Judge calls handbag-snatching "innocent"

Ellis Dee · 12-10-2012 01:07PM #1

This report in today's Indo caught my eye. A criminal with 89 (yes!) previous convictions tried to snatch a woman's handbag, and when she hung on to it, dragged her along with his car as he drove off.

Brave woman, and she is lucky not to have been seriously injured or killed.

The article also mentioned that a girl passenger in the defendant's car had punched the victim in the face, but there was no mention of her having been charged with this offence.

Giving the guy three years' in prison, the judge made a comment that, assuming the reporter has been accurate in his account, makes me wonder whether judges think before they speak.

Judge Martin Nolan said the robbery had started innocently and became much more serious.

So now a little handbag-snatching is an innocent pursuit?

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/handbag-thief-gets-three-years-for-dragging-woman-with-his-car-3257602.html

Boombastic · 12-10-2012 01:08PM

Ellis Dee wrote: »

This report in today's Indo caught my eye. A criminal with 89 (yes!) previous convictions tried to snatch a woman's handbag, and when she hung on to it, dragged her along with his car as he drove off.

Brave woman, and she is lucky not to have been seriously injured or killed.

The article also mentioned that a girl passenger in the defendant's car had punched the victim in the face, but there was no mention of her having been charged with this offence.

Giving the guy three years' in prison, the judge made a comment that, assuming the reporter has been accurate in his account, makes me wonder whether judges think before they speak. So now a little handbag-snatching is an inniocent pursuit?

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/handbag-thief-gets-three-years-for-dragging-woman-with-his-car-3257602.html

I hope the little scumbag got his free legal aid, in fact I think the victim should have to pay him for resisting:rolleyes:

AnonoBoy · 12-10-2012 01:12PM

"I was innocently stabbing him your honour, it just escalated into murder as the knife went in. How was I to know that'd happen?"

Boombastic · 12-10-2012 01:14PM

Back up there a minute, who in their right mind keeps their pin details with their cards?

The court heard that the woman didn’t want to let the bag go because it was an expensive leather bag containing expensive sunglasses, a BlackBerry phone, credit cards and their PIN details.

Amalgam · 12-10-2012 01:21PM

You'd be surprised, I returned a wallet to someone in the IFSC a while back, most of the cards had the pin numbers stuck to them with little scraps of white sticker.

Kurz · 12-10-2012 01:21PM

She should have thrown the blackberry at him and stole his phone instead, it was probably much better.

biko · 12-10-2012 01:24PM

robbery had started innocently

ThatEscalatedQuickly.jpg

Boombastic · 12-10-2012 01:27PM

Amalgam wrote: »

You'd be surprised, I returned a wallet to someone in the IFSC a while back, most of the cards had the pin numbers stuck to them with little scraps of white sticker.

Well I wouldn't be surprised at the crowd that work down there, but normal people..?

up for anything · 12-10-2012 01:29PM

Defence counsel Cathal McGreal BL said his client, who has 89 previous convictions including two for drug dealing, was deeply ashamed of his part in the robbery. He said Sheridan became addicted to heroin while serving a prison sentence in Mountjoy Prison in 2007.

He was in his fucking arse! How do solcitors keep straight faces when they are saying crap like that in court? :mad::rolleyes:

Curly Judge · 12-10-2012 01:36PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Back up there a minute, who in their right mind keeps their pin details with their cards?

The court heard that the woman didn’t want to let the bag go because it was an expensive leather bag containing expensive sunglasses, a BlackBerry phone, credit cards and their PIN details.

"Aw Jazus Missus, Yah can't be at that!"

FFS

sceptre · 12-10-2012 01:39PM

Exact same report in the Times btw (well, one or two of the words are different - like "thief" instead of "robber")
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/1012/breaking25.html

JazzyJ · 12-10-2012 01:40PM

The whole criminal justice system in this country is a joke.

Judges really have their heads up their arses and live a dream world.

