Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

Snickers Man · 28-06-2017 1:54pm

Candie wrote: »

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.

Golf club???? You've never read any of his stuff have you?

drunkmonkey · 28-06-2017 2:58pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

Were these in place at the time of Humphries' acts?

Not really relevant as it was his daughters friend, no rules can prevent that.

Yamanoto · 28-06-2017 3:04pm

Let's hope it's a very long time before Mr. Humphrie's utters the words "I'm Free".

Red_Wake · 28-06-2017 3:32pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

Were these in place at the time of Humphries' acts?

Not really relevant as it was his daughters friend, no rules can prevent that.

No, but if Humphries used the facilities of the club to conceal or enable his inaproppriate contact and abuse of this young lady, the club could certainly tighten up its regulations.

Out of curiousity, why do you assume the GAA has no questions to answer? It's a perilous belief to assume an organisation which has such unfettered access to children is above scrutiny [a fact which Humphries himself supports in his article on predators].

Snickers Man · 28-06-2017 3:38pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

I wonder if the club in question has put any safeguards in place to prevent such predators doing this again?

Knowing the GAA, I doubt it.

When my son was at school I volunteered to help out with rugby coaching. I never played much, and certainly not to any level but I showed willing with imparting knolwedge of basic skills to the young lads.

I was sent on an IRFU-designed course and the first thing that we all had to do was read and sign a document on code of practice to ensure child safety. It was full of basic common-sense and some not so common-sense rules about what to do and specifically what not to do.

No going into a changing room alone with a kid who wasn't your own.
No taking a child who wasn't your own anywhere in a car without somebody else.
No inappropriate touching.
No going into the showers etc etc

This, I believe, was a government-mandated document that we all had to sign. I'm sure it would be the same for any school or club coaching kids at GAA too.

drunkmonkey · 28-06-2017 3:44pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

No, but if Humphries used the facilities of the club to conceal or enable his inaproppriate contact and abuse of this young lady, the club could certainly tighten up its regulations.

Out of curiousity, why do you assume the GAA has no questions to answer? It's a perilous belief to assume an organisation which has such unfettered access to children is above scrutiny [a fact which Humphries himself supports in his article on predators].

I'm just making an assumption like everyone else here but I don't think he was that sort of person, a serial child abuser, maybe he was but I'm just not getting that from what i've read, to me it looks like an affair with his daughters friend.
Sure the GAA need to ask who he coached but I presume that was done years ago and we've heard nothing.

Red_Wake · 28-06-2017 3:48pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

No, but if Humphries used the facilities of the club to conceal or enable his inaproppriate contact and abuse of this young lady, the club could certainly tighten up its regulations.

Out of curiousity, why do you assume the GAA has no questions to answer? It's a perilous belief to assume an organisation which has such unfettered access to children is above scrutiny [a fact which Humphries himself supports in his article on predators].

I'm just making an assumption like everyone else here but I don't think he was that sort of person, a serial child abuser, maybe he was but I'm just not getting that from what i've read, to me it looks like an affair with his daughters friend.
Sure the GAA need to ask who he coached but I presume that was done years ago and we've heard nothing.

Presumption is a dangerous thing imo. There should at least be a clarification on whether an internal investigation occurred within the club.

ohnonotgmail · 28-06-2017 3:50pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm just making an assumption like everyone else here but I don't think he was that sort of person, a serial child abuser, maybe he was but I'm just not getting that from what i've read, to me it looks like an affair with his daughters friend.
Sure the GAA need to ask who he coached but I presume that was done years ago and we've heard nothing.

there was more than one girl involved. the other decided not to proceed with a prosecution.

drunkmonkey · 28-06-2017 3:55pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there was more than one girl involved. the other decided not to proceed with a prosecution.

Maybe but we don't know why and never will, Possibly there was no case to proceed with. Again only an assumption.

drunkmonkey · 28-06-2017 3:57pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

Presumption is a dangerous thing imo. There should at least be a clarification on whether an internal investigation occurred within the club.

There had to have been. Garda were probably involved. The club aren't going to make any statesment about a case in progress as it could influence the outcome.

Red_Wake · 28-06-2017 4:16pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

Presumption is a dangerous thing imo. There should at least be a clarification on whether an internal investigation occurred within the club.

There had to have been. Garda were probably involved. The club aren't going to make any statesment about a case in progress as it could influence the outcome.

The case is no longer in progress.

Again, probably isn't good enough. The club needs to conduct a public investigation in order to exonerate its other members.

