nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Gender, going to jail, male victims, etc.: the Caroline Brennan case, etc.

iptba

Although I do not follow the courts that closely, I have seen it pointed out that some women in Ireland have got light sentences for killing men.

To me, it looks like Caroline Brennan got a light sentence (5 years suspended) for killing her brother with a knife.

I think if the defendant had been a man or the dead person had been a woman, I think time it is quite likely that time would have been served.

People talk about domestic violence and that it should be taken seriously. Well, this could be said to be an example of domestic violence against a man.

Find more posts tagged with

gender

sentencing

equality

domestic violence

male victims

Quick Links

Comments

citytillidie

Here is one up here

A couple got beat up by another couple.

You would think the couple who did the assualt should be jailed.

But nope only the man is jailed while the woman walks away after being given a conditional discharge

http://www.u.tv/News/Man-jailed-over-parking-space-attack/78b6a5d9-4455-4f0e-a807-5271f8520650

CDfm

I think that there is a lot of publicity around this resignation.

A lot of the studies have their origan with studies on lesbian couples.

One of the most influential writers on mens issues and violent women has been Erin Pizzey who herself founded the first Womens Refuge and probably what became Womens Aid

http://www.womenspeakers.co.uk/speakerdetail.asp?speakerid=32

So you need balance in these things to have a proper debate.

I am sure there are women out there too with a strong sense of justice on these issues and who would find it easier to engage in a justice debate than a revenge andv retribution debate.

iptba

I think if you discuss men and women together (i.e. what should they get for the same crime), there is less tendency to simply fall into looking at female offenders as only victims which can end up with injustices. And men may also get better conditions in prison or there may be a decision that fewer need to go to prison if you look at both together. So I don't see that calling for men and women offenders to be discussed together as simply along the lines of revenge and retribution. It's about fairness.

While some people seem to be pushing for completely separate legal systems in a way (different sentences for women (e.g. send less to prison) and then different prison conditions for women when they are in prison. As I said, if you listen to Eibhlin Byrne on Six-One, when she says some places have a lot worse, she doesn't mention the Men's prison in Mountjoy, she mentions women's prisons in the US.

It's maybe a bit like having one system for whites and one system for blacks.

CDfm

Eibhlin Byrne is a politician and when have you ever heard a politician give a straight answer. Remember the infamous Macreavy speech in Brussels when foreign journalists were agog when he spoke about souffles.

I imagine she was giving a politically expedient answer to a TV interview. I imagine that given the budgetary constraints the country is adapting to -so will our institutions change on prisons.

There are no votes in prison conditions but as a politician she has an objective in being elected which is what being Lord Mayor was about.

I dont disagree with some of your sentiments and dealing with criminals irrespective of gender in the same way is not wrong.

iptba

I listened to the Pat Kenny interviews. The main change was that 18 bunk beds were put in.
But she said that wasn't the reason she retired or something to that effect - the media coverage hadn't got it correct. She mainly didn't seem to like the interference of the Prison Service.

The prison service guy thought the issue about holy communions and confirmations was mainly to do with grandchildren and nieces and nephews as he felt most should get out for their own children. He did say there was one case where a woman got a four year sentence for drug dealing and he thought it was inappropriate to let her out for a holy communion one month into her sentence.

So it doesn't appear that it has suddenly got particularly punitive.

Earlier, she said the Dochas Centre was designed so that the women prisoners could live their lives as if they were in the community. The prisoners were not called prisoners and it was about treating people with respect.
She said that depriving people of their freedom was enough of a sentence or something along those lines.

She kept talking about women being different to men.

He said she would retire on a full pension.

The way to avoid overcrowding would appear to be build more capacity for female prisoners. But what some are pushing for is to send less women to prison - "prison isn't a suitable place for women." That appears to be where one of the main debates is.

CDfm

It would be interesting to see how women would like to see female criminals dealt with.

Brenda Power commented that custodial sentences for killing some was appropriate.

So not all women agree with the soft approach.

iptba

Half of inmates jailed for non-payment of fines
Sunday, May 02, 2010 By Richard Curran and John Burke
Half of all the people who were sent to prison last year were incarcerated for non-payment of fines, new figures reveal.

Full article at: http://www.sbpost.ie/news/half-of-inmates-jailed-for-nonpayment-of-fines-49011.html

Those suggesting that a disportionate amount of women are in jail for non-payment of fines give a different impression to this finding.

As I said, I've no problem if people want to argue that no or fewer people should be sent to jail for not paying fines. I just have a problem with it being suggested that measures only be brought in for women on this issue. I do think the justice system shouldn't be broken down too much in an apartheid-type system where men and women are deliberately sentenced in very different ways based on their gender.

