen my words carefully here - completely immoral, rather than how some might think that is the moral think to do. He can reform all he likes of his own accord but he stays put. I don't believe for a second this guy has been 'radicalized'. It's just him, the way he is. Afaic it's whole life in prison or bullet to the head, one or the other.




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    Too many looking to create a hierarchy of victims.

    Some people think prison is there to rehabilitate. I see prison as protecting wider society from crime. How many times do we see people with hundreds of convictions.

    Personally I don't give a damn about rehabilitation because I'd have a sliding scale of every increasing sentencing for each offence.

    For murder the punishment should be life without parole. The victim's family get a whole life sentence. Why shouldn't the perpetrator?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    No opportunity for parole and no chance of being let out?

    Don't see the point in keeping him alive in that case



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,411 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    Well at least he gets to suffer in prison for a very very long time. Personally I'd prefer the bullet. The thought of spending the rest of my live in prison makes me shudder.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Me too, but I don't like the thoughts of paying for that pricks food until he dies.



  • Registered Users Posts: 30 patsfan1286


    Apparently part and parcel of living in Ireland involves no reporting of obvious facts



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Help & Feedback Category Moderators Posts: 9,813 CMod ✭✭✭✭Shield


    Even though this is not my forum, and this has the potential to drag the discussion off topic, I’m happy to do some digging on behalf of the local mods given they are so busy. Section 4.5 of the site’s Terms of Use answers your question. It says:

    ‘We expect you to act responsibly in posting Material on Boards.ie. You agree, through use of this service, NOT to use boards.ie to:

    • post Material in respect of any matter that is currently before the courts”


Advertisement