A full and open investigation into the actions of the RCC has been called for to investigate its child protection practices and to prevent the innocent from being tarred with the crimes of the guilty - why is this GAA club exempt?

Would you be willing to send your child to a club in which a coach had been found to have been sexually abusing a child in this manner?

nice_guy80 · 28-06-2017 4:25pm

you can train people up, provide all the protections and safeguards you can, but if somebody acts like a **** and goes after young children the main thing is that there is a clear reporting structure in the club and that every allegation is immediately reported to the Gardai and that the person involved is removed from all contact with children in the club and all club activities until the investigation has been concluded

simple as that

Snickers Man · 28-06-2017 4:46pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there was more than one girl allegedly involved. the other state decided not to proceed with a prosecution in one other case.

Amendments mine.

ohnonotgmail · 28-06-2017 4:50pm

Snickers Man wrote: »

Amendments mine.

not sure why you think those amendments were appropriate. the state entered a nolle prosequoi but that doesnt mean it was their decision. the existence of another girl is not in doubt. the only doubt is the extent of her involvement with Humphries.

Sweet Science · 28-06-2017 4:54pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

No, but if Humphries used the facilities of the club to conceal or enable his inaproppriate contact and abuse of this young lady, the club could certainly tighten up its regulations.

Out of curiousity, why do you assume the GAA has no questions to answer? It's a perilous belief to assume an organisation which has such unfettered access to children is above scrutiny [a fact which Humphries himself supports in his article on predators].

There is garda vetting etc and strict rules you have to follow if you are to be involved in a gaa juvenile teams .

All they can do is act quickly if an accusation is made

Water John · 28-06-2017 6:17pm

There is a specific type of guy who targets young teenage girls. They hang around sports and social situations. Make smutty talk and 'accidentally' brush against on occasion.
Ask any young woman. They'll have met the likes.

Murrisk · 28-06-2017 6:22pm

Water John wrote: »

There is a specific type of guy who targets young teenage girls. They hang around sports and social situations. Make smutty talk and 'accidentally' brush against on occasion.
Ask any young woman. They'll have met the likes.

Yes, any female poster here will, I guarantee you, have her own tales of receiving lewd comments or behaviour at a disgustingly young age. I first had a lewd comment uttered to me by a man when I was eleven years old. Eleven. I had started developing early and probably looked about thirteen. Still gives me the heebies to think about it. My mother was with me and he uttered it right in front of her. Brazen.

Water John · 28-06-2017 6:26pm

What you describe, Murrisk, is par for the course. I have a daughter. Know girls who gave up sport because of the likes.

B0jangles · 28-06-2017 6:46pm

Murrisk wrote: »

Yes, any female poster here will, I guarantee you, have her own tales of receiving lewd comments or behaviour at a disgustingly young age. I first had a lewd comment uttered to me by a man when I was eleven years old. Eleven. I had started developing early and probably looked about thirteen. Still gives me the heebies to think about it. My mother was with me and he uttered it right in front of her. Brazen.

I was twelve, I was all on my own and it was a whole carful of men who started shouting comments at me while driving past .

Apparently they liked my shorts

take everything · 28-06-2017 7:10pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Maybe but we don't know why and never will, Possibly there was no case to proceed with. Again only an assumption.

Your reflexive minimisation of anything that happened in this case is disconcerting.

This guy is no fool or angel.
And an adult will always be the responsible one (no matter how much they are supposedly "led on" by an emotionally and sexually immature teenager).

drunkmonkey · 28-06-2017 7:29pm

take everything wrote: »

Your reflexive minimisation of anything that happened in this case is disconcerting.

I'm not minimising anything, I'm just not making judgements based on some twisted fantasy going on in some people's heads.
Very easy jump on the bandwagon and say rot in jail you monster and get loads of people thanking my post. That's bull**** though as there not rational comments people are making.
When we know what happened I'll make my judgment and it may not be as fluffy as you assume.

yosser hughes · 28-06-2017 7:51pm

There always seems to be defenders of these inadequates when there is a hint of celebrity about them. Pathetic. I remember there were quite a few defending this creep at the time:
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/boys-were-damaged-by-sex-trysts-with-poet-26422334.html

Humphreys bitter articles about sports he didn't like, particularly rugby, revealed a lot about him I always felt.

