85 convictions and free to kill?

woodoo · 13-04-2013 02:10PM #1

I am flabbergasted that in this country someone can have 85 convictions and still be free at 25 to kill just like Jason Morrissey was. He is not the first and he won't be the last unless we see some change.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/killer-danced-around-victim-with-arms-aloft-after-landing-fatal-punch-29193456.html

Could we do more to ensure these people are punished appropriately. America has 3 strikes and your are out. Could we have something along those lines, 5 strikes 10 etc. Surely after 85 convictions the likes of Morrissey just aren't getting the message that their behaviour is unacceptable. James Tynan would most likely be alive today if there was such a policy in place.

Should we be pressuring our political representatives more to do something about it? What can be done? what should be done or is our current system just fine?

Remember these also:

21 Year old Martin Morgan 55 previous convictions http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dublin-man-jailed-for-life-for-mindless-and-savage-murder-545575.html

Gerard Manning 118 previous convictions http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/man-found-guilty-of-murder-has-118-previous-convictions-588732.html

26 Year old Garda Killer Martin McDermott 91 previous convictions http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/no-excuse-for-transfer-of-garda-killer-with-91-previous-convictions-prison-chief-26837486.html

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 02:13PM

I can't see it in the article, what are the previous convictions for in general? Does it state that anyway?

Tombi! · 13-04-2013 02:17PM

I'll quote it.
But no, it doesn't give the exact details. It states: public order offences.
What kind of things would they be?

A SMIRKING killer who struck a man to the ground with a single punch and then danced around him as he lay dying on the ground, said it "felt good" when he hit the victim in the unprovoked assault.

Only quiet sobbing could be heard at Nenagh Circuit Criminal Court yesterday as a harrowing statement from Delores Tynan told how her family live their "lives in darkness" following the manslaughter of her son, James (25).

The court heard how he went on a night out with friends – but came home in a coffin.

Jason Morrissey (23) of Church Street, Toomevara, Co Tipperary, was jailed yesterday for 18 years for the unlawful killing of Mr Tynan on February 19, 2012, in Liberty Square, Thurles, Co Tipperary, and three assaults committed in five days beforehand.

Frank Quirke, prosecuting for the State, read the statement prepared by the grieving mother as her son's killer sat just feet from her and smirked.

Judge Tom Teehan said it was "the most affecting victim impact statement I have ever heard since the introduction of it (victim impact statements) 20 years ago". The Tynan family cried and hugged each other while Mr Quirke broke down and had to compose himself as he relayed the loss the family suffered after James – from Johnstown, Co Kilkenny – was killed.

"We will never forget the phone call from Clonmel hospital to tell us that our son was gravely ill and to get there as quickly as possible, the nightmare drive, to see him lying there attached to machines – the life gone out of him.

"The week before he died he had told me he was so happy and we knew it. He loved his job, his lovely girlfriend Fiona, his friends and he had everything to live for.

Unbearable

"Now we have to live without him. I can't put down in words how hard that is. An illness or an accident would be hard enough, but to lose your son like this is devastating and unbearable. Every day is a nightmare.

"The pain and loss is terrible. It is so hard to carry on without him.

"He was born on October 3, 1986 – a joy to us all. He was always smiling, so happy. I feel so robbed that I will never be a granny to his children and he would have been a wonderful dad.

"His life was not in vain, when he died he gave life to six people as his organs were donated, that was his wish. James was that kind, thinking of others.

"I want you all to know what one punch can do – it takes a life. It leaves us to live our lives in darkness now, as the light left us when James died," the statement read.

Morrissey had 85 criminal convictions and was on bail for public order offences when he killed Mr Tynan.

c_man · 13-04-2013 02:20PM

Odysseus wrote: »

I can't see it in the article, what are the previous convictions for in general? Does it state that anyway?

Looks like assault etc., http://www.tipperarystar.ie/news/local/assaulted-garda-while-on-bail-1-2268553

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 02:26PM

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I'll quote it.
But no, it doesn't give the exact details. It states: public order offences.
What kind of things would they be?

They could be anything, which is why I'm asking? Telling me the amount of previous doesn't give me much info. The could be all petty offenses or there could be more serious ones there.

However, taking the persons age and the fact that they where out and not locked up at the time, [if that makes sense] it would imply that the offenses where lower down the scale when compared to the very serious crime he is currently up on.

This things about comparing the USA and 3 strikes rule. Does that only apply to felonies and not misdemeanors? Would Public Order offenses be misdemeanors? I'm not sure but I think most would.

