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

Harsh sentence

Options
1…5681011…15

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    GreeBo wrote: »
    The article is short on facts, so why assume it was not a mistake versus assume it was?

    Innocent until proven guilty and all that...

    Erm, he has been jailed. The trial is over.

    WE have a paucity of information. That doesn’t mean the jury didn’t have enough details.


  • Options
    #213
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,614 ✭✭✭Feisar


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    In rare cases, it’d be assault? :eek:

    Oh... my... god.

    If my husband did that to me, I would consider it so. When my friend confided in her close friends about what happened to her, we all recoiled. In rare cases? I find that chilling.

    Oral on a sleeping partner to wake them even has a term, the not to creative, "alarm clock"

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #214
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Lasera wrote: »
    You're missing my point. In society there are implicit rules and consent we often abide by.

    Nobody ever gave you permission to touch people on the arm but I bet you do it.

    I actually stopped doing that years ago. Hasn't adversely changed my life.


  • Options
    #215
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,712 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Candie wrote: »
    Bizarre that frequently people would almost pop a vein if someone questioned the validity of a not guilty verdict in a sex assault case, yet there's no problem questioning the validity of a guilty verdict.

    TBF I don't think anyone (that isn't a lunatic) is questioning the verdict.

    In a way what other choice had the Jury?

    There is definitely validity in discussing the "harshness" of the sentence though and why it was imposed.


  • Options
    #216
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Boggles wrote: »
    TBF I don't think anyone (that isn't a lunatic) is questioning the verdict.

    In a way what other choice had the Jury?

    There is definitely validity in discussing the "harshness" of the sentence though and why it was imposed.

    Oh come on! Theres been plenty of 'sounds like a mistake' stuff from a few posters. Luckily the minority.

    I think serving less than a year for a calculated sexual assault is pretty lenient.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Feisar wrote: »
    Oral on a sleeping partner to wake them even has a term, the not to creative, "alarm clock"

    Oh, well that’s okay then. There’s a slang term for it. All is well.


  • Options
    #218
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    What kind of uncivilised world do we live in when you can't just sexually assault your spouse anymore


  • Options
    #219
    Feisar
    Registered Users Posts: 6,614 ✭✭✭Feisar


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Oh, well that’s okay then. There’s a slang term for it. All is well.

    Ah in fairness I wasn't suggesting a slang term = A1. It's just not the affront to nature you believe it to be.

    On the other hand maybe I spent my life dating lunatics with Daddy issues.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • Options
    #220
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    bluewolf wrote: »
    What kind of uncivilised world do we live in when you can't just sexually assault your spouse anymore

    Imagine a world where you can't curl up with your sleeping partner and insert the odd digit (or more!) without checking they're up for it first? PC madness!



    ETA: Ridiculous, but I feel compelled to point out this is sarcasm.


  • Options
    #221
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    bluewolf wrote: »
    What kind of uncivilised world do we live in when you can't just sexually assault your spouse anymore

    One which some of the posters here aren't happy with apparently, even more unhappy that they can't do it to their friends either. Should talk to Joe about it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Lasera wrote: »
    You're missing my point. In society there are implicit rules and consent we often abide by.

    Nobody ever gave you permission to touch people on the arm but I bet you do it.

    Well I touced my husbands arm today to get his attention if that's what you mean. He was OK with that. If I'd grabbed him by the penis though I think we'd have a problem

    You're right, there are certain situations where touching someone is OK. It's all about the context and where you touch them and no one is disputing that. The attempt to link that to touching someone who is asleep or semi comatose in their genitals though? Maybe that's acceptable in your relationship, it's not in mine


  • Options
    #223
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    batgoat wrote: »
    He didn't do it to his girlfriend... He's shown no remorse which is worrying in own right.

    Yeah but he thought he was doing it to his girlfriend. Which according to some here makes it all okay.


  • Options
    #224
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Yeah but he thought he was doing it to his girlfriend. Which according to some here makes it all okay.

    Yep I agree totally with ye on that just to clarify.


  • Options
    #225
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Lasera wrote: »
    There's no way for us to know, some people seem to think even if it were a mistake he should go to jail. Ask them for the rationale and it's tumbleweeds.