Water John · 28-06-2017 7:53pm

Yosser, the defence of that guy by the intellegensia elite was dumbfounding.

the14thwarrior · 28-06-2017 8:17pm

when you do it once it might be considered a lapse in judgement, silly old man,
when you do it twice it might be considered a bit of a habit, dirty old man.
when you do it a third time, there's no doubt. ........ old man

he did at least three times with three different girls at club and county. he knew what he was doing.
i know, i was there when the news broke, you could have picked me up off the floor. i had a long and difficult conversation with my daughter, having been coached at county level since she was 12 till she was 15 by him. i shudder to think what might have happened if I hadn't been 100% there for her. She never liked him anyway, and always thought there was something off with him. she knew, at an instinctive basic level, she knew. i threw up that night and didn't sleep at all, hoping she was telling me the truth and that she wasn't the one that it happened to.

He was the hero, he was a maverick how he coached, how he thought, how he challenged the system of teamship and he got results. He was a God to most of those girls, they hero worshipped him. I know, i was there. what he said was the LAST WORD. they'd do anything to please him. hmm

This is not a case of someone making a mistake, he went out of his way to get what he wanted. These groomers are not hanging around the club, trying to peak up the skirts and coping a feel during the team talk, arms sneaking to places during the huddle.
cop yourselves on, he targeted young girls and did what he wanted to them.
you don't see these people coming. wasn't he clever enough to get Roy Keane's side of the story before anyway else? says something about his tenacity

ceadaoin. · 28-06-2017 8:38pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm not minimising anything, I'm just not making judgements based on some twisted fantasy going on in some people's heads.
Very easy jump on the bandwagon and say rot in jail you monster and get loads of people thanking my post. That's bull**** though as there not rational comments people are making.
When we know what happened I'll make my judgment and it may not be as fluffy as you assume.

You are making judgements though- maybe he "wasn't leading the dance", you've seen teenage infatuation etc. That says everything about what you think the circumstances were. Even faced with the fact that he was found guilty of grooming this girl and sent thousands of messages you still refuse to accept that he is the responsible party. What else do you need to know about what happened? He is an adult and she is an underage child. She was groomed. End of story.

drunkmonkey · 28-06-2017 8:48pm

ceadaoin. wrote: »

You are making judgements though- maybe he "wasn't leading the dance", you've seen teenage infatuation etc. That says everything about what you think the circumstances were. Even faced with the fact that he was found guilty of grooming this girl and sent thousands of messages you still refuse to accept that he is the responsible party. What else do you need to know about what happened? He is an adult and she is an underage child. She was groomed. End of story.

Give it a rest, we now have a clearer picture from the poster above what happened not because of other posters assumptions.

maudgonner · 28-06-2017 11:18pm

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm just making an assumption like everyone else here but I don't think he was that sort of person, a serial child abuser, maybe he was but I'm just not getting that from what i've read, to me it looks like an affair with his daughters friend.
Sure the GAA need to ask who he coached but I presume that was done years ago and we've heard nothing.

No. I'm sorry, but just no.

Using language like that normalises what he did. It was not 'an affair'. It was child abuse.

the14thwarrior · 28-06-2017 11:20pm

more than one affair? you're wrong

Snickers Man · 29-06-2017 4:13pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not sure why you think those amendments were appropriate. the state entered a nolle prosequoi but that doesnt mean it was their decision. the existence of another girl is not in doubt. the only doubt is the extent of her involvement with Humphries.

I'm not disputing the existence of another girl. :rolleyes: I'm only saying that in the absence of a court case to determine guilt or otherwise, whatever allegations were made by her or on her behalf remain just that: allegations. And it wasn't HER decision whether or not to proceed with the case. That's a matter for the state, or at least its legal representatives.

Hold Mr Humphries to account for his crimes, which are serious. Not for unproven allegations.

ohnonotgmail · 29-06-2017 4:24pm

Snickers Man wrote: »

I'm not disputing the existence of another girl. :rolleyes: I'm only saying that in the absence of a court case to determine guilt or otherwise, whatever allegations were made by her or on her behalf remain just that: allegations. And it wasn't HER decision whether or not to proceed with the case. That's a matter for the state, or at least its legal representatives.

Hold Mr Humphries to account for his crimes, which are serious. Not for unproven allegations.

If the family decide they dont want a prosecution then the state cannot bring a prosecution. hence the nolle prosequoi.

Peregrine · 29-06-2017 5:34pm

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.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

As you said we don't have the detail. Probably will never have.

There's loads of assumptions being throw out like your assumption she was plyed with drink and took the D (why are ye making up such stuff it's not based on any fact).

It's quite possible he might not have been leading the dance. The photos were found and the whole **** house exploded.

Someone mentioned the President of France earlier, Elvis also deserves a special mention as he fell in love with someone at the younger of the girls mooted age.

