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; } } }

Nine years for raping a woman - twice!

Judgement Day

Is this sentence adequate? http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/serial-burglar-sentenced-to-nine-years-for-raping-dublin-woman-576909.html

I am absolutely sick and tired of these unspeakable 'beasts' being given paltry sentences and then allowed back into society to re-offend. If every second person raped was a man perhaps stiffer sentences would be handed down but I doubt it. :mad:

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

DrumSteve

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In fairness, while ye all know about my serious gripes with our justice system, 9 years is hardly a lenient sentence, it's an absolutely gigantic chunk of someone's life. Doesn't look like much written down, but it really is.

TBF its not as much as the gigantic chunk he took out of her life.

biko

Reasons for rape
COLOR="White"]X[/COLOR Short skirt
COLOR="white"]X[/COLOR Alcohol/drugs
[X] You are a rapist

padd b1975

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In fairness, while ye all know about my serious gripes with our justice system, 9 years is hardly a lenient sentence, it's an absolutely gigantic chunk of someone's life. Doesn't look like much written down, but it really is.

His sentence was for 12 years, why is everyone saying 9??

Cantona's Collars

padd b1975 wrote: »

His sentence was for 12 years, why is everyone saying 9??

He got 3 years suspended.

K3lso

Prisoners should have the choice of euthanasia. I mean honestly, they're taking up too much room and money.

DEFTLEFTHAND

The punishment for rape is not as severe as it once was in other jurisdictions that use common law either. You could get the Death in certain States in America at one point, now a person can serve as little as 5 years in some states. In Britain the average sentence is 8 years. This Irish sentence in fairness is at the top end of punishment.

padd b1975

zerks wrote: »

He got 3 years suspended.

Its still a 12 year sentence.

Gaynna

He's a re-offender. Re-offenders have a chance to prove they can be reformed. This guy failed to reform himself and therefore he should fry on the electric chair or get lethal injection.

Hannibal Smith

jees thats a horrendous story and he should have got a sentence for each time he raped her. sick twisted fiend. breaking into someone's house is violation enough but to then rape her and invite her out for dinner??? wtf? is there more to the story I wonder? what an absolute cretin

upstairs for coffee

The judge suspended three years of his sentence on the provision that he completes the Leaving Cert. No joke.

hatrickpatrick

DrumSteve wrote: »

TBF its not as much as the gigantic chunk he took out of her life.

I never said it was, I said it can't be described as lenient. 9 years is a long time, it's pretty much a decade. It's easy enough to dismiss sentences as lenient when all you have are numbers, but think about what it actually means and it suddenly seems a lot more significant.

It's also good to see someone actually being jailed for a long time for a serious crime as opposed to, for example, that guy who beat up his kid and last week got no time whatsoever.

Grayson

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In fairness, while ye all know about my serious gripes with our justice system, 9 years is hardly a lenient sentence, it's an absolutely gigantic chunk of someone's life. Doesn't look like much written down, but it really is.

It's because it's not double figures. If sentences were given in hexadecimal, we'd be happier.

On a serious note, this guy has been in and out of prison. He was standing there with socks on his hands and then afterwards hugged her and asked for her phone number so he could bring her to dinner (presumably with the money he'd just stolen).

Besides being nasty as hell, am I the only person here who thinks this guy is special needs? He may be the dumbest person I've ever heard of. I mean, the guy raped her and then wanted to ask her out to dinner. Does that not strike anyone else as mentally deficient and delusional in the extreme?

Personally, I'm surprised the judge or defence council didn't ask for a psychiatric evaluation. Besides serving time for the crime, it sounds like the guy should be sent to a facility where he can be properly diagnosed and treated.

[Deleted User]

Hannibal Smith wrote: »

into someone's house is violation enough but to then rape her and invite her out for dinner??? wtf? is there more to the story I wonder?

Grayson wrote: »

On a serious note, this guy has been in and out of prison. He was standing there with socks on his hands and then afterwards hugged her and asked for her phone number so he could bring her to dinner (presumably with the money he'd just stolen).

