Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

Sweet Science · 03-10-2017 4:06pm

Red_Wake wrote: »

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.

Ah here . Take your GAA agenda somwhere else

AGC · 03-10-2017 4:14pm

buck65 wrote: »

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.

Woeful post.

Was it not obvious he would have the number from using a older phone of a family member?

Samaris · 03-10-2017 4:16pm

Okay, I rather see why my question was contentious - this was actually innocent on my part.

But if there are allegations or insinuations about the GAA as a whole, they should be well backed-up. The Church was one kettle of fish and that there was a large number of people in sensitive positions involved was devastating for the reputation of the organisation, same for the BBC regarding Saville (deservedly in those cases, but down to actual information of involvement). Anyone indicating mischief on the part of the GAA would want to have good reason for it and sources.

karlitob · 03-10-2017 4:17pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

The former Irish Times sportwriter pleaded guilty to grooming a young child who was a friend of his daughters. He had naked pics of the child on his phone who found it and showed it to her mother who called the Gardai.

Its hard to believe his initial arrest (and the media blackout of naming him) has been ongoing since 2011. But here we are 6 years later and he has admitted his guilt. Sentencing to take place next month.

A great writer in his day but heres hoping he gets locked up for a long time for what he did to that poor girl.

He was an ignorant writer who demeaned other sports, particularly rugby. Thereby offended the people who gave their time and energies for the development of the sport and for others (and their) enjoyment. He hasn’t been missed.

WHIP IT! · 03-10-2017 4:42pm

karlitob wrote:

He was an ignorant writer who demeaned other sports, particularly rugby. Thereby offended the people who gave their time and energies for the development of the sport and for others (and their) enjoyment. He hasnâ€™t been missed.

Jesus, seriously. That's what you take away from all this?? He didn't like rugby??

What he did was heinous... who gives a f*ck about the egg chasers?!

farmchoice · 03-10-2017 4:53pm

[QUOTE=Red_Wake;104861985]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.[/QUOTE]

its extremely comprehensive and details every aspect of child protection. it took me less then 2 minutes to find a direct answer to the charge you leveled.
''Be accompanied by
at least one other adult at coaching sessions, games and in underage team dressing rooms''

underage code of conduct page 9.

karlitob · 03-10-2017 5:03pm

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Jesus, seriously. That's what you take away from all this?? He didn't like rugby??

What he did was heinous... who gives a f*ck about the egg chasers?!

The OP gave an opinion on his writing. I gave mine. Thanks for proving my point.

yosser hughes · 03-10-2017 5:33pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

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

Incorrect.

ohnonotgmail · 03-10-2017 5:39pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

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.

all very fine words as usual but they amount to a hill of **** when there is no evidence to present because the victim doesnt want to continue. which was my point.

Mr. CooL ICE · 03-10-2017 5:39pm

Mod: I've deleted some posts naming a person found to be not guilty in a separate case. Be careful of what you post here lads

03-10-2017 6:31pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

all very fine words as usual but they amount to a hill of **** when there is no evidence to present because the victim doesnt want to continue. which was my point.

It may be what you meant, but it wasn't your point. You said "If the family decide they dont want a prosecution then the state cannot bring a prosecution", and this is in no way correct.

S.16 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 was introduced -- and has been employed, by the courts -- to introduce the evidence of the alleged victims of crime, in prosecutions where a victim or another witness was too frightened to give evidence. This legislation has been used in cases of sexual violence, and is particularly important in maintaining or supporting a separate allegation of the same nature against one individual.

Maybe you meant that there can be no *investigation* without a complaint, which is usually true, but that is so obvious I doubt it needs asserting.

radharc · 03-10-2017 9:02pm

There is a lot of info in The Journal article

http://www.thejournal.ie/tom-humphries-sentence-3627181-Oct2017/

I think anyone who was in any doubt about the depravity of Humphries' behaviour will change their minds after reading the article. Sick ****.

Are Am Eye · 03-10-2017 9:14pm

Ewan MacKenna tweeted that he thinks there has been an omerta in the media.

the14thwarrior · 03-10-2017 9:30pm

more than one girl involved. at least one other for sure. he's a scumbag, and you need to understand his presence and power when he was coaching. most of the girls idolised him. he demanded 110%, and had lots of big name hurlers on his side, doing sessions etc.