Hazys

Im not a fan of Kevin Myers but he makes some good points on two 'girls' getting off scott free for their role in the murder of two polish men.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-it-is-obscene-that-these-two-teenage-shethugs-are-free-2176098.html

HERE we go again: two good men are dead and two of the participants in the events of the night that brought Mariusz Szwajkos and Pawel Kalite to their terrible end in Drimnagh two years ago have gone free.

Those culprits are both teenage girls. Subtract their contribution to that terrible evening and our two Polish visitors might be alive and well, at home with their loved ones. Despite garda wishes on this matter, the two girls -- who could at least have been charged with common assault -- have been allowed to go free. And the message to teenage she-thugs elsewhere must therefore be that different rules apply to them.

It is of course impossible to say what was the DPP's office's motivation in not seeking to prosecute the two girls. However, evidence given at the trial of David Curran, who murdered the two Poles, placed both girls at the centre of the action. It also placed one of them at the heart of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

One witness described a scuffle between Pawel and a local teenage boy and how the girls attacked the Pole.

"The lad in the tracksuit, the two young girls and this older man, they were basically killing the bald chap (Pawel) on the ground," she said.
When the initial brawl was over, the two girls were left there with Pawel.
"One of the girls was carrying a bottle of vodka and the other had what appeared to be a bottle of wine."

As Pawel walked away, a witness said: "One of them gave him a clatter across the face, across the neck. He done nothing. He just crossed the road."

Another witness described the aftermath of this first serious attack. "I saw Pawel, and the two girls hitting him. I asked him if he is okay. He didn't say anything. He looked upset. I noticed a broken bottle of vodka on the footpath and Pawel had a big bump on his head."
Pawel had just minutes to live. Another witness then told of seeing Pawel (earlier) lying on the ground. "(He) picked himself up. He staggered towards the chipper."

Witness said the girls were screaming abuse at Pawel. The witness was so afraid at what he was seeing that he rang the gardai. "The bald guy was heading up the road and the girls were following him and still shouting abuse."

According to another witness, this abuse went on the lines of: "All Polish people are f****rs."

One of the girls then texted Curran four times to tell him of the affray. Ten minutes later, he arrived outside the house where the Poles lived. He drove a screwdriver into the heads of Mariusz Szwajkos and Pawel Kalite, killing both.

That night, he and one of the girls tried to concoct an alibi for them both. She later lied to gardai, denying that she and Curran had been in contact that evening.

In fact, there had been four phone calls and many texts. "Ha," chortled this comely maiden, "I just reading what it says on the news. Ha. **** xxxx." Later she texted: "Ha ha but like I can't believe it. . . Mad night xxxxx."

Later still, she texted: "Do you know what I was thinking, we could say that you and me was only in babysitting cos you and me are the only ones who don't have an alibi."

THIS foul young woman has got away with all her crimes: she participated in a violent attack on an immigrant, she was party to racist abuse and she attempted to pervert the course of justice. And like her similarly complicit girl-friend, she has walked free.

It is too grotesque, but wholly apposite, that at the same time as this trial, our feminist establishment was getting its collective knickers in a twist over a silly advertisement for crisps. Ireland, declared Fiona Neary of the Rape Crisis Network, was a place where "the casual and everyday sexual assault of women is permitted and unchallenged". (Sorry, but just who permits this?) And Susan McKay of the National Women's Council lamented that the ad was "depressing" and represented "old-style sexism".

So, here we are, 10 years into the 21st Century and state-sponsored feminism is still not managing to promote a culture of equality of legal responsibility. Instead, its primary function remains the promotion of the ideology that women are always victims and to seek out examples of such victimhood as proof of a one-way system of injustice.

Two innocent men are dead, victims of a sadistic killing. Two of the catalysts, both of them female, have walked free. And the feminist-egalitarian-multicultural quangos of the State -- that could absolutely have been relied on to denounce such an outcome if the dead had been two immigrant women and two native males had incited their killings -- have stayed completely silent.

Justice and death in modern Ireland -- of which, more tomorrow

CDfm

And thats not all. A bit of brothel keeping -spot on -no bother.