Besides being nasty as hell, am I the only person here who thinks this guy is special needs? He may be the dumbest person I've ever heard of. I mean, the guy raped her and then wanted to ask her out to dinner. Does that not strike anyone else as mentally deficient and delusional in the extreme?

Personally, I'm surprised the judge or defence council didn't ask for a psychiatric evaluation. Besides serving time for the crime, it sounds like the guy should be sent to a facility where he can be properly diagnosed and treated.

I was thinking the same myself: is he that disturbed that he thought it was consensual? People are strange. I don't think jail will reform this guy somehow. But then again, judges are supposed to know best...

loggedoff

Cereal Rapist wrote: »

There should be more poll options IMO.

Not saying that 9 years is enough but certainly no need to throw away the key. Some people can be rehabilitated and introduced as a normal citizen again to society.

Did you not see the bit where it said he's 36 and has spent most of his adult life in prison?

Grayson

loggedoff wrote: »

Did you not see the bit where it said he's 36 and has spent most of his adult life in prison?

and that means he's impossible to reform? Should we not just kill every one who ever reoffends if there's no hope? It could be like california where you can get life without parole for your third offense. Even if the offense is just marajuana possession.

loggedoff

Grayson wrote: »

and that means he's impossible to reform? Should we not just kill every one who ever reoffends if there's no hope? It could be like california where you can get life without parole for your third offense. Even if the offense is just marajuana possession.

At 36 he's spent over half his life in prison.
I can't see him reforming, can you?
The rest of your post is just ridiculous.

Grayson

loggedoff wrote: »

At 36 he's spent over half his life in prison.
I can't see him reforming, can you?
The rest of your post is just ridiculous.

Proove that no-one who is 36 and has spent most of their adult life can be reformed.

Seriously, that's what your stating. You're saying that it's impossible.

Personally, I think that in our prison system he has very little chance of reforming. Our prison system isn't designed to reform. But that doesn't mean that he won't reform or can't reform.

And if we determine 100% that he can't be reformed (or just making a quick judgement would suffice by your standards), what do you suggest. Automatic life sentances without parole?

loggedoff

Grayson wrote: »

And if we determine 100% that he can't be reformed (or just making a quick judgement would suffice by your standards), what do you suggest. Automatic life sentances without parole?

For rapists?
Once convicted, chemical castration and GPS tagged for the rest of their lives.

Grayson

loggedoff wrote: »

For rapists?
Once convicted, chemical castration and GPS tagged for the rest of their lives.

Why do both?

Judgement Day

Where To wrote: »

I think nine years is adequate enough provided he serves the full term.

How many years will he do, realistically, though?

Would you feel the same if it was a relation or friend of yours that had been raped? How do come to think that any particular sentence is adequate for something so awful as the crime of rape?

Procrastastudy

Judgement Day wrote: »

Would you feel the same if it was a relation or friend of yours that had been raped? How do come to think that any particular sentence is adequate for something so awful as the crime of rape?

No of course no one would, hence why objectivity is required in sentencing.

loggedoff

Grayson wrote: »

Why do both?

Why not?
Rapists deserve to be treated like the rabid dogs they are.
If I had my way, rapists and paedophiles would be executed.

Procrastastudy

loggedoff wrote: »

Why not?
Rapists deserve to be treated like the rabid dogs they are.
If I had my way, rapists and paedophiles would be executed.

Do you think the state has the right to take anyone's life? Where do you want to draw the line? Rape, Burglary, parking on double yellow lines? What if it was your brother that got pissed one night and ended up going home with some girl and ended up in court over it? What if it was your 16 year old son who shagged his 15 year old girlfriend?

[Deleted User]

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

That man should have his balls cut out. That man has destroyed a woman for life.

He should get same treatment.

I hate when people make these statements.

That woman has a rough time ahead rebuilding her life, and its made a million times harder if the people around her assume her life is destroyed.

Victims need encouragement and support to get their lives on track again, they don't need the pervading sentiment to be that its not worth trying because they're ruined for life.

