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

Cllr fined for throwing paint at Mary Harney

Twigster

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0225/harneym.html

Ms Minihan refused to make a payment to a charity nominated by Ms Harney and said she would only make a contribution to Cherry Orchard Hospital.
The judge said it was not for her to choose the charity and instead imposed a two-month suspended sentence. Ms Minihan also refused to do community service, so Judge Watkin imposed a fine on the assault charge.

I don't want to start a thread on what was done, whether or not it was right or wrong.
My question is since when do criminals have a choice of what their sentence should be? Does the judge ask the person what they'd prefer to do? I'd think that if the judge passed a sentence if someone refused to carry out they should be held in contempt of court and jailed, not just given a fine.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

major bill

Einhard wrote: »

Are you for real? You think the law should change depending on the person involved? Throwing a bucket of pain on someone is a criminal offence. Not only is that common sense, but it is reality, as illustrated by the fact that it was prosecuted as such. Now, you may wish to ignore that fact, or think it absurd, but that doesn't change reality!

I never mentioned the sentence.

I'd say you're the ignorant type who answers points that were never raised, and who clearly has a poor grip on reality, as illustrated by the fact that he persists on claiming that the attack was not an assault, even though it was prosecuted as such.

poor grip on reality i dont have...i know the justice system and know its flaws....this woman didnt deserve a criminal record for doing what most of the country didnt have the chance to do. Sometimes the law does change when certain people or classes are involved and ive seen this first hand aswell.

Einhard

major bill wrote: »

poor grip on reality i dont have...i know the justice system and know its flaws....this woman didnt deserve a criminal record for doing what most of the country didnt have the chance to do. Sometimes the law does change when certain people or classes are involved and ive seen this first hand aswell.

I stated that what she did was an assault and a criminal offence. You told me to get a grip, that I was completely wrong. Now you're changing your tune...

It doesn't matter of it were Harney or Pee Flynn, Adi Roach or Sister Stanislaus Kennedy, your mother or your father...throwing a bucket of paint on someone is not merely assault, it's wrong. She deserved to be prosecuted. And she had some cheek to tell the judge that she would in effect veto any punishment she didn't like. Whatever about the paint, I would have thrown the book at her for that kind of contemptuous arrogance.

major bill

The-Rigger wrote: »

Firstly, it's two months and not two years.
Secondly, it's a two month 'suspended sentence', she serves zero jail time.

It means she is on probation for the next two months, if she does not break the law, fine, carry on.
If she breaks the law again during this two month time period then I think the two months jail time will be added to whatever sentence she receives for further crimes.

This is my understanding at least.

So in essence she got a fine and that is all. And for some unknown reason she was allowed to 'refuse' to do community service and this is why she got a fine instead.
I have no idea why she gets to make that choice.

So exactly what sentence (bearing in mind she is purely getting a fine and should serve no jail time or community service whatsoever) do you feel is appropriate? A few dead arms, a big cheeky wink and a 'shure don't be at that craic again!'?

And if you answer the above question, please ignore who she threw paint over, it actually isn't relevant.

How much less than the choice of a fine or community service and no jail time served should be handed out for throwing paint over an unsuspecting person?

ok only seeing this now.. first off I heard it was two years but two months seems to make more sense so il retract my ramblings about that but two months still seem a bit drastic.

Well take a normal case like teenage kids messing about and they foolishly decide to act the bollox and throw paint over some unsuspecting person on the street thinking its the funny thing to do.That person outraged at this then decides to ring the police and have the teenagers charged. The teenagers go to court and get a fine of a few hundred and recieve a criminal record on assault.These teenagers get a bit older and wiser and they start going looking for work and find they struggle to get some because of their criminal record....do you think thats justice??

Ive never heard of a person been charged with throwing paint over someone id imagine 99 times out of a 100 it wouldnt even make it to court only this was high profile so therefore the only reason it went to court.

major bill

Einhard wrote: »

I stated that what she did was an assault and a criminal offence. You told me to get a grip, that I was completely wrong. Now you're changing your tune...

