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.
Goodnight.
Carney felt that unlawful killing had been proved as Nally had admitted to shooting Ward as he fled. Carney gave that erroneous direction because he feared a perverse verdict which is also known as nullification.
The jury in the second trial heard the same evidence and returned a not guilty verdict. Why? Because clearly they thought he acted properly in defending himself and his property and didn't agree that using lethal force in such a situation was unwarranted even though this few in the face of the law and the definition of what constituted manslaughter minimum.
Criminal Law (Defense and the Dwelling) act was introduced to regularise the state of affairs as a direct result of the Nally trial verdict. It is a clear case of nullification imo, which granted is rare in Ireland. As for it being unheard of or an "internet myth" see the 1982 SC judgement in the case of DPP vs O'Shea. Thee judge there noted "what may seem to judges to be a perverse verdict of acquittal may represent the layman's rejection of a particular law as being unacceptable" and that this could prompt a reform of the law. As you might note, 1982 is before the era of the internet.
Google PTSD
And in my view anyone who assaults a sleeping woman is the height of scum, but that's just me.
Ah yes, the convenient diagnosis every victim has
But would you have done what he did to the woman?
And me.
Every victim? Read over your comment. PTSD is a thing , you can doubt the severity of her statement compared to the crime here but cop on to yourself man.
Of course it’s a thing. And she had 3 years to get a formal diagnosis which would have been “proof” of her traumatised state. I guess she didn’t need it in the end.
I think a lot of people are questioning the severity of her impact statement vs what we actually know happened.
An act that lasted mere seconds (for her), as when she was aware, she said stop and he stopped. He groped/kissed, she woke, said stop, and it was over…
From this, to what her impact statement said seems way OTT for me. She used words like sexual violence in her statement. It does not add up, when you factor in the event, her reaction afterwards. Suicide, depression and counselling. All this, and coming from what we know.
Posters have mentioned her mental health issues and whether she was using these, heightening them, losing support/cfriends etc. Did it all get too much and she decided that HE is going to suffer for what she was experiencing?
Nobody is saying he had a right to do what he did. But this is not some black and white yes/no world all the time. At times there are circumstances and nuance that lead to less than favourable outcomes.
I just cannot countenance what I have read about the incident and all that happened before and after the incident, to a man now behind bars…
and the deliberate and continued use of the words sexual assault by those happy that he’s behind bars doesn't change my view. A very low scale on the bar was this incident.
At times the law is an ass: here, this couldn’t be more true!
You’re not going to get anyone saying “yes, I would have done that.”
it’s an unfair and silly question . Nuance, circumstance and interactions all need to be factored in.
fact is: many men and women do similar all the time, and a prison sentence doesn’t follow. They initiate intimacy on a partner/GF/BF/spouse/booty call. They’re not trying to hurt, intimidate, terrify.
Seriously, what he did isn’t being completely dismissed, but the black and white viewing of it, without factoring in all the circumstances is not the way to then phrase a question: “would you have done what he did?”
He is not Jack the Ripper or anything like.
Question to you: do you think this man was trying to hurt/terrify/scare this woman? Or was it a clumsy and ill-judged attempt that backfired?
we dont always agree but thats on the money.
Tyson fury is pants!!!!! :)
Careful now or you'll be accused of victim bashing.
I wouldn't answer a direct question of that nature from a guard in an interview room ,let alone from an overly zealous white Knight on an Internet chat room
What I will repeat is life is messy and hopefully you learn that some day ,you're feminist Bible orthodoxy isn't really realistic in terms of application ,jailing this guy will do no good whatsoever, countless thugs roaming Dublin each day would be a much better fit for his cell and Dublin would be much safer ,Dublin isn't one bit safer with this poor gullible fool behind bars
Couldn’t agree more.
According to some posters’ logic I’d be a serial sexual assailant, who has also been sexually assaulted by others. And I won’t be the only one either. Hopefully we can expect a manual that outlines which body parts you can touch in order to gently wake your partner.
Have you ever climbed on top of and groped a sleeping woman?
It's a very simple question that a lot of you are afraid to answer for some reason.
No, I don’t think I ever climbed on top of a sleeping woman. It sounds like a sure way to get a “**** off” as a response.
Have you?
No, but I'm not the one going out of my way to downplay the act.
"The height of scum". What would you call an actual rapist then?
You are making a fool of yourself.
I'm sorry that me responding to someone using hyperbole by using hyperbole offended you so much that you had to register a brand new boards account to rant at me. Have a blessed weekend friend.
The jury in the second trial heard the same evidence and returned a not guilty verdict. Why?
Because they were given the option.
Again nothing to do with jury nullification.
Just to confirm, you're claiming she is lying about her trauma?
Just to confirm, do you think she's lying about her trauma?
It's up to the Judge to temper an victim impact statement when deciding on sentencing if he or she feels it necessary.
And whats that got to do with your horrible comment about how PTSD is convenient for every victim???
I think the lesson here is when accused of anything do not say a word.
Get a solicitor and shut the F**k up,
Provide no help to the Garda at all.
I am saying I can’t see PTSD mentioned in the reports. Apologies if I missed it. I am not entertaining the idea unless it’s formally diagnosed. I have the same stance on any “diagnosis” btw.
You think it is wrong or off for people to question the severity of her suffering after you consider what actually happened?
I cannot say if she is lying or not, but some of the suffering she claims (suicide, counselling, doctors appointments, depression, anxiety), as well as using words like sexual violence; come on, does this sound genuine/real, when you factor in the act, the reaction afterwards, the time?
The actual incident/act was on the very lower end of the scale..how could it have warranted the impact statement?
Walshb theres nothing wrong with questioning this case. There is something horrible about saying ptsd - the convenient excuse for EVERY victim. Im sure youd agree? Thats the problem with this thread, theres a few not agreeing and thats fair , this is a very strange case but then theres just some with a horrible under current of nastyness. I dont think you are one of them.
Is there possibly another lesson? Maybe just one around sleeping women?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d3e92925f7bde702415f91ea088d4f7a.svg)