Mickeroo · 12-10-2012 01:43PM

Obviously the judge meant the robbery started out without any intention to cause physical harm to the victim, but then escalated when she didn't let go of the bag. The judge also sentenced the guy for three years lets not forget. Poor choice of words perhaps but this is a non-issue really.

tayto lover · 12-10-2012 01:47PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Back up there a minute, who in their right mind keeps their pin details with their cards?

The court heard that the woman didn’t want to let the bag go because it was an expensive leather bag containing expensive sunglasses, a BlackBerry phone, credit cards and their PIN details.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the case at all. The woman had her bag grabbed by a parasite with 89 previous convictions. The fact that her PIN number was available has nothing to do with the case at all. He should have got at least 5 years as he has had numerous chances.

12-10-2012 02:04PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Back up there a minute, who in their right mind keeps their pin details with their cards?

The court heard that the woman didn’t want to let the bag go because it was an expensive leather bag containing expensive sunglasses, a BlackBerry phone, credit cards and their PIN details.

What in jaysus name has that got to do with anything?/She should be able to walk around with her life savings in her bag if she wants, its the scumbag whos at fault here, not the victim of a violent robbery. Which it was, as he bit her, and his delightful girlfriend punched her.

pair of Cnuts.

omahaid · 12-10-2012 02:08PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Back up there a minute, who in their right mind keeps their pin details with their cards?

The court heard that the woman didn’t want to let the bag go because it was an expensive leather bag containing expensive sunglasses, a BlackBerry phone, credit cards and their PIN details.

Ah ya, of course. I'm surprised she wasn't arrested for resisting a robbery.

omahaid · 12-10-2012 02:10PM

Mickeroo wrote: »

Obviously the judge meant the robbery started out without any intention to cause physical harm to the victim, but then escalated when she didn't let go of the bag. The judge also sentenced the guy for three years lets not forget. Poor choice of words perhaps but this is a non-issue really.

Is that really the definition of innocence?

Mickeroo · 12-10-2012 02:12PM

omahaid wrote: »

Is that really the definition of innocence?

Clearly not, hence why I said "poor choice of words...".

syklops · 12-10-2012 02:19PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Back up there a minute, who in their right mind keeps their pin details with their cards?

The court heard that the woman didn’t want to let the bag go because it was an expensive leather bag containing expensive sunglasses, a BlackBerry phone, credit cards and their PIN details.

It happens a lot. Its so easy to obfuscate the numbers that there is no reason for it to be easy for a robber to find them. I was listening to Liveline one day and a woman had a card in her handbag, and I am not exagerating, it was like:
Marys PIN nimbers
BOI 4382
TSB 7607
Ulster Bank 4910

Facepalm time.

syklops · 12-10-2012 02:22PM

Jake1 wrote: »

What in jaysus name has that got to do with anything?/She should be able to walk around with her life savings in her bag if she wants, its the scumbag whos at fault here, not the victim of a violent robbery. Which it was, as he bit her, and his delightful girlfriend punched her.

pair of Cnuts.

I dont think Boombastic was suggesting thievery is ok.

JohnMarston · 12-10-2012 02:24PM

I'm sure the thief feels terrible causing that woman physical injury during his day job

Curly Judge · 12-10-2012 02:27PM

syklops wrote: »

It happens a lot. Its so easy to obfuscate the numbers that there is no reason for it to be easy for a robber to find them. I was listening to Liveline one day and a woman had a card in her handbag, and I am not exagerating, it was like:
Marys PIN nimbers
BOI 4382
TSB 7607
Ulster Bank 4910

Facepalm time.

Fine! I agree!
But even if the lady concerned had the bloody number tattooed on her forehead, it still wouldn't mitigate the offence of the mugger.
Or the stupidity of the judge's statement.

TheFruitarian · 12-10-2012 02:45PM

It's not the state's money though and so, sure no real harm done.