    "Sorry I hit that pedestrian with my car, I genuinely thought I had time to make the light, honest mistake"

    "Sorry I stole that, I was so drunk I forgot to pay, I'd never do that sober so, I'll just be on my way"

    "I thought that under the circumstances it was reasonable to think that my mother wanted me to take her money out of her credit union accounts. She never said that's what she wanted, but I really did assume she did when I took it."

    These defences don't work for other crimes, do they. They're never wheeled out, either. Just sexual crimes.

    The rationale is committing a crime by mistake is still committing a crime. Perhaps nobody else wanted to insult your intelligence by explaining that to you.


  • Options
    #226
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    Lassera wrote: »
    You still haven't answered the question, what benefit is there to putting him in jail if it was a genuine mistake?

    Some people seem to be foaming at thr mouth to put a man in jail even if it was a genuine mistake. What is the benefit of putting him in jail if it was a genuine mistake?

    The crimes you listed would all be treated much more leniently if it was determined to be a lenient mistake. Your examples lose the argument for you.

    Maybe he may actually learn to understand the consequences of his actions and feel some remorse.


  • Options
    #227
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Because maybe the jury didn’t believe it was a genuine mistake? Maybe they compared the victim to the girlfriend and there were no similarities? Maybe his girlfriend wasn’t even there that night? Maybe they didn’t do any of that and decided that his defence of “i fondled the wrong sleeping girl your honour” to still be unacceptable. We don’t know a lot here, as the article in the OP is limited in details. But we do know that the jury are privy to a lot more details than you or I, and thus based a decision based on what was presented in court, not a few lines in an article.


  • Options
    #228
    JupiterKid
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,631 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    I find it a bit unsettling and a tad disturbing that a few of the posters who believe that the convicted guy in this case was unfairly sentenced have previously defended other men founfd guilty or in one case not guilty of sexual assaults/rapes.


  • Options
    #229
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    I don't know if this thread is funny or sad. You would swear from some of the replies that if a guy can't go straight to his partner's sexual organs while in bed together, his sex life will be over. Top tip lads if you want to wake her up, maybe start kissing the back of her neck, her shoulders and arms and on your slow journey downwards, I think you'll get your answer to the consent question. And if she doesn't wake up at all leave her alone. I feel really sorry for some women if they wake up to fingers already inside them and yet some men here seem to think that's normal behaviour. Apart from anything else it shows a very poor understanding of how the female body and arousal works.


  • Options
    #230
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    Why would you even want to launch straight into touching your sleeping partner’s vagina? Surely sex and sexual acts are a mutual thing, something beneficial and pleasurable to both and not a solitary affair? Sorry but if you think there’s nothing wrong with pulling down someone’s underwear while they’re sleeping and helping yourself to her private parts while she’s unaware then you are a complete and utter fcuking weirdo.
    Like the poster above me said, if you find yourself in the mood for something something then at least have the decency to wake her up and maybe ask her first before you go rooting around in her nether regions like a sad sack.


  • Options
    #231
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Why would you even want to launch straight into touching your sleeping partner’s vagina? Surely sex and sexual acts are a mutual thing, something beneficial and pleasurable to both and not a solitary affair? Sorry but if you think there’s nothing wrong with pulling down someone’s underwear while they’re sleeping and helping yourself to her private parts while she’s unaware then you are a complete and utter fcuking weirdo.
    Like the poster above me said, if you find yourself in the mood for something something then at least have the decency to wake her up and maybe ask her first before you go rooting around in her nether regions like a sad sack.

    I've read threads on here where lads were giving out about women who need foreplay, blaming it on Catholic guilt and feminism, and encouraging other men that there are women out there who love "actual sex", which I guess is when you're so free from religious dogma and feminism (we mustn't forget the feminism!!!) that he lobs it straight in there and you just immediately cum. It was kind of hilariously and unintentionally revealing of their sexual skill level, but kind of sad too.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,115 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Civilised society? Where unremorseful vagina grabbers are let off the hook to roam the streets and continue their hobby?

    Again you are reading a post on topic A and responding as if it's about topic B.

    I'm sure its fun but it makes discussion complicated


  • Options
    #233
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,115 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Erm, he has been jailed. The trial is over.

