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

Farmer avoids jail sentence

Options

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 755 ✭✭✭davidjtaylor


    Xcellor wrote: »
    Hows about setting an example that this sort of treatment is disgraceful and shouldn't be tolerated.


    We have a long uphill struggle in County Clare. The decision is unwelcome but unsurprising.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,091 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Imagine a judge saying that somebody that killed their kids was no longer a threat to his kids, so he was good to go.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,357 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Imagine a judge saying that somebody that killed their kids was no longer a threat to his kids, so he was good to go.

    But he didn't kill kids. He killed animals.
    Scummy thing to do on the farmers part but to equate killing animals and kids is crazy.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,091 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Pawwed Rig wrote: »
    But he didn't kill kids. He killed animals.
    Scummy thing to do on the farmers part but to equate killing animals and kids is crazy.

    I suggest you google Strawman Argument, since that is not what I said at all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭Iodine1


    As usual it's easy to criticise and to be judge and jury when you are looking on and maybe not have the full facts.
    No farmer treats his animals that badly intentionally as he is simply loosing money. Dead animals are a complete loss.
    So there's more to this case. Was the farmer unable to deal with the situation as it developed over time due to illness, addiction, mental illness, or something else I can't think of? But the judge knows and in his opinion he should not be jailed. Respect his judgement. If the state prosecutor agrees that the judgement is too lenient, the option is there to appeal the sentence and have another court examine it.
    Maybe the man has suffered enough?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,803 ✭✭✭Xcellor


    Iodine1 wrote: »
    As usual it's easy to criticise and to be judge and jury when you are looking on and maybe not have the full facts.
    No farmer treats his animals that badly intentionally as he is simply loosing money. Dead animals are a complete loss.
    So there's more to this case. Was the farmer unable to deal with the situation as it developed over time due to illness, addiction, mental illness, or something else I can't think of? But the judge knows and in his opinion he should not be jailed. Respect his judgement. If the state prosecutor agrees that the judgement is too lenient, the option is there to appeal the sentence and have another court examine it.
    Maybe the man has suffered enough?

    "...as he is no longer a threat to animals and is no threat to society."

    This was the reason stated when sentencing. I don't agree that because the animals are dead / already harmed it's a reason for a lenient sentence. This reasoning applied to any other criminal matter wouldn't be acceptable either. But because they are animals it's fine.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,357 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Depends on your perceptions really. Is jail for punishment or rehabilitation or both.
    Equally are animals simply property or have they a right to life in their own right.
    The judge seems to have been of the opinion that punishment is not required and that rehabilitation has already occurred.

    Personally I would prefer to see an element of both in sentencing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,510 ✭✭✭Wheety


    I suggest you google Strawman Argument, since that is not what I said at all.

    What?
    Imagine a judge saying that somebody that killed their kids was no longer a threat to his kids, so he was good to go.

    That's exactly what you said.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,803 ✭✭✭Xcellor


    Pawwed Rig wrote: »
    Depends on your perceptions really. Is jail for punishment or rehabilitation or both.
    Equally are animals simply property or have they a right to life in their own right.
    The judge seems to have been of the opinion that punishment is not required and that rehabilitation has already occurred.

    Personally I would prefer to see an element of both in sentencing.

    My main issue is with the language used by the judge. Crime already committed and victims already suffered and dead so let's move on.

    A jail sentence may not have been the best option here I get that but a serious crime has still been committed.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,357 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Xcellor wrote: »
    My main issue is with the language used by the judge. Crime already committed and victims already suffered and dead so let's move on.

    I agree with you on that. The judge saw the animals as property rather than a living being and ruled as such ie no victims


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 755 ✭✭✭davidjtaylor


    It would be interesting had a parallel case involved dogs.
    part of his order is a life-time prohibition order on Mr Foley having any animals in his care.

    Now that's what I'd like to see imposed on those sulky racing scrotes - including the lads following in cars and vans.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,181 ✭✭✭Lady Haywire


    Imagine a judge saying that somebody that killed their kids was no longer a threat to his kids, so he was good to go.

    Nobody is saying this 'farmer' was right.
    Why even bring the similarity of kids into it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,803 ✭✭✭Xcellor


    Nobody is saying this 'farmer' was right.
    Why even bring the similarity of kids into it?

    It was just an example of a crime that had a victim to show that this type of ruling isn't consistent.

    It could have been assault, rape... any crime that has a victim.

    Sentencing should consider the victim butthe animals in this case were not seen as victims and because they were dead / removed from the abuse it was "OK".


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,679 ✭✭✭Worztron


    Many a time, judges don't seem to use any logic.

    Mitch Hedberg: "Rice is great if you're really hungry and want to eat two thousand of something."



  • Registered Users Posts: 435 ✭✭GoogleBot


    Judge has made the correct decision otherwise they will have to sue meet factories as well.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,679 ✭✭✭Worztron


    Well you must be as bad as the judge and the animal abuser. Never heard of "meet factories".

    Post edited by Worztron on

    Mitch Hedberg: "Rice is great if you're really hungry and want to eat two thousand of something."



  • Registered Users Posts: 435 ✭✭GoogleBot


    Go to supervalu butcher corner and complain all day long... : )



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,384 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail




  • Registered Users Posts: 435 ✭✭GoogleBot




  • Registered Users Posts: 40,384 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    googlebot telling me to google something. why dont you google it and post the link. i've no interest in spending time to find info that supports whatever argument you are trying to make.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement