Dubliner kills two kids and walks free

prinz wrote: »

Er yes I would. I would rather serve the three years and at least be able to come home with my head held up rather than trying to weasel out of it.

Did you read any of the SC judgements?

prinz wrote: »

Er yes I would. I would rather serve the three years and at least be able to come home with my head held up rather than trying to weasel out of it.

So, you would leave your wife and young family for three years, to serve a sentence in a foreign jail, with all the dangers to life and wellbeing that that entails, isolated from family and friends in a dangerous environment where neither the guards or fellow inmates are likely to speak your language?

Sure ye would...

This was a tragic accident. The lives of two families have been ruined. I see no need to compound the tragedy further for the sake of mere vengeance.

ResearchWill wrote: »

Can i ask did you read any of the SC judgements.

I have read some. Legally maybe correct but justice? No. Hadn't Tobin already appealed the Hungarian sentence down to only 18 months? He made a dangerous move and lost control of the vehicle killing two kids.

If this was two Irish kids killed by a Hungarian IMO the reaction would be quite different.

SocSocPol

Einhard wrote: »

So, you would leave your wife and young family for three years, to serve a sentence in a foreign jail, with all the dangers to life and wellbeing that that entails, isolated from family and friends in a dangerous environment where neither the guards or fellow inmates are likely to speak your language?

Sure ye would...

This was a tragic accident. The lives of two families have been ruined. I see no need to compound the tragedy further for the sake of mere vengeance.

This was no accident. The tosser was speeding , that is driving dangerously when he he mounted the pavement and killed the two you children. I wonder if a Hungarian driver did this to someone you love would you so readily accept that he should not be punished.

prinz wrote: »

If this was two Irish kids killed by a Hungarian IMO the reaction would be quite different.

and what if it was two Irish kids killed by an Irish driver on Irish roads?

Einhard wrote: »

So, you would leave your wife and young family for three years, to serve a sentence in a foreign jail, with all the dangers to life and wellbeing that that entails, isolated from family and friends in a dangerous environment where neither the guards or fellow inmates are likely to speak your language?

He had already appealed the Hungarian sentence to half that...and yes I would. Dangers to life and wellbeing? Good one. :rolleyes: Real black hole of Culcutta stuff.

Deleted User wrote: »

and what if it was two Irish kids killed by an Irish driver?

If an Irish driver lost control of their car, mounted a path and killed two young Irish kids waiting for a bus on O'Connell St then I'd say 18 month sentence isn't too much to ask.

prinz wrote: »

If an Irish driver lost control of their car, mounted a path and killed two young kids then I'd say 18 month sentence isn't too much to ask.

What if they were overtaking at a junction say?

Deleted User wrote: »

What if they were overtaking at a junction say?

Overtaking at a junction, lose control, mount the path and kill two kids waiting for a bus?

prinz wrote: »

Overtaking at a junction, lose control, mount the path and kill two kids waiting for a bus?

Overtake at a junction, hit a car on the wrong side of the road, and kill two children.

SocSocPol wrote: »

I wonder if a Hungarian driver did this to someone you love would you so readily accept that he should not be punished.

I think I would actually. What would be the point in adding to the tragedy by demanding that his family suffer more trauma? If he been driving incredibly recklessly, or was drunk while driving, then it would be different, but anyone can lose control of a car.

Deleted User wrote: »

Overtake at a junction, hit a car on the wrong side of the road, and kill two children.

...and what if they were hit by lightning.... and wearing orange jumpers.

prinz wrote: »

If an Irish driver lost control of their car, mounted a path and killed two young Irish kids waiting for a bus on O'Connell St then I'd say 18 month sentence isn't too much to ask.

It would depend on the circumstances, if the matter was not dangerous driving but careless then usually Ban possibly only fine. If the matter was dangerous with a plea and no extra then 10 year ban no jail time high fine, if excessive speed is shown, or drink or a knowingly defective vehicle then you are moving into jail time from 1 to 5 years.

Again on the evidence, and I mean valid evidence I have seen this matter was not dangerous. If anyone has valid evidence that totally contradicts the evidence of teh respondent, then I will look at it. But on the evidence this was a terrible accident.

prinz wrote: »

He had already appealed the Hungarian sentence to half that...and yes I would. Dangers to life and wellbeing? Good one. :rolleyes: Real black hole of Culcutta stuff.

I think that incarceration in any prison poses a risk to life and wellbeing. Especially when one is isolated in a foreign country surrounded by people who are unlikely to speak one's language. I think it's entirely reasonable to suggest that his health would be at far greater risk in a Hungarian prison than at home with his family, and you made the moronic comparison with Calcutta, so you keep your rolly eyes icon.

Einhard wrote: »

I think that incarceration in any prison poses a risk to life and wellbeing. Especially when one is isolated in a foreign country surrounded by people who are unlikely to speak one's language. I think it's entirely reasonable to suggest that his health would be at far greater risk in a Hungarian prison than at home with his family, and you made the moronic comparison with Calcutta, so you keep your rolly eyes icon.

