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

Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

Options
12467…30

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Murrisk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 889 ✭✭✭Murrisk


    glasso wrote: »
    I don't know the specific details of the case and but I'm not saying what age is right or wrong but it's certainly interesting to see the large variance in age of consent across Europe. There are provisions in some countries if there is a situation of influence (e.g. as could be argued in the case of Humphries) where the age is raised. e.g. from 14 to 16 if position of influence.

    I'm glad you posted the last bit because when people quote low ages of consent on these types of threads, they often neglect to mention the reason for the low ages ie. to protect teens who are having sex with each other. And I still think some of those ages of consent are too low. Just because they exist doesn't mean they are right.
    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Age of consents should come with limitatons (and I'm sure many do) . They are there to protect the likes of someone who has just turned 15 or 16 while with their 14 year old gf/bf, not to allow predatory middle aged men and women to engage in sexual acts with the same 14 year old kid.

    Absolutely.


  • Options
    #93
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    It's not sympathy..... it's perspective.

    If I head out and hang around the Wesley disco on Friday night , pick up a 14 year old girl and spend the next year engaging in the same stuff , would the thread about me be as tame?


  • Options
    #94
    up for anything
    Registered Users Posts: 5,776 ✭✭✭up for anything


    buck65 wrote: »
    Well then you would go instead right? Sure that's grand so, I believe you.

    You think so? I'm not stupid. Far from it. I know how the system works. First of all, I'd work outside of it and then, if necessary, with it. Would you really leave justice to the Irish court system? Judge Nolan, for instance, would probably leave Humphries off with a suspended sentence and tell him to pay damages to his victim. That's not justice, especially in sex crimes.


  • Options
    #95
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,116 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    How are the low ages protecting teens from teens, it gives adults a licence.

    I think it should probably be on age gap until 17/18. I used to work near a red light district and the age gap was shocking, vulnerable kids boys and girls versus groups of men. It gave me shivers to think what was happening.


  • Options
    #96
    Murrisk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 889 ✭✭✭Murrisk


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    How are the low ages protecting teens from teens, it gives adults a licence.

    Some of the low ages come with conditions. Depends on the country. And in any country, I'm confident that a grooming case could still be taken if the evidence was there. Low age of consent doesn't magic all that away.

    I've seen old men sleaze openly on young teenagers in Spain. It's revolting.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,728 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    No but he doesn't deserve to rot to death, he made a mistake. We call it abuse but it's perfectly legal in France and very close to it an hour from Dublin. I think calling it child abuse is a bit of a stretch, I didn't read anywhere she was forced. American Beauty springs to mind. I think he was a bored idiot. Maybe there's more that I missed.

    ffs, do you defend all paedos ?


  • Options
    #98
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,116 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Augeo wrote: »
    ffs, do you defend all paedos ?

    ffs I'm not defending a pedo, I'm saying some of the punishment and language being dished out here without facts is OTT.

    Would I get a few thanks if I suggested we should burn off his skin with acid before letting him rot in jail, that seems to be the underlying theme here.


  • Options
    #99
    Imallrightjack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 177 ✭✭Imallrightjack


    JupiterKid wrote: »
    Disgusting. :mad: And to think I used to read his pieces in the IT.

    so what?

    how many of us watched jimmy saville every thursday night for years.should we be ashamed of that?


  • Options
    #100
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,728 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    ffs I'm not defending a pedo, I'm saying some of the punishment and language being dished out here without facts is OTT.

    Would I get a few thanks if I suggested we should burn off his skin with acid before letting him rot in jail, that seems to be the underlying theme here.

    You posted about stakes and firelighters in post #14 of this topic, there was little to no mention of pumishment or language at that point :)


  • Options
    #101
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    "The court will hear that Humphries groomed the girl over a lengthy period of time by exchanging over 10,000 text messages with her. Many of these messages were sent in the early hours of the morning and some contained video files.

    At some stage during the grooming process Humphries began engaging in sexual acts with the girl who was in her young teens at the time


    "Prosecuting counsel Shane Costelloe SC told Judge O’Connor the State was entering a nolle prosequi on the three further charges relating to a separate girl, meaning the charges were not being proceeded with."


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,728 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/sports-writer-preyed-on-girl-after-highlighting-cunning-of-paedophiles-35869078.html

    "Humphries was engaged in sexual acts with an underage girl at an apartment in Dublin.
    We also know he sexually exploited the same child by inviting her to engage or participate in a sexually explicit, indecent or obscene acts on various dates in 2010 and 2011.