It doesn't matter of it were Harney or Pee Flynn, Adi Roach or Sister Stanislaus Kennedy, your mother or your father...throwing a bucket of paint on someone is not merely assault, it's wrong. She deserved to be prosecuted. And she had some cheek to tell the judge that she would in effect veto any punishment she didn't like. Whatever about the paint, I would have thrown the book at her for that kind of contemptuous arrogance.

Im not changing my tune i just think its very harsh to label it as assualt..see my reply to ''the rigger''.. i would however agree with you that she should not have had a choice!!

Jesus Wept

How does that work anyhow? I've never been asked about my criminal record in any interview/job I've had.

Regardless, the goalposts are being moved, she is not a teenager, she is just an utter fool who got off lightly.

major bill

The-Rigger wrote: »

How does that work anyhow? I've never been asked about my criminal record in any interview/job I've had.

Regardless, the goalposts are being moved, she is not a teenager, she is just an utter fool who got off lightly.

some jobs will look into your background.....

sandmanporto

the woman reminds me of the fat ugly girl we all know who has more money than sense and intellect!

FlutterinBantam

major bill wrote: »

Im not changing my tune i just think its very harsh to label it as assualt..see my reply to ''the rigger''.. i would however agree with you that she should not have had a choice!!

Luckily for us you are not making the laws, buddy.

If you think pouring a can of paint over someone going about their lawful business is not assault, well, hey, there you go.

you are a long way off reality my friend.

Seaneh

having spent 48 hours between 3 different hospitals in an attempt to be admitted when I was close to having a massive brain hemorrhage, I can testify just how retarded the HSE and it's bureaucratic idiots in middle management are.

I was very lucky to finally be treated by fantastic doctors who saved me from permanent, severe brain damage but I still went through way more pain that anyone should have to before I could get that treatment.
And a lot of people aren't as lucky as it was.

Getting paint thrown at her is no more than that incompetent tool deserves.

MagicSean

major bill wrote: »

ok only seeing this now.. first off I heard it was two years but two months seems to make more sense so il retract my ramblings about that but two months still seem a bit drastic.

Well take a normal case like teenage kids messing about and they foolishly decide to act the bollox and throw paint over some unsuspecting person on the street thinking its the funny thing to do.That person outraged at this then decides to ring the police and have the teenagers charged. The teenagers go to court and get a fine of a few hundred and recieve a criminal record on assault.These teenagers get a bit older and wiser and they start going looking for work and find they struggle to get some because of their criminal record....do you think thats justice??

Ive never heard of a person been charged with throwing paint over someone id imagine 99 times out of a 100 it wouldnt even make it to court only this was
high profile so therefore the only reason it went to court.

The reason you never hear of it is because people don't go around throwing paint on others very often. You can rest assured if it did happen to a regular person it wouldbe prosecuted if they made a complaint.

If a teenager is involved in crime they are given many chances under the juvenile diversion scheme and don't get a criminal record or even go to court unless they offend repeatedly. If an adult commits a minor crime and has no record they can avoid court and a conviction by accepting an adult caution.

In regard to this specific case. The judges original penalty was an offer of community service and a charitable donation in exchange for no recorded conviction. This would involve dealing with the probation service. Both these penalties require the accused to accept their responsibility but the accused would not do this. Because of her lack of a guilty plea, lack of remorse and refusal to engage with probation service the judge had no choice but to impose a fine and custodial sentence, the latter suspended most likely because she had a clean record.

Those that say Mary Harney deserved it have no business living in a democracy. While her reign as health minister has been less than impressive she can hardly be blamed for all the problems. Every single measure she has tried to bring in has been vehemently opposed by doctors, nurses, pharmacists and unions. I doubt anyone in the previous government would have done better. We'll soon see if FG can do better.

Seaneh

every single measure she has been so strongly opposed because they have been to the detriment of the health and welfare of the irish public.