He's not a pedo or a child abuser, he got in a mess with a young lady not of legal age. I don't buy all 15yr olds are dumb regardless of the poster who say they were dumb at 15.

The asssumptions are vile to be honest. It's not healthy to be running those scenarios around your head based on nothing only your own thoughts.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm just making an assumption like everyone else here but I don't think he was that sort of person, a serial child abuser, maybe he was but I'm just not getting that from what i've read, to me it looks like an affair with his daughters friend.
Sure the GAA need to ask who he coached but I presume that was done years ago and we've heard nothing.

drunkmonkey permabanned from AH for trivialising and normalising child abuse. Anyone doing the same may find themselves in a similar position. Ta.

Mod

Snickers Man · 12-07-2017 6:40pm

the14thwarrior wrote: »

when you do it once it might be considered a lapse in judgement, silly old man,
when you do it twice it might be considered a bit of a habit, dirty old man.
when you do it a third time, there's no doubt. ........ old man

he did at least three times with three different girls at club and county. he knew what he was doing.
i know, i was there when the news broke, you could have picked me up off the floor. i had a long and difficult conversation with my daughter, having been coached at county level since she was 12 till she was 15 by him. i shudder to think what might have happened if I hadn't been 100% there for her. She never liked him anyway, and always thought there was something off with him. she knew, at an instinctive basic level, she knew. i threw up that night and didn't sleep at all, hoping she was telling me the truth and that she wasn't the one that it happened to.

He was the hero, he was a maverick how he coached, how he thought, how he challenged the system of teamship and he got results. He was a God to most of those girls, they hero worshipped him. I know, i was there. what he said was the LAST WORD. they'd do anything to please him. hmm

This is not a case of someone making a mistake, he went out of his way to get what he wanted. These groomers are not hanging around the club, trying to peak up the skirts and coping a feel during the team talk, arms sneaking to places during the huddle.
cop yourselves on, he targeted young girls and did what he wanted to them.
you don't see these people coming. wasn't he clever enough to get Roy Keane's side of the story before anyway else? says something about his tenacity

Is there any corroborative evidence for any of this, over and above the offences for which he has been convicted? And by his own admission?

I hope no Mod thinks I am "trivialising child abuse" by asking this. If there is reliable evidence for what is mentioned in the above post then it's monstrous. If there isn't, then the above post is despicable. Just because somebody is proven guilty of one crime doesn't mean you can falsely claim they committed many others.

Sweet Science · 03-10-2017 1:52pm

16,000 text messages

His sentencing cant come quick enough.

Grayson · 03-10-2017 1:53pm

Sweet Science wrote: »

16,000 text messages that started when this girl was only 11.

His sentencing cant come quick enough.

I read that today. And it was 16k in 3 months wasn't it. It's horrific but honestly I can't believe anyone could send that many messages for any reason. The number is stupidly large.

Red_Wake · 03-10-2017 1:56pm

No mention in the papers of how he was coaching the girls he molested.

We have learned nothing of child protection if there are no official questions on how the GAA could have prevented this.

AnneFrank · 03-10-2017 2:05pm

Sweet Science wrote: »

16,000 text messages that started when this girl was only 11.

His sentencing cant come quick enough.

jesus that's insane, the poor girl.
Scum of the earth

WHIP IT! · 03-10-2017 2:45pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

No mention in the papers of how he was coaching the girls he molested.

We have learned nothing of child protection if there are no official questions on how the GAA could have prevented this.

Stupid statement. You clearly no nothing about how the GAA strives to protect its young people. Educate yourself.

Sweet Science · 03-10-2017 2:52pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

No mention in the papers of how he was coaching the girls he molested.

We have learned nothing of child protection if there are no official questions on how the GAA could have prevented this.

The GAA take may steps to prevent this type of thing .

Samaris · 03-10-2017 3:05pm

WHIP IT! wrote: »

As I said, educate yourself. You made the original statement. Not up to me to educate the ignorant.

Maybe not, but as a fellow person ignorant in what relatively arcane rules the GAA might have specifically for the protection of young people in the organisation, could you help me out?

I plain and simple do not know, since I am not involved in GAA and these rules obviously enough would not penetrate my day to day life.

WHIP IT! · 03-10-2017 3:08pm

Samaris wrote: »

Maybe not, but as a fellow person ignorant in what relatively arcane rules the GAA might have specifically for the protection of young people in the organisation, could you help me out?

I plain and simple do not know, since I am not involved in GAA and these rules obviously enough would not penetrate my day to day life.

