Niall Gilligan cleared of assault

are you saying that the 12 men and women on the jury are corrupt?

I mean, there are already several comments saying that a Clare jury would never convict him. Do you not have any issues with those comments?

Claremen and women who listened to the evidence dispassionately and deliberated scrupulously for ages before finding their fellow county man and ex-hurler innocent of all charges.

Being honest, I don’t agree.

As keeponhurling suggested earlier - witnesses appearing for the prosecution who tell a story different enough from the one they gave during the investigation, can really tank a prosecutions case. There were credibility issues all round, but generally the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove their case. It’s reasonable to assume this is why the jury took as long as they did in their deliberations, certainly more reasonable than assuming because he was a GAA man he was found not guilty.

You'd have to assume the state would at least consider appealing the verdict. The family could even take a civil case against Gilligan, I can't really see them letting this go.

Probably free legal aid and people saying why did the Dad do something, nobody here knows the dads character. Maybe he would have condoned what his son was doing.

The family are not short of money.

Anyone who thinks Gilligan got Clare people's support because of his hurling success is out of touch.

He did have a lot of local support, but solely because the young fella had entered his property without permission. Gilligan was supported for much the same reasons as Padraig Nally was supported.

Right decision.

Surely this was a criminal rather than a civil case.

I'm no expert but I'm guessing that Gilligan will have to pay for his own legal team regardless of the outcome.

I don’t think it’s as simple at all though as simply “blame the parents”, like, using that rationale, Mr. Gilligan’s parents would be blamed for his behaviour where he assaulted a child (that’s not the same thing as a charge of assault, I’m aware he was found not guilty), as though they had anything to do with his decision to do so, or Cathal Crotty’s parents had anything to do with his decision. I don’t think it’s fair or reasonable to blame parents for the behaviour when it would be unreasonable to assume they raised their children to think they would be at all justified in committing assault.

In your above scenario where you say if anyone has a teenage daughter, they could face a similar scenario. They could face a similar scenario from the point of view of the boy’s parents too if they have a son or sons, no? My own young lad knows never to raise his fists to anyone, he was always a lot bigger than other children his age and was a target for a few little shìts, but he knew himself without me having to tell him that being a man is being able to control his emotions and not losing the rag like Mr. Gilligan appears to have been unable to do. But to unleash his anger on a child and claim he believed he was under siege?

Like I said earlier - child must have had his weetabix!

“Who initiated the sequence of events”

At long last - it’s only fair to go easier on those who retaliate.

I hope the outcome of this case gives confidence to people to defend themselves and their property if they’re being invaded.