Want to save money and streamline the HSE? Start at the ****ing top, 8 levels of management in any organisation is retarded. Thousands of people with no job descriptions since the healthboards were dissolved but still on high wages, for doing what exactly? Thousands of admin staff who don't know what areas they are meant to be working in or who they are meant to report to...
cut them or at least efficiently manage them, before you start cutting front line and critical services.
There is badly managing a situation and then there is making an absolute shambles of the nations health system!

MagicSean

I agree with your assessment of the problems. I just think you are naieve in your assumptions on how easy it would be to fix.

FlutterinBantam

Seaneh wrote: »

every single measure she has been so strongly opposed because they have been to the detriment of the health and welfare of the irish public.

Want to save money and streamline the HSE? Start at the ****ing top, 8 levels of management in any organisation is retarded. Thousands of people with no job descriptions since the healthboards were dissolved but still on high wages, for doing what exactly? Thousands of admin staff who don't know what areas they are meant to be working in or who they are meant to report to...
cut them or at least efficiently manage them, before you start cutting front line and critical services.
There is badly managing a situation and then there is making an absolute shambles of the nations health system!

Rhetoric, hearsay, and generalisations, my friend.

If it were that easy don't you think it would have been fixed long ago.

Want to know the real reason?

Vested interests my friend.

From the very top to the very bottom nobody will change to effect any significant cost reduction or work practice measures.

Any slight changes are the result of torturous negotiations which ensures that the HSE will always need a bloated admin system.

There's your real reason friend.

Sorry to hear of your difficulties.

Kennie1

+1 but I also think that the underlying root of the problem is the unions where they object to every single change that is proposed

colly10

major bill wrote: »

well be surprised because assault most of the time wouldnt get that much of a fine.

The size of the fine is usually down to the ability to pay it, thats why your usually asked when you go to court what you work at and your solicitor will usually ask you what you work at and what you earn.
If she was on the dole the fine would have probably been around 100, the fact that she's a politician meant she wouldn't wouldn't get away lightly

Cybertron85

Throwing paint at someone is NOT assault.

Next time a kid throws a water balloon at you, make sure you get his name and address, that's assault!

Someone forcefully pushes their way past you on your way to board a bus? Hello sunshine, you're going down for assault!

An efficient rational court would take one look at this and say, reimburse the dress and stop wasting my time. Oh, by the way Mary, we'll be seeing you next monday for that criminal negligence case. cheerio.

Dudess

major bill wrote: »

pc brigade on boards is fcuking shocking at times

Jeez, objecting to some hardcore leftie throwing paint at a member of the establishment is "PC"? Dude, you need to learn what the expression means...

The "Harney is a murderer!!!" stuff demonstrates no thinking whatsoever.

Seaneh wrote: »

having spent 48 hours between 3 different hospitals in an attempt to be admitted when I was close to having a massive brain hemorrhage, I can testify just how retarded the HSE and it's bureaucratic idiots in middle management are.

I was very lucky to finally be treated by fantastic doctors who saved me from permanent, severe brain damage but I still went through way more pain that anyone should have to before I could get that treatment.
And a lot of people aren't as lucky as it was.

Getting paint thrown at her is no more than that incompetent tool deserves.

You do realise these were the obstacles Harney herself faced when trying to reform the service? E.g. the consultants were a law unto themselves. The clerical staff in permanent jobs - do you think it would be fair to just fire them and have a whole plethora of people forced to go on the dole?

MagicSean

Cybertron85 wrote: »

Throwing paint at someone is NOT assault.

Next time a kid throws a water balloon at you, make sure you get his name and address, that's assault!

Someone forcefully pushes their way past you on your way to board a bus? Hello sunshine, you're going down for assault!

An efficient rational court would take one look at this and say, reimburse the dress and stop wasting my time. Oh, by the way Mary, we'll be seeing you next monday for that criminal negligence case. cheerio.

All of those examples are assaults. Wether they are prosecuted or not is a different matter. Also paint isn't exactly the same as water. If I sprayed water on your car you'd probably not notice. If I put paint on it I guarantee you'd be upset.

Pauleta

Paint can blind somebody. Its not surprising to see the far-left cockroaches defending their fellow cockroach.