You admittedly are ignorant of the rules, but are happy to dismiss these same rules, which you know nothing of, as "arcane"... good man.

farmchoice · 03-10-2017 3:13pm

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjNlbr_0NTWAhWjBsAKHdPWD-kQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gaa.ie%2Fthe-gaa%2Fchild-welfare-and-protection%2F&usg=AOvVaw3_c_Lx7aL_j-FxFnFk4e-E

this will give anyone who wants it an overview of the gaa's child protection.

03-10-2017 3:41pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If the family decide they dont want a prosecution then the state cannot bring a prosecution. hence the nolle prosequoi.

That is simply not true. At all.

A victim is a witness in a criminal trial. They have no role in deciding whether a prosecution should be brought.

The DPP (or alternatively, the Attorney General) has complete prosecutorial independence.

It may or may not be a question of practicality to decide not to prosecute, when any witness is unhappy to give evidence, but it isn't any witness's choice. It makes no difference whether the witness is the alleged victim or not.

AGC · 03-10-2017 3:49pm

Sweet Science wrote: »

16,000 text messages that started when this girl was only 11.

His sentencing cant come quick enough.

She was 14.

He deserves everything that is thrown at him.

Samaris · 03-10-2017 3:51pm

WHIP IT! wrote: »

You admittedly are ignorant of the rules, but are happy to dismiss these same rules, which you know nothing of, as "arcane"... good man.

...No, I am saying that it is arcane knowledge unless you happen to be involved in the GAA. (Hell, I doubt many people who know the GAA in terms of understanding its set-up and understanding the rules of the various games would know something as specific as the guidelines for protecting children in the clubs. It's just not something that one absorbs without specific reason.)

This is not an insult. It is saying that many people who are not involved in GAA (and at a fairly organise-y level at that) would probably not know these rules because they are not something one comes across in day to day life unless one is involved in the GAA. Which I am not.

It was actually a straight-forward and honest question that really did not warrant either a huff or a snark.

I am still interested - is there anyone in this thread that actually might explain them to someone who doesn't know the inner workings of the GAA?

howamidifferent · 03-10-2017 3:51pm

Just to address the earlier posts that the girl was 11, it says in today's article that she was 16 when they first engaged in sexual contact. Not excusing him for abusing a position of trust or power but he was not a paedophile.

buck65 · 03-10-2017 3:59pm

Sweet Science wrote: »

16,000 text messages that started when this girl was only 11.

His sentencing cant come quick enough.

Facts are she was 14 when the texts started, 16 when the sexual contaxct happened please be accurate here.

Sweet Science · 03-10-2017 3:59pm

I got 11 because it said the test started 3 years previous to when the assault took place . I thought she was 14 when it occured but presume i was wrong

Red_Wake · 03-10-2017 4:03pm

farmchoice wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjNlbr_0NTWAhWjBsAKHdPWD-kQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gaa.ie%2Fthe-gaa%2Fchild-welfare-and-protection%2F&usg=AOvVaw3_c_Lx7aL_j-FxFnFk4e-E

this will give anyone who wants it an overview of the gaa's child protection.

A lot of aspirational stuff in there, rather than anything about standard processes for child safety. Nothing about child supervision standards[eg. not being allowed alone with children, etc].

RTE notes that the victim reckons he got her phone number via the club. Not conclusive, but notable that didn't give it to him, and presumably she made an attempt to figure out how he got it, and came to this conclusion.

Of course, the GAA's reputation is more important than child safety in the eyes of some here. The spiritual successors of those who enabled the church's sins.

Samaris · 03-10-2017 4:04pm

farmchoice wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjNlbr_0NTWAhWjBsAKHdPWD-kQFggoMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gaa.ie%2Fthe-gaa%2Fchild-welfare-and-protection%2F&usg=AOvVaw3_c_Lx7aL_j-FxFnFk4e-E

this will give anyone who wants it an overview of the gaa's child protection.

Thanks farmchoice, missed that at the bottom of the page.

buck65 · 03-10-2017 4:04pm

I have coached GAA underage teams and have been Garda vetted twice in 5 years. Attended 2 child protection training meetings, there is a protocol for every club and a child protection officer too.

What more can they do? The amount of parents involved in the GAA has always been a major boon for the GAA , unlike say swimming where coaching is specific and salaried anyone can help out in GAA coaching, running drills collecting sliotars etc. They also keep an eye on their kids.

Not saying t doesn't happen but for an organization that has 50,000 children every week training it has a good record in child protection.

Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

Comments