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

Man avoids jail for sexually assaulting two nieces

davet82

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/car-dealer-avoids-jail-for-sexually-assaulting-two-nieces-3249984.html

He ordered that Farrington's name can be reported in the media after hearing the victims have no problem with this.

"This will be a punishment in itself," the judge added. "He will be rightfully held in public odium for what he has done."

Since when was it the medias job to administrate justice?

This really pisses me off, is being named and shamed not a consequence of being a dirty pervert!

The guy walks free and sends out a message to other dirtbags they can get away with it and a message to victims that there is no point going to the courts you won't get justice!

:mad:

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

davet82

padd b1975 wrote: »

O yeah I agree totally.

I also think that the judge got one thing right when passing sentence (3 years suspended), he allowed the abusers name to be reported in the media, more of this please. except when it is a parent who abuses their children.

I dont think he got anything right imo, he asked the victims if they would like to wave their anonymity and have him named.

It seems the punishment is to have him named and shamed and forfeiting jail time, I'm sure the women would have opted to stay anoynomous if it ment some time in prison for him or at least making them aware of this and subsquent ruling based on their decision.

Either way suspended sentence are not appropriate for sexual crimes

Totally agree with parent and children cases btw

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it ? I'm not sure i disagree with the sentence.

OP your thread title is slightly misleading again.

How exactly is the title misleading? A man escapes jail for sexually assaulting his two nieces, how is that misleading... is that not what happened?

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

How exactly is the title misleading? A man escapes jail for sexually assaulting his two nieces, how is that misleading... is that not what happened?

Title suggests children but these women were adults. He is only a few years older than them. This makes no difference only that I first thought little girls and old man. Yes your thread title is confusing and misleading.

What relevance is the fact they are his nieces ? Do you think because its family the crime is worse?
What is the family relation ? Is he an uncle or uncle in law?

[Deleted User]

Title does not suggest children, nieces are nieces, and obviously it being family is even worse
good lord

Boombastic

Why is there no photograph of him if the punishment is to name and shame?

humbert

I really thought while reading the article I'd discover that want he did was pretty harmless, then there was :eek:

HeyThereDeliah

bluewolf wrote: »

Title does not suggest children, nieces are nieces, and obviously it being family is even worse
good lord

So it's ok to sexually assault women but make sure it's not family, right.

Good lord

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Title suggests children but these women were adults.
What relevance is the fact they are his nieces ? Do you think because its family the crime is worse?
What is the family relation ? Is he an uncle or uncle in law?

No the title was taken from the headline in the Indo where the link is posted.

The crime of sexually assaulting somebody is disgusting no matter who it is and their victims suffer regardless who the perpetrator is, whats your point?

How in the name of god does the title suggest they were children?

Unfortunatley you are given limited space in a title thread, maybe you should ask the mods so that you post a full article in the title so people like you aren't 'mislead'

Click the bloody link to find out about the story, thats what its there for.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

So it's ok to sexually assault women but make sure it's not family, right.

Good lord

where the fcuk did she say sexually assaulting women is ok?

davet82

cojomo2 wrote: »

Does anyone else think this is a bit weird (apart from the obvious reasons)?
The victim here was 22 year old adult - how did he even get as far as pulling down this womans underwear without being told to fcuk off, get out, what the hell are you doing etc? Unless ofcourse she was actually afraid of this guy?

I dont think its weird, its very common for victims of sexual assault to come forward for years, even decades later.

Maybe if you met somebody that was sexually abused/assaulted/raped they could explain it to you.

I reckon shame and fear is a big factor. Not being believed and of course what is demonstrated in this case we're discussing now, not getting real justice.

cojomo2

davet82 wrote: »

I dont think its weird, its very common for victims of sexual assault to come forward for years, even decades.

Maybe if you met somebody that was sexually abused/assaulted/raped they could explain it to you.

I reckon shame and fear is a big factor. Not being believed and of course what is demonstrated in this case we're discussing now, not getting justice.

Yes, I'm not saying it's weird that it took the victim years to come forward...have another read of my post (don't mean that in a rude way)

LittleBook

davet82 wrote: »

This really pisses me off, is being named and shamed not a consequence of being a dirty pervert!

I don't understand this. People convicted of sexual assaults are routinely named in public unless it would identify the victim. If anything, this ásshole judge has probably outed the victims.

Boombastic wrote: »

"Farrington was not added to the sex offender's register as the victims were over 18 and a suspended sentence was given"

Again, I'm confused. Since when does the sex offenders register have anything to do with the age of the victims??

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it?

As in many cases, the victims themselves didn't initiate the investigation.

It was said on the radio that one of their parents found a letter the man had sent to one of the women describing what had happened and then encouraged the victims to press charges. I'll bet they're kicking themselves now.

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

I dont think its weird, its very common for victims of sexual assault to come forward for years, even decades later.

Maybe if you met somebody that was sexually abused/assaulted/raped they could explain it to you.

I reckon shame and fear is a big factor. Not being believed and of course what is demonstrated in this case we're discussing now, not getting real justice.

Their mother found a letter four years ago that was sent to one of the women, how did she find it? I'm curious to know how it all came about. I know this will cause outrage but could money be a factor here ?

MagicMarker

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

I think the sentence is right in this case.

So if he were to pull down your sisters underwear and perform oral sex on her against her will you'd be happy with this outcome? A suspended sentence and his name in the paper?

the_syco

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

These women are in their forties now, why wait so long to report it ? I'm not sure i disagree with the sentence.