He was a scum bag. he got them young, and groomed them. He made sure he wormed his way into their lives, and abused his position as coach of club and country.

ohnonotgmail · 03-10-2017 11:17pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It may be what you meant, but it wasn't your point. You said "If the family decide they dont want a prosecution then the state cannot bring a prosecution", and this is in no way correct.

S.16 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 was introduced -- and has been employed, by the courts -- to introduce the evidence of the alleged victims of crime, in prosecutions where a victim or another witness was too frightened to give evidence. This legislation has been used in cases of sexual violence, and is particularly important in maintaining or supporting a separate allegation of the same nature against one individual.

Maybe you meant that there can be no *investigation* without a complaint, which is usually true, but that is so obvious I doubt it needs asserting.

if the victim does not wish to continue then there is no evidence. if there is no evidence how can the state bring a prosecution?

Zebra3 · 04-10-2017 12:09am

tomwaterford wrote: »

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.

Why didnt he fcuk off to france and do it so??

In reality is any different to the messing muslims over in england got upto??

Or the nonces at the BBC?

Shemale · 04-10-2017 12:27am

From the Journal:

"Hugh Harnett SC, defending, handed in a number of testimonials to court, including statements from the chief sports writer of The Sunday Times and a well-known sportsman about Humphries’ journalism career and involvement with GAA.
The sportsman wrote of Humphries’ previous good character and his activity as a volunteer in the GAA"

What is with the incessant use of GAA in defence, he probably volunteered for easy access to young girls.

I hope he gets life.

04-10-2017 12:31am

Shemale wrote: »

From the Journal:

"Hugh Harnett SC, defending, handed in a number of testimonials to court, including statements from the chief sports writer of The Sunday Times and a well-known sportsman about Humphries’ journalism career and involvement with GAA.
The sportsman wrote of Humphries’ previous good character and his activity as a volunteer in the GAA"

What is with the incessant use of GAA in defence, he probably volunteered for easy access to young girls.

I hope he gets life.

its like Mickey Hart giving reference for a fella who did an serious crime (it was a murder or a rape I believe ) and used him/his family were involved in the Gaa, good people....its the most annoying thing - so f'n what that they were involved in the gaa

Guy:Incognito · 04-10-2017 12:45am

Grayson wrote: »

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.

Going by the journal article , I read it as 16,000 total between them, so assuming they averaged the same it's 8,000 each. Still obviously a lot.

"Forensic analysis by investigators of a number of mobile phones used by Humphries showed that over 16,000 texts were exchanged back and forth over one three month period before March 2011."

Shemale · 04-10-2017 1:05am

Veda Small Ham wrote: »

its like Mickey Hart giving reference for a fella who did an serious crime (it was a murder or a rape I believe ) and used him/his family were involved in the Gaa, good people....its the most annoying thing - so f'n what that they were involved in the gaa

Like that prick Alan Hawe who killed his wife and three sons before killing himself and the initial RTE was all about the lovely man who was involved in GAA and "The Parish", no mention of his defenceless victims.

Omackeral · 04-10-2017 1:18am

Shemale wrote: »

From the Journal:

"Hugh Harnett SC, defending, handed in a number of testimonials to court, including statements from the chief sports writer of The Sunday Times and a well-known sportsman about Humphries’ journalism career and involvement with GAA.
The sportsman wrote of Humphries’ previous good character and his activity as a volunteer in the GAA"

What is with the incessant use of GAA in defence, he probably volunteered for easy access to young girls.

I hope he gets life.

Wouldnt hold my breath on that. You can get life on a rape charge but it's rare enough. This isn't a rape case though is it?

Shemale · 04-10-2017 1:23am

Omackeral wrote: »

Wouldnt hold my breath on that. You can get life on a rape charge but it's rare enough. This isn't a rape case though is it?

From:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/tom-humphries-exchanged-thousands-of-texts-with-girl-1.3242533

"In law, defilement means engaging in a sexual act with a child. It was introduced after the offence of statutory rape was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2006.