So who does go to prison in your world?

ResearchWill wrote: »

It would depend on the circumstances, if the matter was not dangerous driving but careless then usually Ban possibly only fine....

So if I carelessly drive over two toddlers tomorrow, meh, throw a few hundred quid in the poor box and off I go?

prinz wrote: »

So who does go to prison in your world?

Ah come off it now. You're better than that kind of inane comment. Are you spoiling for a fight or something?

prinz wrote: »

So who does go to prison in your world?

Well in my world people guilty of a crime. From what I have seen I do not believe this man was guilty of any crime. But who cares what the law says we are just a hairs breath from lynching, some people on here will just not accept that terrible deaths are not always crimes.

I base my decisions on real evidence not what some blog, or a third cousin of a person says what they have heard. I have seen more than one family have to go through the trauma of a death by dangerous driving, made all the worse for the dead persons family by the incorrect rumors going around about the driver in the accident. I know of one family who believed for 4 years their father was killed by a man on a mobile phone, the facts, it was a accident.

Einhard wrote: »

Ah come off it now. You're better than that kind of inane comment. Are you spoiling for a fight or something?

If every prison poses a threat to life and wellbeing, and a threat to life and well being is a valid excuse to dodge prison I am wondering who does get incarcerated. How far are we going to take that?

prinz wrote: »

So if I carelessly drive over two toddlers tomorrow, meh, throw a few hundred quid in the poor box and off I go?

The legal definition of careless driving is a momentary lapse in concentration. So depending on the facts of the case maybe. So say you are driving in a car, driving at say 50kmph its dry, and the speed limit is 70kmph. You come around a conor and are blineded by a low sun, you blink, lower sun visor, and by now you are on the wrong side of the road and crash. That is careless driving.

prinz wrote: »

If every prison poses a threat to life and wellbeing, and a threat to life and well being is a valid excuse to dodge prison I am wondering who does get incarcerated. How far are we going to take that?

I never stated that people shouldn't be sent to prison because of a risk to their wellbeing. I stated that I would not voluntarily make myself available for incarceration for reasosn which include personal safety. The distinction is pretty basic.

ResearchWill wrote: »

Well in my world people guilty of a crime. From what I have seen I do not believe this man was guilty of any crime...

I base my decisions on real evidence not what some blog, or a third cousin of a person says what they have heard.......

...and his original legal conviction was for what?

I assume you understand the concept in EU law of mutual recognition of legal decisions. So he is guilty. That much is certain.

prinz wrote: »

If every prison poses a threat to life and wellbeing, and a threat to life and well being is a valid excuse to dodge prison I am wondering who does get incarcerated. How far are we going to take that?

Noone is saying that, it maybe something a judge takes into consideration but it is not the only thing, for example a member of AGS or the prison service is less likely to serve time for the same offence because of the extra danger they face. In ireland when sentencing persons not resident in Ireland the Court usually gives some discount for the extra hardship.

After reading a lot of these threads I hope people on here never have a loved one looking for some mercy or compassion from any legal system.

prinz wrote: »

...and his original legal conviction was for what?

I assume you understand the concept in EU law of mutual recognition of legal decisions.

Yes I do, and I believe there was problems with the original conviction, based on what I have read. While I fully understand that any valid, legal conviction must be accepted by Ireland, I believe this decision was not valid based on the evidence before the SC, which Hungry did not refute.

It was a valid legal decision to convict Aung San Suu Kyi, would I up hold it if I had to, no.

ResearchWill wrote: »

In ireland when sentencing persons not resident in Ireland the Court usually gives some discount for the extra hardship..

It has been reported already that Tobin had his original three year sentence reduced to only 18 months on appeal in Hungary. Discount?

prinz wrote: »

...and what if they were hit by lightning.... and wearing orange jumpers.

So you won't answer then. Ok

Deleted User wrote: »

So you won't answer then. Ok

Whatever. It was going to go on and on wasn't it? Every time I answered the circumstances got a little more outlandish. You can deal with the actual circumstances if you want..... 'it was the car judge'.......

prinz wrote: »

Whatever. It was going to go on and on wasn't it? Every time I answered the circumstances got a little more outlandish. You can deal with the actual circumstances if you want..... 'it was the car judge'.......

Actually prinz it wasn't outlandish at all. It's the exact situation I have been in

prinz wrote: »

It has been reported already that Tobin had his original three year sentence reduced to only 18 months on appeal in Hungary. Discount?

I know, I just don't believe the conviction was safe. Hardiman, did what he did in relation to the hungry conviction, because he knew the media and uninformed people would be upset by the legal decision not to return based on the word flee. So he set out the circumstances that led to conviction, remember hungry did not refute the Affidavit.