From the irish times latestMan jailed for brothel keeping in Cork

A Cork court has today jailed a man for organising prostitution and brothel keeping in the city.
Tony Linnane (53) Scartbarry, Watergrasshill, Co Cork, received a two-year prison sentence after being found guilty of 19 counts of organising prostitution and brothel keeping.
The final nine months of the sentence were suspended on the condition Linnane did not associate with the business and accountancy services of his business adviser.
Linnane's partner, Caroline O'Leary (39), also of Scartbarry, Watergrasshill, Co Cork, was also convicted of seven counts of acting or assisting in the management of brothels in Cork. She was given a two-year sentence, of which she had already served three weeks, and Judge Sean O Donnabhain suspended the balance of the sentence.
The court heard O'Leary had two young children and no previous convictions. The judge said that but for those mitigating factors, she would be serving time in prison.
A third accused, Julieanne Gibson (41) from Springvale, Old Youghal Road, Cork, pleaded guilty to five counts of acting or assisting in the management of brothels in Cork. The court heard Gibson was a mother of seven, including a seven-month-old baby, and the judge suspended her 18-month jail sentence in its entirety.

CDfm

From the Evening Herald

By Eimear Cotter

Friday May 14 2010

A SOUTH DUBLIN woman who sat on a pregnant woman's stomach while punching her in the face has escaped without a jail sentence.
Sarah Quill (22) claimed she attacked Paula Murray after Ms Murray and her boyfriend -- Ms Quill's ex -- "jeered" at her.
But a court convicted her and her current boyfriend, Stephen Costello (23), of assault.
They were dealt with under the Probation Act after they agreed to compensate the victim, Ms Murray, who was left with bruises to the body in the roadside assault.
Costello threw the pregnant woman to the ground and kicked her in the side during the attack, a court heard. He had claimed he stood back to watch the catfight -- but the court rejected this.
The pair claimed that they've been subjected to "jeering" by Ms Murray, and her boyfriend, Gavin Tansey, who is an ex-boyfriend of Quill's, on a number of occasions outside Dun Laoghaire courthouse.
Their solicitor, Ronnie Lynam, claimed this behaviour was intended to provoke his clients, but they had ignored it.
The matter was before the court for sentencing after a judge found the defendants guilty of assault and ordered a probation report.
Judge Clare Leonard ordered Quill to pay €250 compensation to the victim. Costello handed over €350 compensation earlier this year.
The defendants had denied assaulting Ms Murray at Wyattville Park, Loughlinstown on May 4, 2007.
Ms Murray had told Dun Laoghaire District Court that Costello threw her to the ground and kicked her three or four times on the side and legs. He then grabbed her neck and pinned her to the ground.
She said Quill sat on top of her, on her stomach, and hit her with her fists in the face
Quill, of Pinewood, Ballybrack, had claimed the victim, an old school acquaintance, hit her first and pulled her hair through an open car window, and she got out of the car to defend herself.
Costello had denied he was involved in the assault, claiming he stood at the side of the road and watched the catfight, as the two women hit and punched each other and rolled about on the ground.
He said he had asked Ms Murray in a "nice, friendly way" why she was threatening to kill his girlfriend. She denied she ever made any threats.
Costello, of Wyattville Park, Loughlinstown, claimed Ms Murray reacted badly to this question, and came over to the car and repeatedly hit Quill and pulled her hair through the open car window.
Mr Lynam said his clients accepted the ruling of the court and were ashamed and embarrassed about their behaviour.
Judge Leonard applied the Probation Act.
hnews@herald.ie
- Eimear Cotter

citytillidie

Thought i should post this here too

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/04...ts-with-child/

Nevada Woman Gets Life for Lewd Acts With Child

by Welmer on April 28, 2010

Epoxytocin found an interesting example of what goes on in America’s courtrooms, forwarding it to me and suggesting that perhaps women are no longer getting a pass on account of their sex.
Due to draconian sentencing guidelines meant to punish men, a Nevada woman received a life sentence for allowing a 13-year-old boy to fondle her breasts. Although eligible for parole in ten years, the woman’s life is essentially destroyed. In the video of the sentencing, her female attorney breaks down in tears at the “injustice” done to her client. Certainly, it is harsh, but what this woman is facing is reality for American men. Nobody would shed any tears if a man were to receive the same sentence for having a girl that young touch him sexually. In fact, this happens to men all the time in the US.

Honestly, I think the sentence is excessive, and the judge appears to have the same opinion, but if women expect equality in all spheres of life, then it is necessarily just under an equalist regime.
Let the lawyer weep over the monstrosity that her sisters have helped to create, and that put her in front of a judge to make a futile statement against the brutal laws that our man-hating society put in place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZmuXKNFIkM

CDfm

In the US they have draconian sentencing -but they also would take issues like grooming someone sexually very seriously.

I dont know the case, but in Ireland when a woman deliberately goes out with a weapon and stabs a man she does not recieve any jail time.