Giraffe Giraffe

Dudess wrote: »

Jeez, objecting to some hardcore leftie throwing paint at a member of the establishment is "PC"? Dude, you need to learn what the expression means...

The "Harney is a murderer!!!" stuff demonstrates no thinking whatsoever.

You do realise these were the obstacles Harney herself faced when trying to reform the service? E.g. the consultants were a law unto themselves. The clerical staff in permanent jobs - do you think it would be fair to just fire them and have a whole plethora of people forced to go on the dole?

One of few people in this thread who understands anything, whoever took over that position was going to ruin their political career. It is and was an impossible position to do anything with.

Gunsfortoys

Dudess wrote: »

Viewing Mary Harney as solely responsible for the problems in the health service is ridiculous. The HSE is overcrowded with administrators in permanent jobs - she couldn't just fire them; consultants refused to take pay cuts; the service was in an awful state before she was appointed. She has her role to play but "She's minister for health, therefore everything's her fault" is plain lazy.

That protestor behaved like a petulant child - and I am FAR from a leftie basher, and while I'm not a fan of SF, I'm not on the "Let's slate everything vaguely republican" bandwagon either.

Where exactly are you then? You have yet to state that. Apart from trying to be right all the time.

Anyone who says Mary Harney isn't responsible for the HSE mess is either delusional or quite ignorant of the facts. She was responsible for the closing down and centralisation of many health provisions in Ireland. She and her government have also cut sevices to the most vunerable in society.

Although I am not surprised at the AH justice "hang them all" attitude.

Giraffe Giraffe

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Where exactly are you then? You have yet to state that. Apart from trying to be right all the time.

Anyone who says Mary Harney isn't responsible for the HSE mess is either delusional or quite ignorant of the facts. She was responsible for the closing down and centralisation of many health provisions in Ireland. She and her government have also cut sevices to the most vunerable in society.

Although I am not surprised at the AH justice "hang them all" attitude.

She had to work with what she was given, anyone who can't see that is incredibly short sighted and probably just believes whatever they hear on the radio/television as the newest piece of scandal related to any topic rather than pay full attention to the thing.

She made some bad decisions, but some had to be made and shes not the war criminal people in this thread are making her out to be

m@cc@

orourkeda wrote: »

does she qualify for a darwin award

Is she dead?

(Kinda ironic showing ignorance of what a Darwin award is :P)

Daegerty

Mary Harney should be brought out to sea and sank. The only reason she's still here is because there isn't a big enough forklift in Ireland

Run_to_da_hills

I don't see anything wrong with the "offense" committed.

He was only doing her a favour..

In this day and age it is always advisable to have cattle branded.

Dudess

Pauleta wrote: »

Paint can blind somebody. Its not surprising to see the far-left cockroaches defending their fellow cockroach.

I don't know whether the left-wing thing is even relevant - I'd say we can be fairly sure there are anti government conservatives who'd applaud the protestor. One of her supporters here was whingeing about the PC brigade (something that is only EVER said by conservatives). And I'm a card-carrying pinko (apparently) and I condemn the protestor's actions.

steddyeddy

Giraffe Giraffe wrote: »

One of few people in this thread who understands anything, whoever took over that position was going to ruin their political career. It is and was an impossible position to do anything with.

Hair cuts on fas expenses wouldnt help a career either

seligehgit

She should have got jail,absolute joke,she committed a physical assault!She did not even have the courage to plead guilt to the charge!

Run_to_da_hills

steddyeddy wrote: »

Hair cuts on fas expenses wouldnt help a career either

Edit: $400 Hair cuts on fas expenses wouldnt help a career either

MagicSean

Daegerty wrote: »

Mary Harney should be brought out to sea and sank. The only reason she's still here is because there isn't a big enough forklift in Ireland

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I don't see anything wrong with the "offense" committed.

He was only doing her a favour..

In this day and age it is always a good idea to brand cattle.

There goes the thread.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Hair cuts on fas expenses wouldnt help a career either

Anyone who spends €400 on a haircut should be jailed, no matter where they get the money.