A convicted sex offender, jailed for the rape and killing on Tinder

What's the joke, exactly? Convicted sex offenders is subject to lifetime requirement to keep authorities informed of all the names they use; offender uses name that has not been notified to authorities, he says by mistake; offender is almost immediately detected, arrested and charged.

I'm not sure what part of this you find amusing, to be honest.

Well, what's the failure? Man breaks law, gets detected and prosecuted. That's not a failure; it's what's supposed to happen.

I understand from the OP's use of the word "joke" that he is very unhappy with the situation, but I genuinely have no idea as to why. Does he think that the restriction should not have been imposed on the offender in the first place? Does he think that the offender's breach should have gone undetected, or should have been ignored by the authorities? I can hardly imagine that he does. But, if he doesn't think either of these things, then what is his problem? I'm mystified. He can't have meant that the system had failed, because it plainly hasn't. He can't have meant that the system is unbelievably bad, because he describes nothing bad.

You say that I "can't fail to have understood what the OP meant by 'joke' in this context, but you are mistaken. I genuinely, in good faith, do not understand what he meant.

Well lets see he raped and murdered a woman and within about 18 years is out and about on a dating app trying to find women to meet.

He was given life sentence for her murder according to newspapers.

Oh yeah life is what 16/18 years with less for time off for good behaviour since he probably didn't rape or kill any women when in jail.

Wasn't he great.

And because the rape sentence would have been concurrent, wippeee do for good old concurrent sentencing, he is out in 18 years or so.

BTW for some fooking reason two of the jurors could not find him guilty. 😯

Nah our justice system is not a joke.

Actually not sure if this is true, but there is Sunday World article that said he had gotten only manslaughter for killing Rachel Kiely (maybe he accidentally choked her after accidentally raping her) and that he had gotten more time for robbing someone at knife point.

Oh and that he had girlfriend who happened to be sister of a convicted rapist.

Maybe someone can confirm correct story ?

I haven't looked at the full details, but yeah the retrial was ordered mainly because doubt was cast over DNA evidence.

A retrial is complete reevaluation of all evidence not juts parts of it.

So I guess the second time around the jury were not convinced of the murder charge. If there's a strangulation aspect, the argument is usually that they were attempting to restrain the other person and didn't mean to kill them. See: George Floyd.

Sentences are typically applied concurrently except in rare circumstances, so the prison time for rape would like have been served at the same time as the manslaughter.

Presumably the concern is that somebody matching with "Cian" on Tindr might not realise that they are matching with Ian, the notorious rapist and manslaughterer.

This thread has a weird title

I'd be shocked if most people didn't google someone they met online before meeting them in person, so yes it would.

You don't think dating sites ask the Gardai to vet every new signup, do you? Tinder have no idea and don't care if his name is Ian or Cian.

This most likely came about because someone recognised him on Tinder and reported it to the Gardai.

There's a strong argument that dating sites should indeed take stronger measures to verify people in order to protect their users. Revolut for example requires you to take a selfie and then send a copy of your passport or driving licence before they'll activate your account.

No reason a dating site couldn't do the same thing. Tindr and the likes might be for casual hookups, but there's no honest reason for someone to have a fake or anonymous account on these platforms. If they want, someone can have a nickname instead of a real name before they're matched, but the account should still be validated.

How that would tie into the sex offenders' register, I don't know. There is nothing stopping a sex offender from signing up a real account on Tindr, and no obligation on them to inform the site or potential partners, of their past.

eats shoots and leaves sort of title

It would be best for everyone if this fella drove head on into a truck like the vermin in Tallaght. He's the lowest of the low, I'd put him even beneath that bunch.

It's missing punctuation (or possibly additional words) with the result that it has an entirely different meaning that what was intended.

The way it's written makes it sound like he was jailed for murdering someone on the dating app.