It does sound very harsh but you do have a lot of discussion about gender based sentencing and gender used to mitigate a sentence rather than sentencing for specific crimes.

Here are some of the changes being addressed in other countries

Women who abuse children
Mark Easton | 17:29 UK time, Thursday, 1 October 2009

The facts of the Plymouth case challenge our understanding of human nature. Not simply the idea that people can find pleasure in the sexual abuse of very young children. But the revelation that women were involved.

But, as I have reported here before, child abuse is far more commonplace than most people comprehend and there are an increasing number of studies suggesting the involvement of women is significantly under-reported.

According to research by the National Centre on Child Abuse and Neglect in the United States, the sexual abuse of children by women "constituted 25% (approximately 36,000 children) of the sexually abused victims" in their study. "This statistic is thought to be underestimated due to the tendency of non-disclosure by victims", the report goes on.

In the UK, Childline says that 11% of the calls received from children alleging sexual abuse suggest the perpetrator is a woman.

The NSPCC says that women are the abusers in 6% of cases highlighted in their study.

However, all these estimates - from the last few years - are far higher than had previously been acknowledged.

Michele Elliott, founder of the children's charity Kidscape and author of the book Female Sexual Abuse of Children: The Ultimate Taboo put it this way today:

"Women abuse children for the same reason men abuse children - for sexual gratification, for power. Quite frankly it is something they enjoy doing. I know that is hard for the rest of us to comprehend but women are no different than men in that case."
In June this year, the Australian child welfare charity Child Wise began a television advertising campaign highlighting the risks from sexual abuse by people entrusted with the care of children. You can see the latest ad here.

Child Wise has calculated that almost a third of sex abuse by women takes place in an organisational setting, notably kindergartens and baby-sitting. The majority of such abusers are not coerced by a man but initiate the abuse themselves. The damage can last a lifetime.

Police in Britain fear that new technology has made all forms of child abuse easier and more commonplace.

As in today's case, the internet allows paedophiles to communicate and share child pornography. Mobile phone cameras mean images can be shot and disseminated around the world within seconds.

A kindergarten close to the Plymouth nursery involved in today's case is banning mobiles with cameras on its premises. But risk can never be eliminated.

Background checks on staff won't spot those who have never abused before. The new vetting scheme currently being rolled out across England, Wales and Northern Ireland would not have helped in this case.

But there is another danger too. That we allow fears about paedophilia to damage the relationship between adults and children and to undermine the trust that makes communities function.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/10/women_who_abuse_children.html

Giselle

CDfm wrote: »

I dont know the case, but in Ireland when a woman deliberately goes out with a weapon and stabs a man she does not recieve any jail time.

CDfm, thats a huge sweeping generalization that takes no account of the individual circumstances of individual cases.

Generalisations on that scale are always unfair.

CDfm

Giselle wrote: »

CDfm, thats a huge sweeping generalization that takes no account of the individual circumstances of individual cases.

Generalisations on that scale are always unfair.

I am refering to a particular case, and where under Irish law there is an obligation under the self defence/reasonable force to retreat.

IMHO -there is often over use of the battered woman defense without supporting evidence.

I do not believe the genders should be tried under seperate rules and that one gender should be given the benefit of a defence not available to the other -especially as academic studies prove that men and women abuse in equal measure.

So if it is available as a defence,then, it should be available to men also.

I can imagine if it was available the conviction rate of men in spousal murder cases would drop significantly.

Giselle

CDfm wrote: »

I am refering to a particular case, and where under Irish law there is an obligation under the self defence/reasonable force to retreat.

But you didn't refer to a specific case.

You simply stated that in Ireland a woman can go out and stab someone and not go to jail.

Its not sentancing policy, its your opinion.

If you mean a specific case, state it when you say things like that, because otherwise it just looks paranoid and unfair.

I haven't attended the trial of every woman who claimed they were battered in their defence case, nor have I considered the evidence given in the same depth as the jury or the judge. So I don't feel I can comment on each and every single one of those cases, or on them in general.

CDfm

But you are aware of the pressure groups and the political discussions concerning the sentencing of women for crimes. You are aware of how gender is used as a mitigating factor. And you are aware that women physically abuse their partners violently in equal measure and severity.

So it should be fairly simple,on that basis, cetiris paribus, that a man in an abusive relationship should benefit from the battered spouse defence.

Its a simple question should men & women be tried under the same laws, same mitigating circumstances and if convicted get the same sentence.

If not why not?

Giselle

Two wrongs don't make a right, and making it sound like women use these defences without reason, or that we can just go and maim and kill without consequence does nothing to further anyones rights, female or male.