Anyone know how that compares to the Irish system

Praetorian Saighdiuir · 13-04-2013 02:26PM

There needs to be tougher punishments for repeat offenders like this. Rehabilitation is not something that would work for a little Cnut like him.

Is it likely that he would be out in less than 10 years? My personal opinion in a situation like this would be very unpopular. I would like to see some sort of slave labour and reduction in human rights, if not the death penalty for a repeat offender who ends up killing another person.

Schism · 13-04-2013 02:26PM

How does a 23 year old even go about getting so many convictions? He sounds like a shining example of humanity :rolleyes:

It's a sad fact that there's still career criminals, and let's be honest, dangerous individuals out there with nothing constructive or at all good to add to their society. It's news like this that makes me somewhat wary on nights out, you never know who you'll run into and evidently the worst can happen in a flash.

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 02:28PM

c_man wrote: »

Looks like assault etc., http://www.tipperarystar.ie/news/local/assaulted-garda-while-on-bail-1-2268553

He had 44 at the time of that link, looks like he was clocking them up at quite a rate.

Praetorian Saighdiuir · 13-04-2013 02:30PM

Odysseus wrote: »

They could be anything, which is why I'm asking? Telling me the amount of previous doesn't give me much info. The could be all petty offenses or there could be more serious

Does it matter what they were? He was convicted of 85 crimes either way. It is irrelevant how small or petty they might have been, it all culminated to an attitude where assault resulted in the death of someone. Just reading about his actions while the guy was on the ground is shocking.

There is no defence for scum like this.

13-04-2013 02:31PM

“Edward Byrne was on bail at the time, a factor I find aggravating,” he said, noting his considerable criminal record of 55 previous convictions.

He said the sole mitigating factors he could find for him were his plea of guilty and his remorse.

He imposed a 12-year sentence on him. He pointed out that he had just begun a three-year sentence for another crime, meaning he would really serve only an extra nine years for Mr Rzeszutko’s killing.

So he got to commit a crime for free? Awesome.

Conmaicne Mara · 13-04-2013 02:35PM

Another scumbag:

"The court heard on Monday about John ‘Frog’ Ward’s previous convictions, which numbered 80 and were spread over 38 court appearances. All court appearances, bar two, were in district courts. Mr Ward served a number of prison sentences. At the time of his death he was awaiting trial arising out of an incident at Carrowbrowne Halting Site on April 15, 2004 when he was alleged to have produced a slash hook to gardaí.
The court also heard how there were four bench warrants issued for the arrest of Mr Ward that were not executed at the time of his death. It was explained by gardaí that the warrants were not executed because Mr Ward was receiving psychiatric treatment at the time."

Prodigious · 13-04-2013 02:37PM

Tragic that it took a death to get him put away. However, he got 21 years which is excellent in Ireland

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 02:40PM

Praetorian Saighdiuir wrote: »

Does it matter what they were? He was convicted of 85 crimes either way. It is irrelevant how small or petty they might have been, it all culminated to an attitude where assault resulted in the death of someone. Just reading about his actions while the guy was on the ground is shocking.

There is no defence for scum like this.

Well personally it matter to me, I don't see any one defending this guy; however, anagin personally, if I am going to comment on such cases, I like access to as much pertinent info as possible.

In order to understand the type of person we are dealing with in this case, I think I does matter what the previous where, and this would be more important to people like the judge who actually have to deal with this guy, as oppossed to us just talking about him.

We seem to have noted that at least one of the previous was for a violent crime, in that case attacking a member of AGS. So I would be interested in knowing how many more of those convictions involved violent acts.

Telling me he has 85 convictions tells me little tbh.

SB2013 · 13-04-2013 02:42PM

Odysseus wrote: »

They could be anything, which is why I'm asking? Telling me the amount of previous doesn't give me much info. The could be all petty offenses or there could be more serious ones there.

However, taking the persons age and the fact that they where out and not locked up at the time, [if that makes sense] it would imply that the offenses where lower down the scale when compared to the very serious crime he is currently up on.

This things about comparing the USA and 3 strikes rule. Does that only apply to felonies and not misdemeanors? Would Public Order offenses be misdemeanors? I'm not sure but I think most would.

Anyone know how that compares to the Irish system

Who cares if they are minor offences? If the courts and probation services started taking notice of minor offences then maybe we wouldn't have people graduating to such major offences.

Take the likes of burglary. Often treated as a minor offence by court. To me it is one of the worst crimes. It's a violation of the victims home and place of safety and often leaves a permanent mental trauma on its victim, especially if they are vulnerable.