    WE have a paucity of information. That doesn’t mean the jury didn’t have enough details.

    Erm the verdict doesn't prove intent or otherwise, which is what i was discussing.


  • Options
    #234
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Erm the verdict doesn't prove intent or otherwise, which is what i was discussing.

    It does. Intent is part of what makes an action criminal. Motive and intent are necessary elements. The jury felt that intent was established, or they couldn't have found him guilty.


  • Options
    #235
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    JupiterKid wrote: »
    I find it a bit unsettling and a tad disturbing that a few of the posters who believe that the convicted guy in this case was unfairly sentenced have previously defended other men founfd guilty or in one case not guilty of sexual assaults/rapes.

    But not surprising.


  • Options
    #236
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Interesting this thread has probably reversed people's attitudes on crime and penalties, with the left supporting a more draconian sentences and the right opposing in this particular case.


  • Options
    #237
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,728 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    JupiterKid wrote: »
    I find it a bit unsettling and a tad disturbing that a few of the posters who believe that the convicted guy in this case was unfairly sentenced have previously defended other men founfd guilty or in one case not guilty of sexual assaults/rapes.

    I don't believe the guy was treated unfairly. I did think those who were found not guilty were treated to a witch hunt and also they were found not guilty


  • Options
    #238
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    Kaylani Curved Tray wrote: »
    I've read threads on here where lads were giving out about women who need foreplay, blaming it on Catholic guilt and feminism, and encouraging other men that there are women out there who love "actual sex", which I guess is when you're so free from religious dogma and feminism (we mustn't forget the feminism!!!) that he lobs it straight in there and you just immediately cum. It was kind of hilariously and unintentionally revealing of their sexual skill level, but kind of sad too.

    Yes, in fact regarding the guy in this case and giving him the benefit of the doubt that he thought it was his girlfriend, if his sexual skill level wasn't so inadequate, and he had instead began by stroking her cheek or her hair or kissing her shoulders etc instead of going straight to his end target, it's highly unlikely he would be behind bars now. So ironically he was more or less hoisted by his own petard so to speak.


  • Options
    #239
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,769 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Amazing to read people still saying he showed no remorse. We don't know that but the fact that he made a detailed statement to a Garda suggests that he had remorse. If he didn't regret it he'd hardly fine the Garda all the details to help them go after him


  • Options
    #240
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Erm the verdict doesn't prove intent or otherwise, which is what i was discussing.

    The intent aspect was confuses me, he admitted the action but thought it was someone else so is intent measured based on the action or the person?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Kaylani Curved Tray wrote: »
    "Sorry I hit that pedestrian with my car, I genuinely thought I had time to make the light, honest mistake"

    "Sorry I stole that, I was so drunk I forgot to pay, I'd never do that sober so, I'll just be on my way"

    "I thought that under the circumstances it was reasonable to think that my mother wanted me to take her money out of her credit union accounts. She never said that's what she wanted, but I really did assume she did when I took it."

    These defences don't work for other crimes, do they. They're never wheeled out, either. Just sexual crimes.

    The rationale is committing a crime by mistake is still committing a crime. Perhaps nobody else wanted to insult your intelligence by explaining that to you.


    I would never wish to insult your intelligence either, particularly as I don’t see how intelligence and lack of knowledge are related, but that aside -

    The sentiments of the kinds of excuses you listed are often given in people’s defence as mitigating factors when they are accused of committing a criminal offence. They’re given as excuses in cases where the accused is charged with sexual crimes too, because the types of offences in the circumstances you listed above, and in the case of most criminal sexual offences - they aren’t generally strict liability offences. I use the word ‘generally’, because there are exceptions in law under certain circumstances, such as if the victim were a child.

    The idea of consensual relations between couples automatically constituting criminal offences is just silly tbh. It’s entirely unreasonable, and would only fly on Boards, where facts and context are abandoned in favour of, well, ignorance of Irish law at least.

    All that being said, I think the sentencing in the case in the opening post was reasonable and entirely appropriate. I would have preferred had the sentence been far more severe, as I think forcing the victim to endure a trial to get justice when they have been wronged, should be far more severely punished if the accused is found guilty beyond a reasonable by a jury of their peers of having committed a criminal sexual offence.


Advertisement