It carries a maximum sentence of five years while the grooming charges carry a maximum life sentence."

Omackeral · 04-10-2017 1:29am

I work in the prison system and have seen the records of many life sentenced prisoners, the majority are in there for murder. There are a few incarcerated for attempted murder too and a handful life's off for rape that I've seen too. I don't think I've seen any for grooming or defilement of a minor, as opposed to rape, I wonder are there any.

nacho libre · 04-10-2017 2:43am

Like most sexual predators of children, he probably believed he was in a relationship with her and that she was a willing participant. In his mind he is different to the person(the abuser) he wrote about back in 1998. Just thinking back to all the rubbish he wrote about moral fibre, honour and courage in his paen to Roy Keane. I can't feel sympathy for the life sentence he has in reality. He deserves it. If he wasn't a great writer, if he was an ordinary joe soap or a priest, those feeling sympathy for his plight after his jail term, and describing what he did as a waste, would likely be condemning him outright.

Asus X540L · 04-10-2017 2:50am

Piece of thrash this guy.

He only had his mental breakdown and suicide attempts after he was caught

He was perfectly able to act the loving family man with his wife while having this child on the side before he was found out.

Unfortunately as this is Ireland he'll get a slap on the wrist.

Deusexmachina · 04-10-2017 3:38am

nacho libre wrote: »

Like most sexual predators of children, he probably believed he was in a relationship with her and that she was a willing participant. In his mind he is different to the person(the abuser) he wrote about back in 1998. Just thinking back to all the rubbish he wrote about moral fibre, honour and courage in his paen to Roy Keane. I can't feel sympathy for the life sentence he has in reality. He deserves it. If he wasn't a great writer, if he was an ordinary joe soap or a priest, those feeling sympathy for his plight after his jail term, and describing what he did as a waste, would likely be condemning him outright.

Why do you think people have sympathy for his plight only because he was a good journalist? (And not just an ordinary joe soap)
I have sympathy for him but I never really liked his journalism.

He had sexual relations with a girl while she was aged from 15 to 17 as far as I understand. While this is very wrong and should be condemned, it is not to my mind as depraved or vile as a man forceably committing sexual acts on a young child (pre pubescent).

It has is important to have a sense of proportion on such matters. We need to be able to differentiate between acts of sexual exploitation and dark sadistic acts of utterly vile perversion.

In this case, the mans life is utterly ruined in any case. It’s sad. He was totally wrong but he will pay an enormous price - maybe even more than his crime deserved.

nacho libre · 04-10-2017 3:48am

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Why do you think people have sympathy for his plight only because he was a good journalist? (And not just an ordinary joe soap)
I have sympathy for him but I never really liked his journalism.

In this case, the mans life is utterly ruined in any case. It’s sad. He was totally wrong but he will pay an enormous price - maybe even more than his crime deserved.

Well, there are posts here seemingly sympathetic to him because he was a great writer, who made an unfortunate mistake.

He knew what he was doing. Let's be clear he started grooming a child of 14, then committed sexual acts on her a couple of years later.
There are allegations that there is more than one victim too.
It's disgusting he wrote about the devastating effect of sexual abuse of minors, only to years later be guilty of the very same crime. I feel the price he will pay is fully deserved.

Rubberchikken · 04-10-2017 4:21am

How many people condemn child abuse yet are secretly guilty of it?
I don't know what his writing was lime, never read the times but as an adult surely some part of him knew what he was doing was wrong.
I realise these People, and I include women abusers, can convince themselves that the child loves them and they in turn love the child and would never harm them, but I just can't find any sympathy for him.
He only appears to be remorseful and suicidal once found out.

HalloweenJack · 04-10-2017 8:33am

If I were a higher up in the GAA, I wouldn't want criminals thinking membership of the organisation might get them a bit of leniency in court.

They should have a way of authorising those kind of statements, in the hope that, in cases like this where the evidence seems quite damning, throwing in "But he helped out withthe local GAA club" can't be used to save someone's reputation.

Imo, this kind of thing just damages the GAA if they're willig to go along with it.

valoren · 04-10-2017 9:46am

On the 16,000 text messages.