Silentcorner · 13-04-2013 02:49PM

In cases like this, we need to start asking who benefits and who doesn't.

Who doesn't.
The 85 victims of the crimes he was convicted for plus their families

The other victims of this man whose crimes were never reported or charged for.

The convicted man himself, there is no life or future for someone with more than 3 convictions, this mans life will be blighted with imprisonment, mental health issues, possible addictions etc, of course it could be argued that he deserves no sympathy

The taxpayer

Who benefits
The legal firm that represented him, a min of 85 court dates equates to a lot of work, chances are the taxpayer picked up the tab for each court appearance

The body or quango that receives funding each year to help these disadvantaged youths, and every region of the HSE has outreach programs

The state training agency who receives funding each year to help kids who drop out of school, FAS spent €1bn a year

The political establishment (which pays itself extremely well), it gets to decide who gets all that lovely funding described above, this may be why we NEVER see debate on how the state treats its vulnerable citizens

Praetorian Saighdiuir · 13-04-2013 02:49PM

Odysseus wrote: »

Well personally it matter to me, I don't see any one defending this guy; however, anagin personally, if I am going to comment on such cases, I like access to as much pertinent info as possible.

In order to understand the type of person we are dealing with in this case, I think I does matter what the previous where, and this would be more important to people like the judge who actually have to deal with this guy, as oppossed to us just talking about him.

We seem to have noted that at least one of the previous was for a violent crime, in that case attacking a member of AGS. So I would be interested in knowing how many more of those convictions involved violent acts.

Telling me he has 85 convictions tells me little tbh.

85 convictions to date tells me this guy has no moral boundaries. Now look what has happened, he killed a guy. Remember, he was only done on 85 counts, I'm sure he has got away with a lot more.

Just as a matter of interest. If he had 85 minor convictions and this serious one. What is your opinion then? Would you have a more relaxed attitude about what he has done?

No matter what he has done, he obviously thinks nothing of his actions.

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 02:51PM

SB2013 wrote: »

Who cares if they are minor offences? If the courts and probation services started taking notice of minor offences then maybe we wouldn't have people graduating to such major offences.

Take the likes of burglary. Often treated as a minor offence by court. To me it is one of the worst crimes. It's a violation of the victims home and place of safety and often leaves a permanent mental trauma on its victim, especially if they are vulnerable.

Weel I do for one, which does not mean I am defending the guy. I am happy with the sentense of 21 years.

However, yeah I have an interest in certain areas of criminality, so I like as much info as possible when I cooment on such issues.

Though I think my previous post may answer the points you raised above.

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 03:10PM

Praetorian Saighdiuir wrote: »

85 convictions to date tells me this guy has no moral boundaries. Now look what has happened, he killed a guy. Remember, he was only done on 85 counts, I'm sure he has got away with a lot more.

Just as a matter of interest. If he had 85 minor convictions and this serious one. What is your opinion then? Would you have a more relaxed attitude about what he has done?

No matter what he has done, he obviously thinks nothing of his actions.

I am not sure, does he really have not moral boundaries? To be more general I would know a lot of people with a significant amount of convictions.

I think it would be incorrect to say they have no moral compass, and that this is proved by their previous convictions. I think that is taking an very easy way out of a difficult situation.

Also just because a person commits a certain acts, that is not to say their are no personal consequences for it, that for example the subject feels no guilt over such an act. Lots of people who commmit crimes have certaion boundaries in that there are acts that they will not commit.

Morality is very complex area, I know plently of "petty criminals" who have come to the aid of complete strangers, so just because they committed a crime earilier that day, does not mean morality is absent.

In relation to your last question as to would I have a more relaxed attitude if his convictions where all petty/minor?

Well I asked about the status of his convictions for a few reasons, one to establish how many of this where violent, which would lead to the question that if he had a significant amount of violent convictions why was he free to commit this act? There may be a valid answer to that question, but I currently don't know.

Two, if there was a total lack of violence from the previous convictions I think that should be acknowledge in his sentense.

However, I don't think it would lead to a more relaxed attitude, as this was a very serious crime, actually taking the like of another is one of the most serious crimes we can commit. So how he acted when committing the crimes and his behaviour following it would the important factors here, as well as the lead up to the act. All of which reflect very poorly on the subject here, so no I don't think it would lead to a more relaxed viewpoint, but that does not mean that I think such info should not be considered.

Does that make my position any clearer?

DarkJager · 13-04-2013 03:13PM

This is why we really a death sentence option in this country. There's no excuse for someone with 85 previous convictions walking the streets. He should have been put to death after 10 at the most.