The inequalities exist, but making things worse for women will never automatically make things better for men.

CDfm

Giselle wrote: »

Two wrongs don't make a right, and making it sound like women use these defences without reason, or that we can just go and maim and kill without consequence does nothing to further anyones rights, female or male.

The inequalities exist, but making things worse for women will never automatically make things better for men.

I am saying that these defences are often used without supporting evidence so should be available to both genders.

We are not talking about a different species, crime or nationality. I am suggesting that the guilty are punished equally and you reply that this would make things worse for women. This is not a football match or school exam -we are talking about crime and the punishment of criminals.

Society and the victims are entitled to see the guilty punished.

You seem to be suggesting that it is ok to treat women more leniently and that is not fair on victims or their families ,including, their female relatives -mothers,daughters & sisters etc who are entitled to see justice.

Giselle

CDfm wrote: »

I am saying that these defences are often used without supporting evidence so should be available to both genders.

And I never suggested otherwise.

We are not talking about a different species, crime or nationality. I am suggesting that the guilty are punished equally and you reply that this would make things worse for women. This is not a football match or school exam -we are talking about crime and the punishment of criminals.

I never said we were. If a woman uses the battered woman defence, and the judge and jury accept that defence, then justice is done.

Suggesting that women can kill or hurt without consequence, or that they use the defence without reason is not just.

To suggest I consider this to be of equal importance as an exam or football match is insulting. I have never even implied that.

Society and the victims are entitled to see the guilty punished.

And when a person is acquitted by a court of law, where all the evidence has been heard and considered, and where the defence has been accepted by a jury and judge, we should respect that verdict.

You would be singing a different tune if I suggested that men acquitted of rape should have their defence open to speculation.

CDfm

Giselle wrote: »

I never said we were. If a woman uses the battered woman defence, and the judge and jury accept that defence, then justice is done.

Suggesting that women can kill or hurt without consequence, or that they use the defence without reason is not just.

To suggest I consider this to be of equal importance as an exam or football match is insulting. I have never even implied that.

That is my opinion I have deep reservations about it as a defence and would be deeply suspicious no matter what gender used it.

What I am saying is that it is lowering the standard of proof and eventually it will become part of the course in male defences too.

And when a person is acquitted by a court of law, where all the evidence has been heard and considered, and where the defence has been accepted by a jury and judge, we should respect that verdict.

As citizens we have a right to question the operation of our justice system. If we have misgivings about it then we should express that concern.

I was fairly shocked recently when a man was convicted of manslaughter rather than murder in a case I followed. I felt that the type of defence used had crossed over & had misgivings.

You would be singing a different tune if I suggested that men acquitted of rape should have their defence open to speculation

No - I believe rape is a heinious crime and one that is very difficult to prove. When a man is convicted of rape it usually is subject to a lot of scrutiny and I have had serious concerns about some of the sentencing.

I have enormous sympathy for victims of rape or sexual assault irrespective of gender.Thats my point, I wouldn't feel right if I looked at these things in terms of the gender of the perpetrator or the victim.

I just can't do that & as I understand it a growing number of women also do.

iptba

Giselle wrote: »

And when a person is acquitted by a court of law, where all the evidence has been heard and considered, and where the defence has been accepted by a jury and judge, we should respect that verdict.

The thing is that, in the Caroline Brennan case and Anne Burke case, they weren’t acquitted, they were convicted of manslaughter. But it is easy to forget this when the convicted person doesn’t spend time in prison - a very mixed message goes out.

CDfm

iptba wrote: »

The thing is that, in the Caroline Brennan case and Anne Burke case, they weren’t acquitted, they were convicted of manslaughter. But it is easy to forget this when the convicted person doesn’t spend time in prison - a very mixed message goes out.

The girl who was convicted of the murder of Franco Sacco -chip shop owner also walked free after a short time in custody as there was nowhere to put her

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Teen+killer+of+chip+shop+man+Franco+released+by+appeal+court%3B+Girl,...-a060669401

iptba

I have just come across some old scribbled notes of mine. It was at the back of an A4 pad - I am not sure if they are 5, 10 or 15 years old. I did a few quick searches on the internet but unfortunately can't find the story, but maybe somebody else might be able to find it.

Anyway, these are the details I have. It was a radio phone-in discussion:
- What should happen a woman who was convicted for 6.5 years, with a man for 10 years, for 2 syringe attacks (when a syringe was actually used) but, because she is pregnant, she only has to serve 13 months according to the sentencing judge. The man has no right of appeal. It was suggested that she got pregnant when she thought that she might be sent to jail. Should she be allowed keep her (future) baby in prison as suggested.