Apparantly, it was a 50/50 split both ways so it wasn't Humphries sending 16,000 messages.
I guess the defence team will zero in on that. That the relationship was seemingly mutual considering the back and forth over the course of 4 months but that she was a minor then he rightfully doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Still, 8000 messages over 4 months is circa 66 messages a day. Insane.

ArmaniJeanss · 04-10-2017 9:52am

HalloweenJack wrote: »

If I were a higher up in the GAA, I wouldn't want criminals thinking membership of the organisation might get them a bit of leniency in court.

They should have a way of authorising those kind of statements, in the hope that, in cases like this where the evidence seems quite damning, throwing in "But he helped out withthe local GAA club" can't be used to save someone's reputation.

Imo, this kind of thing just damages the GAA if they're willig to go along with it.

I know what you mean, but in reality the courts are going to decide what is or isn't allowed to be said in court - the GAA (or anyone else) can never have a veto over an aspect of the justice system.

Alf Veedersane · 04-10-2017 10:03am

Are Am Eye wrote: »

Ewan MacKenna tweeted that he thinks there has been an omerta in the media.

After the first line, the rest of the tweet is directed at one particular Sunday Times writer

04-10-2017 10:09am

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I know what you mean, but in reality the courts are going to decide what is or isn't allowed to be said in court - the GAA (or anyone else) can never have a veto over an aspect of the justice system.

But they can surely control what is said in their name?

A few clampdowns, warnings, suspensions for bringing the game into disrepute etc. would soon stop these letters. Organisations should really think long and hard about the merits of giving character evidence for serious cases.

ArmaniJeanss · 04-10-2017 10:16am

Deleted User wrote: »

But they can surely control what is said in their name?

A few clampdowns, warnings, suspensions for bringing the game into disrepute etc. would soon stop these letters. Organisations should really think long and hard about the merits of giving character evidence for serious cases.

You know the system better than me.
If the GAA suspended me for something I said in court (XXXX helped out in the local GAA club and was a thoroughly nice chap whilst doing it) would the courts consider that a) this was a fair suspension that the GAA are entitled to invoke or b) this was an attempt by the GAA to interfere in due process.

My guess would be 'b' but if you think it's 'a' then fair enough.

eoghan104 · 04-10-2017 10:19am

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

After the first line, the rest of the tweet is directed at one particular Sunday Times writer

What is the problem in Ewan McKenna's eyes? That the sports journo's aren't talking about Humphries? Why should they? they are sports journalists.

HalloweenJack · 04-10-2017 10:33am

I'd imagine the insinuation is that there has been very little comment on the actions of one of their own but there is frequent comment on the actions of the people they write about.

Not that I've read into it or am I particularly bothered. Tbh, saying nothing is better than coming out and saying stuff along the lines of "This isn't the X I know".

eoghan104 · 04-10-2017 10:51am

HalloweenJack wrote: »

I'd imagine the insinuation is that there has been very little comment on the actions of one of their own but there is frequent comment on the actions of the people they write about.

Not that I've read into it or am I particularly bothered. Tbh, saying nothing is better than coming out and saying stuff along the lines of "This isn't the X I know".

Yeah agreed it is better to say nothing.

I do think it is unfair to expect them to comment on it though because yes in the past they might have discussed the morals or sports or sports stars but Tom Humphries was not a sports star. An article in the sports pages on this would seem odd to me.

Benildus · 04-10-2017 10:53am

Asus X540L wrote: »

Piece of thrash this guy.

He only had his mental breakdown and suicide attempts after he was caught

He was perfectly able to act the loving family man with his wife while having this child on the side before he was found out.

Unfortunately as this is Ireland he'll get a slap on the wrist.

Moronic statement. He will not get a slap on the wrist for child abuse, cop yourself on

Shurimgreat · 04-10-2017 10:55am

I've no sympathy for him. I do have a lot of sympathy for his victim.

It doesn't matter how good or bad a writer someone is, if they are a nasty piece of work. And well done to his family for exposing him and saving other potential victims. In fact it sounds like it was a only a piece of luck that he got caught.

Red_Wake · 04-10-2017 11:00am

Benildus wrote: »

Asus X540L wrote: »

Piece of thrash this guy.