    The full circumstances have yet to be disclosed.


  • Options
    #103
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,153 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Just the 1 "stupid, stupid mistake" was it?

    "The court will hear that Humphries groomed the girl over a lengthy period of time by exchanging over 10,000 text messages with her. Many of these messages were sent in the early hours of the morning and some contained video files.

    At some stage during the grooming process Humphries began engaging in sexual acts with the girl who was in her young teens at the time."




    "Prosecuting counsel Shane Costelloe SC told Judge O’Connor the State was entering a nolle prosequi on the three further charges relating to a separate girl, meaning the charges were not being proceeded with."

    I dont think i've sent 10000 texts in my life and i've had a mobile since 1995.


  • Options
    #104
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Arghus wrote: »
    Humphries won't get anything near the severity of sentencing that Huntley got - what Humphries did was detestable, but the two cases aren't in the same league. He'll serve a few years in all likelihood.

    Eh, I know.... but people are calling for them to lock Humphries up and throw away the key.
    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    If I head out and hang around the Wesley disco on Friday night , pick up a 14 year old girl and spend the next year engaging in the same stuff , would the thread about me be as tame?

    Eh, what has that got to do with my saying there is no perspective in these type of cases?

    There are many variables in all cases and many reactions as a result... some are justified, some are clearly not... to some people at least.

    I haven't commented on this case with any specificity as I feel that so far not enough details have bee released for me to do so but safe to say that calling for the man to be locked up for the rest of his life is a tad extreme, no?


  • Options
    #105
    Murrisk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 889 ✭✭✭Murrisk


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Eh, I know.... but people are calling for them to lock Humphries up and throw away the key.

    How many people on-thread have actually said this or anything to its effect?


  • Options
    #106
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,842 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    Outrage much?

    Be careful, you might cut yourself on that edge.


  • Options
    #107
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Murrisk wrote: »
    How many people on-thread have actually said this or anything to its effect?

    Two, I believe.
    Tigger wrote: »
    I hope he rots in prison
    the lawman wrote: »
    That human being needs to be locked up for the rest of his life and kept away from society.

    Sorry, was I supposed to wait until there was more than that before I was allowed to reply?


  • Options
    #108
    Murrisk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 889 ✭✭✭Murrisk


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Two, I believe.





    Sorry, was I supposed to wait until there was more than that before I was allowed to reply?

    Two people in a thread of how many posts? Hardly an onslaught, is it? An odd thing to hone in on. There will be all kinds of views expressed on a thread. Two posts of a particular thought is very far from being a consensus.

    Allowed to reply? What are you wittering on about? Nobody needs any permission to post here. Don't be such a martyr, FFS. Dramatics.


  • Options
    #109
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Murrisk wrote: »
    Two people in a thread of how many posts? Hardly an onslaught, is it?

    Can you link to where I said it was an onslaught please. Thanks.
    An odd thing to hone in on. There will be all kinds of views expressed on a thread. Two post of a particular thought is very far from being a consensus.

    Can you link to where I said it was the consensus please. Thanks.


  • Options
    #110
    Murrisk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 889 ✭✭✭Murrisk


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Can you link to where I said it was an onslaught please. Thanks.



    Can you link to where I said it was the consensus please. Thanks.

    You did not use those two words. As you well know. You have called for people to employ perspective. Welcome to the wonderful word of subtext and synonyms. You honed in on the comments of two people. I doubt many people would think he should be jailed for life for what he has pled guilty to. However, a lot of those people would also be justifiably disgusted at the charges he has pled guilty to. Don't conflate being disgusted with people thinking he should be locked up for life. And people feeling creeped out by the story are not lacking perspective. Just because somebody else has committed a more heinous crime doesn't take from his.


  • Options
    #111
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Murrisk wrote: »
    Just because somebody else has committed a more heinous crime doesn't take from his.

    I never said it did :p What the hell are you on about.

    You're ranting and using my posts as a platform to do it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Ben Gadot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,767 ✭✭✭Ben Gadot


    BelovedAunt wrote: »
    A paedophile is attracted to prepubescent children. If she was 14 or 15 she was already well into puberty, so technically he isn't a paedophile.

    Either way, he groomed someone in a vulnerable position and did it in a way that made it clear that he knew what he was doing was wrong.