Try thieving money by not paying car tax and see if they call it innocent.

pickarooney · 12-10-2012 03:03PM

syklops wrote: »

It happens a lot. Its so easy to obfuscate the numbers that there is no reason for it to be easy for a robber to find them. I was listening to Liveline one day and a woman had a card in her handbag, and I am not exagerating, it was like:
Marys PIN nimbers
BOI 4382
TSB 7607
Ulster Bank 4910

Facepalm time.

It's a trick. The thief, instead of going to the trouble of hacking the cards, thinks he has it easy and puts them in an ATM. He's so convinced of her stupidity that he tries the same number three times and loses the card.

Probably

Boombastic · 12-10-2012 03:09PM

syklops wrote: »

I dont think Boombastic was suggesting thievery is ok.

Those on their high horses about what I said, obviously jumped over my first post:)

MistyCheese · 12-10-2012 03:21PM

There we were in the park when suddenly some old lady says I stole her purse. I chucked the Professor at her but she kept coming. So I had to hit her with this purse I found...

UCDVet · 12-10-2012 06:29PM

I'm 99% sure that, if asked directly, the Judge would tell you that stealing a purse is not innocent. He simply meant that the crime started out 'more innocent'.

That's to say the thief intended to *steal* a bag from someone. The thief didn't intend to assault the woman. Intent often plays a significant role in determining the punishment for a particular crime, which is why it's pretty relevant for the Judge to consider.

Pottler · 12-10-2012 07:45PM

We were on the London underground a few years back and a lad snatched a womans purse about 50m down the platform and did a runner, towards us. As he ran past, I accidentally gave him a little push, upsetting his balance and causing him to run into a tiled wall-edge which looked quite painful. I then accidentally stood on his fingers quite heavily as I was retrieving the nice ladies bag. I returned the bag to it's owner who was most relieved.

The purse snatcher was not very happy with this turn of events and was also moaning loudly about his fingers being broken-at least I think he was as it was hard to make him out as some of his teeth were still a bit loose from where he bumped into the wall and he was bleeding a lot. The Transport Police arrived and instead of making a fuss about the bag being robbed, they got quite excercised about the injuries the poor young man had sustained through a combination of his and my own clumbsiness, which were apparently quite serious.

Luckily several bystanders explained what had happened and backed me up, as otherwise I reckon it was me getting arrested and not wall-boy. I also got confused and gave the Police the wrong name and address which was silly of me- they mentioned that wall-boy might later choose to press charges!!!

I feel that each and every purse snatching piece of dung needs to be assisted in running into a tiled wall, and then innocently stood on, by accident. Just make sure you have some witnesses, in case the po-po decided to get things mixed up. Btw, I never saw an ambulance arrive as fast as the one that took that lad away - or as much of a fuss being made of someone who I reckoned hadn't been stood on half as much as he needed. I was quite surprised as the T.Po made more fuss and attention to yer man than to the young woman whos bag had been robbed. They were quite snotty about the whole "choose to press charges" thing as well. I wasn't expecting a medal but I thought I might have got a discrete nod and a wink as in "fair dues". Not a bit of it. Missus was also annoyed as he bled on her new white coat, which apparently was also my fault.

arse..biscuits · 12-10-2012 08:39PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Back up there a minute, who in their right mind keeps their pin details with their cards?

I write my PIN on my bank card for good luck

Pottler · 12-10-2012 08:43PM

arse..biscuits wrote: »

I write my PIN on my bank card for good luck

Good luck with that!:D

NoQuarter · 12-10-2012 08:49PM

omahaid wrote: »

Is that really the definition of innocence?

You guys are taking a legal term and twisting it into something its not. The innocent part is in relation to a "robbery" as defined in the theft and fraud offences act. Its requires violence. The accused was trying to steal which is theft. So its just a legal technicality you guys are confusing.

The judge didnt mean that the accused was completely innocent.

But sure dont let me get in the way of a good judicial bashing thread.

Judge calls handbag-snatching "innocent"

Comments