Do people think the sentence is fair? I followed the case. I think it is about right. Probably on the lower end of a sexual assault case but i do think a custodial sentence was required.
In the morning. When she was awake.
In the post i quoted , You more or less said you don't really encounter different views , colour me shocked
When she woke...he still didn't get the ride
Context is important here and also an awareness of the subtleties that occur within human engagement.
Two people who meet, have a few drinks, spend hours in each others company, have sex, fall asleep, one person wakes to find the other on top of them, says get off and they do so. In a reasonable world that would be that. In a world where we have a deep understanding of each other then there would be no fondling while asleep.
But we live in this world and consent can be so grey. It seems to me that the woman in this case was simply not ok with what the man an did. In my single days it wouldn't have bothered me and if it did I wouldn't be long about saying so. I wouldn't dream of making a sexual assault accusation.
That's me. This woman is different and the encounter left her shaken enough to pursue him. Why she waited to do so I couldn't tell you.
At the end of the day though it's the fella here who is in the wrong. We may have different ideas of how wrong but no matter. He was an eejit.
She left herself in a very vulnerable situation sleeping with a man so
Sounds like she's down the pub a year after the fact and some beat down yoke she hates says; "no way i was with him there last year too, great ride so he is" and suddenly he's a rapist because how could this precious angel drop her standards to that subpar level her nemesis is happy with.
very simplistic and presumptious but id bet a couple of hundred quid on it no bother.
You have. Your continued defense of the man. Do you not think/understand/know he broke the law?
I'm not sure about that. A bit of cop on would tell you to not feel up someone who is asleep.
Utter nonsense. Nobody said it’s ok to initiate intimacy on a person who’s sleeping. There is a whole lot of nuance involved.
the debate here relates to the details, situation, and this getting to court resulting in a conviction /sentence.
Its not gang rape. Thanks for that nugget we werent aware. It is sexual assault on a lower scale. Nobody ,not one poster has said it isnt on a lower scale. But only a headcase would/could suggest it does not meet the definition of a sexual assault. It quite plainly does. Not one poster has made ANY remotely valid argument to say it isnt sexual assault. I started the thread for people to debate the severity of the sentence. My view is that it is the lower end , so 6months would have been sufficient. I do think a custodial sentence is necessary for all sexual assault cases.
So, in a club dancing and having the craic and your backside is squeezed/pinched and this deserves a prison sentence?
Would solve the housing problem anyway as everyone would be in prison
But this case is a sexual assault. Not one person could even attempt to claim it isnt. Its literally impossible to.
They didnt have sex. But yep he is a creepy bloke and beyond stupid.
Fair enough , once you are aware he broke the law. The nuance then is merely left down to sentencing , I myself think it was on the harsh side.
I think she regretted ever meeting him not to mind going back to his place and sexual activity taking place...that maybe would not be on her radar before they met accidentally out in the city
That is the lowest end of sexual assault and i admit yeah that does not warrant a prison sentence. It certainly warrants a warning or something if the receiver did not want it , cos its rotten dickish behavour. This case was not that though.
It may have been on her radar and she may have went out with the intention of meeting a man and spending the night with him either having sex or whatever. None of that matters though because she was asleep when he did what he did. I don't believe he is a predator or dangerous but I do 100% believe he left his sense somewhere else.
She must have believed that he could be a threat to the Mna na hEireann to have him named in public from that day forward
Good god.
I'm sorry but that's nuts. How do you prove consent after the fact?
"Hold your horses there for a second, speak into the microphone: 'I (insert name) hereby consent to...' "
The loons have truly taken over.
I never claimed it wasn't.
The poster mused that in the example it would be a more serious sexually assault, I stated how serious would be down to the prescinding Judge.
Example
Now that lad pleaded guilty, he either had decent counsel or actually listened to them.
But the Judges summing up certainly shows the frustrating disparity.
Judge McCabe said the interests of justice would not be served by the imposition of a custodial sentence. He imposed the two-year sentence, suspended for five years and placed Finnegan under the supervision of the Probation Service for the next twelve months.
Judge McCabe said the interests of justice would not be served by the imposition of a custodial sentence
But sure judges sentences have always been vastly different? Im not sure what point you are trying to make? Cos this lad didnt get a custodial sentence rte man shouldnt have? Its a travesty that your man didnt get one , just from initial reading of that article.
If you read the posts instead of reacting to them you will see how the point is pertinent.
The topic of thread is as outlined by the OP, was this the correct punishment.
How does one fully gauge the "correct punishment" if one can't compare to similar convictions.
Precedent is a corner stone of law.
I am the OP. But yeah fair enough , in the example you gave that was a horrendously wrong punishment in my mind. This one was on the harsh side.
Oh yes I could be wrong. I mean in my eyes he was just an eejit who should have known better. The woman in question obviously felt different. Dunno. Dinner time now.
I am the OP.
Oh okay. 😂
Anyway in the example I gave it's not the fact that the lad didn't get a custodial sentence which is the main issue.
It's this.
Now back to the thread case.
There is nothing to suggest the lad in that case is a threat to society, so what interests of justice is the judge in his case working from?
I wouldnt say nothing to be honest , what he did was pretty high on the creepy scale and could be repeated if given the opportunity. Although its still pretty plausible to suggest hes not a threat to society , but I do think a custodial sentence for this type of crime is necessary to act as a deterrent in future to people. Id have given 6months though not the 15.
According to the probation report he is low risk.
That's what the Judge works off.
but I do think a custodial sentence for this type of crime is necessary to act as a deterrent in future to people
Really? The exact same crime will happen 100s if not 1000s of times this week.
The proper sentence here should be a lot of community service and requirements to take part in a sexual education course.
What he did was wrong, but it does not warrant a 15 month jail sentence.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e69729035b2455232b17854d7db16fad.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c4fa995385f3b1d974361fe25841d77e.svg)