    As for the article he wrote, it's not irony, just illness. The sad thing is that Humphries probably can't differentiate between the predators he spoke of and what he did to this young girl. Both were abuses of power and influence, both against the law. That's all there is to it.

    That's not to say I have a pitchfork out for the man. I hope he gets the help he needs and is allowed to live his life in peace eventually.


  • Options
    #113
    Murrisk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 889 ✭✭✭Murrisk


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    I never said it did :p What the hell are you on about.

    You're ranting and using my posts as a platform to do it.

    LOL, I've heard about transference but the bolded is it in action. You are in no position to accuse anyone else of ranting.
    Ben Gadot wrote: »
    Either way, he groomed someone in a vulnerable position and did it in a way that made it clear that he knew what he was doing was wrong.

    Exactly. It doesn't matter whether someone is a paedophile or an ephebophile. To hone in on that is to miss the point entirely.


  • Options
    #114
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,099 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Murrisk wrote: »



    Exactly. It doesn't matter whether someone is a paedophile or an ephebophile. To hone in on that is to miss the point entirely.

    This.

    I've noticed a disturbing trend online of posters minimising grooming and child abuse in this manner. It's very disturbing


  • Options
    #115
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Murrisk wrote: »
    LOL, I've heard about transference but the bolded is it in action. You are in no position to accuse anyone else of ranting.

    On the contrary, I'm in the perfect position given that it's precisely what you're doing.... strawmanning away there like nobody's business.

    Oh and just because people refer to the calls for Humphries to get similar sentences to those handed down to murders and serial killers as being absurd and lacking perspective..... does not therefore mean that they are saying that those more serious crimes diminish lesser ones. What a preposterous thing to suggest.


  • Options
    #116
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    This.

    I've noticed a disturbing trend online of posters minimising grooming and child abuse in this manner. It's very disturbing


    The attitude that other people have done worse, so it's not that bad. :(

    I feel sorry for that mans family, and I even have some compassion for that man as it's almost certain that his life won't ever be the same, even after he's served his time. He's a child abuser for life, he can't, and rightly won't be trusted around kids again. To say he lost it all is wrong though, he threw it all away. It's hard to pay a debt to society when your victim is a child, it goes against human nature to wipe that slate clean because there's too much risk.

    None of it compares to how sorry I am for the victim, who will probably struggle to understand this for years to come, if not the rest of her life. I hope she's okay and getting help. The discussion on the maturity of teenagers is a bit pointless. I thought I knew everything at 18, everything. I'm 30 now and I'm only getting a handle on how little I really know. Our brains aren't even fully mature until we're 25. There is only one adult in this story, and it doesn't matter how mature the girl appeared or sounded, it isn't her.

    I think the sentence was appropriate.


  • Options
    #117
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,117 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    AFAIK he hasn't been sentenced yet. Possibly up to 10 years, is what's being said.


  • Options
    #118
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Water John wrote: »
    AFAIK he hasn't been sentenced yet. Possibly up to 10 years, is what's being said.

    Ah, and I was thinking that 10 years seemed about right.

    I'm worried now that he'll get two years suspended because being shunned at his golf club is punishment enough, or some other nonsense that you sometimes see. :(


  • Options
    #119
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,117 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Wonder if the judge will now feel pressure. Will there be an outcry, if, as it probably will be, less.


  • Options
    #120
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,116 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Candie wrote: »
    The attitude that other people have done worse, so it's not that bad. :(


    I think the sentence was appropriate.

    Your taking up the attitude wrong, some people would like the full facts before calling someone a monster and a pedophile while calling for him to rot in jail. Nobody for one minute has said it's ok. There are a few disputes over the length of the sentance he deserves. No one has said he should be let off. Everybody is in agreement it's a crime.

    He hasn't been sentenced yet but judging it on this case today he's not looking at much of a sentence. 7yrs for 3yrs of intense abuse Man jailed for 'intense' sexual abuse of cousin (6) loses appeal over 'severity of sentence'
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/man-jailed-for-intense-sexual-abuse-of-cousin-6-loses-appeal-over-severity-of-sentence-35871218.html


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    This.

    I've noticed a disturbing trend online of posters minimising grooming and child abuse in this manner. It's very disturbing

    I think people underestimate the impact of grooming. Even if the physical act is minor the manipulation itself is abusive.


Advertisement