Probably shame, and a few helpings of catholic guilt.

=-=

If the chainsaw massacre happened in Ireland, the excuse would have been; sorry sir, but I was drinking heavily? FFS!

Boombastic

Anyone got a picture of him so I know who to avoid?

Sierra 117

LittleBook wrote: »

I don't understand this. People convicted of sexual assaults are routinely named in public unless it would identify the victim. If anything, this ásshole judge has probably outed the victims.

According to the article, the women wanted his name released.

charlemont

the_syco wrote: »

Probably shame, and a few helpings of catholic guilt.

=-=

If the chainsaw massacre happened in Ireland, the excuse would have been; sorry sir, but I was drinking heavily? FFS!

And he once smelled some cannabis from a few yards away so we think drugs are a contributing factor....:rolleyes:

davet82

LittleBook wrote: »

As in many cases, the victims themselves didn't initiate the investigation.

It was said on the radio that one of their parents found a letter the man had sent to one of the women describing what had happened and then encouraged the victims to press charges. I'll bet they're kicking themselves now.

cojomo2 wrote: »

Yes, I'm not saying it's weird that it took the victim years to come forward...have another read of my post (don't mean that in a rude way)

sorry i didnt mean to sound like i was having a go, i was just trying to explain...

anyways if you read LittleBooks post there, it explains the gap between the incident and reporting of the crime in this case

I know why you are suggesting it was weird but you sort of answered it yourself, they were probably afraid.

mitosis

super_furry wrote: »

This is the same judge who sent a man to jail for not paying tax on garlic. Should be on trial himself.

He wasn't even placed on the sex offenders list.

If the first guy had paid his taxes maybe we could afford to imprison the second.

padd b1975

Boombastic wrote: »

Anyone got a picture of him so I know who to avoid?

There is a picture of him in todays Mirror.

mitosis

Boombastic wrote: »

Anyone got a picture of him so I know who to avoid?

Are you related to him?

ResearchWill

LittleBook wrote: »

I don't understand this. People convicted of sexual assaults are routinely named in public unless it would identify the victim. If anything, this ásshole judge has probably outed the victims.

Again, I'm confused. Since when does the sex offenders register have anything to do with the age of the victims??

As in many cases, the victims themselves didn't initiate the investigation.

It was said on the radio that one of their parents found a letter the man had sent to one of the women describing what had happened and then encouraged the victims to press charges. I'll bet they're kicking themselves now.

Read the Article the Judge asked the victims did they mind.

Read the Sex Offenders Act it will explain why in certain circumstances age of the Victim does matter.

I assume that as the victims gave evidence they actively participated in the trial, and i would think they are not kicking themselves.

In relation to the OP in light of other sentences in this area a non custodial sentence was and is in order. There was evidence of 3 seperate sexual assaults over a short time, nothing before or since it is over 10 years since offences, the sentence was correct, in my opinion.

The relevent Law,

3.—(1) Each of the offences referred to in the Schedule shall, subject to subsections (2) and (3), be a sexual offence for the purposes of this Act.

(2) An offence referred to in—

(a) paragraph 2 of the Schedule (sexual assault or indecent assault),

(b) paragraph 5) of the Schedule (incest by males),

(c) paragraph 6 of the Schedule (incest by females of or over 17 years of age), or

(d) paragraph 18, 19 or 20 of the Schedule in so far as it relates to an offence referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c),

shall not be a sexual offence for the purposes of this Act if—

(i) the victim of or, as the case may be, the other party to the offence was aged, at the date of the offence's commission, 17 years or more, and

(ii) the person guilty of the offence has not, in respect of the offence, been sentenced to any punishment involving deprivation of liberty for a limited or unlimited period of time or been made subject to any measure involving such deprivation of liberty.

Boombastic

padd b1975 wrote: »

There is a picture of him in todays Mirror.

I haven't seen it yet, can't find it online but will have a look when I'm down at the shops later. I find it odd that neither the independent nor the examiner printed his picture, when this was his punishment (publicity)

mitosis wrote: »

Are you related to him?

No, am I safe?

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Their mother found a letter four years ago that was sent to one of the women, how did she find it? I'm curious to know how it all came about. I know this will cause outrage but could money be a factor here ?

ffs :mad:

HeyThereDeliah

davet82 wrote: »

ffs :mad:

You don't think Money is ever a factor ?
Have you known anyone who got compensation because of this type of crime ?

davet82

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

You don't think Money is ever a factor ?

stick to the case at hand please and no i dont think money was an issue in this particular case

next you'll be telling me by being in their PJs they were provocatively dressed too and asking for it...

suzie987

Can't beleive these sexual assaults are considered "lower down the scale". It's just disgusting. He should have been given jail time.

I do think it's a good idea "naming and shaming", reminds of this article. Basically 17yo girl assualted by a two boys (17). They also took pics during assault and sent to friends. They were given community service, etc. She was not satisfied so tweeted their names and had to go before the court then herself.

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/world-news/twitter-sex-case-girl-faces-judge-3229530.html

Dravokivich

davet82 wrote: »

Since when was it the medias job to administrate justice?

He is/was involved in a car dealership, this kind of exposure will likely result in reduced sales for him. It has the potential to greatly hurt him financially, will will have a bigger impact on his livelyhood than a short term custodial sentence that most likely wouldn't be fully served.