He only had his mental breakdown and suicide attempts after he was caught

He was perfectly able to act the loving family man with his wife while having this child on the side before he was found out.

Unfortunately as this is Ireland he'll get a slap on the wrist.

Moronic statement. He will not get a slap on the wrist for child abuse, cop yourself on

Time will tell.

Ireland's history of enabling child abuse suggests he won't serve nearly as much time as he deserves.

elefant · 04-10-2017 11:03am

HalloweenJack wrote: »

I'd imagine the insinuation is that there has been very little comment on the actions of one of their own but there is frequent comment on the actions of the people they write about.

Not that I've read into it or am I particularly bothered. Tbh, saying nothing is better than coming out and saying stuff along the lines of "This isn't the X I know".

He has also posted an extract from the autobiography of the senior sportswriter in question that said Humphries is 'the most talented sportswriter I've ever met. A fine man too'. And this was published the year after the child abuse story broke.

sbsquarepants · 04-10-2017 11:04am

Who was the high profile sports star who spoke in his defence that they were talking about on the radio this morning - I didn't catch their name.

Shemale · 04-10-2017 11:07am

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Why do you think people have sympathy for his plight only because he was a good journalist? (And not just an ordinary joe soap)
I have sympathy for him but I never really liked his journalism.

He had sexual relations with a girl while she was aged from 15 to 17 as far as I understand. While this is very wrong and should be condemned, it is not to my mind as depraved or vile as a man forceably committing sexual acts on a young child (pre pubescent).

It has is important to have a sense of proportion on such matters. We need to be able to differentiate between acts of sexual exploitation and dark sadistic acts of utterly vile perversion.

In this case, the mans life is utterly ruined in any case. It’s sad. He was totally wrong but he will pay an enormous price - maybe even more than his crime deserved.

She was 14 when he started grooming her, he sent her two dick picks at 15 and asked about her sexual experiences and wanted to meet her for sexual contact, at 16 he sent her approximately 8,000 text messages in a 3 month period, 88 sent text messages a day.

He manipulated and inappropriately bombarded this girl over two years so he could have sexual encounters with her, the girls father is a better man than I am.

You really don't paint yourself in good light having sympathy for this paedophile scumbag

WHIP IT! · 04-10-2017 11:14am

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Who was the high profile sports star who spoke in his defence that they were talking about on the radio this morning - I didn't catch their name.

Seems to be a reluctance to publish his name. Has (or certainly had) a national newspaper column and, ironically, has been championed as a 'progressive' sort in recent years in the GAA. How he can stand by this animal is beyond me - then again, he has no kids of his own, perhaps that's why he doesn't understand.

Charles Babbage · 04-10-2017 11:19am

There are several 16 year old pregnant at present in Ireland. Is everyone happy that the fathers of these babies are given a similar sentence to Humphries?

Omackeral · 04-10-2017 11:24am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

There are several 16 year old pregnant at present in Ireland. Is everyone happy that the fathers of these babies are given a similar sentence to Humphries?

Jeepers

Shemale · 04-10-2017 11:25am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

There are several 16 year old pregnant at present in Ireland. Is everyone happy that the fathers of these babies are given a similar sentence to Humphries?

So two 16 year olds having consensual sex is the same as an adult grooming, manipulating and having a sexual encounter with a minor is the same thing.

Cop yourself on

HalloweenJack · 04-10-2017 11:26am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

There are several 16 year old pregnant at present in Ireland. Is everyone happy that the fathers of these babies are given a similar sentence to Humphries?

If the circumstances of the pregnancy are similar to Humphries' case then yeah, definitely.

If they are the result of a relationship between two 16-year-olds then it's a totally different case.

Shurimgreat · 04-10-2017 11:32am

I don't think there are any grey areas in the Humphries case. Its fairly black and white, a clear case of grooming and exploitation.
It may not have been rape, but in terms of seriousness it is equivalent.

I hope it does not ruin the victim's life. Time can be a healer in most cases and hopefully here too.

osarusan · 04-10-2017 11:34am

Given she was 16, isn't it statutory rape as well as the other charges?

EDIT: Never mind, statutory rape was struck down as an offence in 2006.

Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

Comments