No one should tell her she is destroyed, or any victim, male or female destroyed by any crime against them.

UCDVet

I really wish we'd just kill people after their fifth violent offense.

That's a generous number, IMHO. Innocent people sometimes are convicted of crimes, no justice system is perfect. But FIVE times? You reach five times, and you're a screw up. And to be in and out of jail four time previous, this means you've spent a significant amount of time as a worthless piece of trash.

Fifth conviction? Dead within 48 hours.

The world would be a safer place.

I'm willing to accept that desperate people do desperate things. If someone wants to break into my house and steal something to feed their drug habit or provide food for their starving child - okay. Fair enough. That might be a good person who might have some value to society. But hurting people? There's no justification for it.

Sure, people make mistakes. But after five violent offences, that's enough. Kill them.

It might not deter *other* criminals, but it would significantly reduce the amount of crime caused by that particular offender.

I'd bet anyone here 10,000 euro that this man will commit another violent crime after being released.

whitesands

I remember reading about that rape, glad he was caught.

It's this http://www.herald.ie/news/rapist-may-have-trailed-young-victim-from-pub-2802710.html

DrumSteve

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I never said it was, I said it can't be described as lenient. 9 years is a long time, it's pretty much a decade. It's easy enough to dismiss sentences as lenient when all you have are numbers, but think about what it actually means and it suddenly seems a lot more significant.

It's also good to see someone actually being jailed for a long time for a serious crime as opposed to, for example, that guy who beat up his kid and last week got no time whatsoever.

In a way Id agree with you... I was suprised at the length of sentence. Normally they'd get less.

loggedoff

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Do you think the state has the right to take anyone's life? Where do you want to draw the line? Rape, Burglary, parking on double yellow lines? What if it was your brother that got pissed one night and ended up going home with some girl and ended up in court over it? What if it was your 16 year old son who shagged his 15 year old girlfriend?

Yea, people who park on double yellows deserve the death penalty.:rolleyes:
You know exactly the type of scum I'm referring to, this faux outrage at what I've said here is quite sad really.

Procrastastudy

UCDVet wrote: »

I really wish we'd just kill people after their fifth violent offense.

That's a generous number, IMHO. Innocent people sometimes are convicted of crimes, no justice system is perfect. But FIVE times? You reach five times, and you're a screw up. And to be in and out of jail four time previous, this means you've spent a significant amount of time as a worthless piece of trash.

Fifth conviction? Dead within 48 hours.

The world would be a safer place.

I'm willing to accept that desperate people do desperate things. If someone wants to break into my house and steal something to feed their drug habit or provide food for their starving child - okay. Fair enough. That might be a good person who might have some value to society. But hurting people? There's no justification for it.

Sure, people make mistakes. But after five violent offences, that's enough. Kill them.

It might not deter *other* criminals, but it would significantly reduce the amount of crime caused by that particular offender.

I'd bet anyone here 10,000 euro that this man will commit another violent crime after being released.

Would you be willing to exit the ECHR to achieve this? The ECHR has been a major driving force in getting Ireland out of the 19th century on a number of issues and continues to push us in the right direction. I take it you'd be fine with homosexuality still being illegal so long as we can kill violent offenders?

UCDVet

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Do you think the state has the right to take anyone's life? Where do you want to draw the line? Rape, Burglary, parking on double yellow lines? What if it was your brother that got pissed one night and ended up going home with some girl and ended up in court over it? What if it was your 16 year old son who shagged his 15 year old girlfriend?

I'd draw the line at adult, *repeat*, *violent* offenders.

The repeat part removes the one-off example of someone getting drunk and going home with a girl who later claims rape and it may or may not just have been a drunken misunderstanding or a girl who regretted it. But if he does that with four more girls....he's the problem.

A 16 year old who shags his 15 year old girlfriend, while potentially criminal, wouldn't meet my definition of a violent crime. But even if it did, I wouldn't consider him an adult, and he wouldn't be a repeat offender.

Burglary, parking on yellow lines are not violent, so no death sentence there.