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 03:14PM

DarkJager wrote: »

This is why we really a death sentence option in this country. There's no excuse for someone with 85 previous convictions walking the streets. He should have been put to death after 10 at the most.

Why ten, why not 9 or 16?

Stercus Accidit · 13-04-2013 03:15PM

Our sentences are light because of the costs of imprisonment and the fact our existing prisons are outdated and over filled.

I wonder how well outsourcing prisons to countries with lower costs would work, especially for repeat offenders. Save the Irish prison spaces for the first 1, maybe 2 offences depending on severity or some other determining factor, ship off the worst to a place where they can be kept at a minimum cost, possibly an EU member state who would appreciate the money. Maybe a Northern African Country for the lowest costs and worst repeat offenders with little likelihood of release.

This would free up Irish prison space, allow for tougher sentences and reduced costs.

catallus · 13-04-2013 03:19PM

People who have a problem with this person having been free to kill the victim should take a long hard look at themselves so they can realise that the killer is a citizen of this country and is therefore in the eyes of the law their equal in every possible way.

It's easy to forget the principle of equality in cases like this. It doesn't matter if he had 8 or 85 or 850 previous convictions. He is still an equal citizen, with all of the freedom that entails.

DarkJager · 13-04-2013 03:22PM

catallus wrote: »

People who have a problem with this person having been free to kill the victim should take a long hard look at themselves so they can realise that the killer is a citizen of this country and is therefore in the eyes of the law their equal in every possible way.

It's easy to forget the principle of equality in cases like this. It doesn't matter if he had 8 or 85 or 850 previous convictions. He is still an equal citizen, with all of the freedom that entails.

That's the problem with this country, scumbags like this are not equal to the rest of us. In a perfect world, any rights up to and including the right to life would be forfeited after such crimes.

catallus · 13-04-2013 03:23PM

But he is your and my equal.

And don't you forget it.

DarkJager · 13-04-2013 03:25PM

catallus wrote: »

But he is your and my equal.

And don't you forget it.

No he's not.

catallus · 13-04-2013 03:27PM

Even if you think he's not, the people in power who make the decisions will insist that he is. It's all very well to talk about perfect worlds and forfeiting rights, but the actual real situation on the ground in the real world is that you are this man's equal.

Praetorian Saighdiuir · 13-04-2013 03:31PM

Odysseus wrote: »

I am not sure, does he really have not moral boundaries? To be more general I would know a lot of people with a significant amount of convictions. I think it would be incorrect to say they have no moral compass, and that this is proved by their previous convictions. I think that is taking an very easy way out of a difficult situation.

85 convictions and I am sure he has a long list that he was not convicted for. Maybe my mention of moral boundaries was not apt but I believe a person of his calibre has little or no regard for laws and has little or no social conditioning. I dont feel I was taking an easy way out of anything. he has 85 covictions, it's not like he brought a book to the library back late.

Odysseus wrote: »

Also just because a person commits a certain acts, that is not to say their are no personal consequences for it, that for example the subject feels no guilt over such an act. Lots of people who commmit crimes have certaion boundaries in that there are acts that they will not commit.

The subject feeling guilt or remorse after the act is a non issue. If it was a redeeming factor, surely these feelings would inhibit his possible future criminal acts....with 85 convictions and rising. He seems fine with the fact that he killed someone, so im not sure where his boundary would be.

Odysseus wrote: »

Morality is very complex area, I know plently of "petty criminals" who have come to the aid of complete strangers, so just because they committed a crime earilier that day, does not mean morality is absent.

That may be true, but im sure not for all petty criminals.

Odysseus wrote: »

Well I asked about the status of his convictions for a few reasons, one to establish how many of this where violent, which would lead to the question that if he had a significant amount of violent convictions why was he free to commit this act? There may be a valid answer to that question, but I currently don't know.

I see no distinction between violent and non violent criminal acts. I would not be leniant towards a repeat offender who has committed their first violent act.

Odysseus wrote: »

Two, if there was a total lack of violence from the previous convictions I think that should be acknowledge in his sentense.

I can be acknowledged alright...but so should the fact that this may have just been a graduated scale. He is moving up the ranks to more serious crimes, so time to stop it before it gets worse.

Odysseus wrote: »

Does that make my position any clearer?

Yes.

woodoo · 13-04-2013 03:32PM

SB2013 wrote: »

Who cares if they are minor offences? If the courts and probation services started taking notice of minor offences then maybe we wouldn't have people graduating to such major offences.
.

I agree, remember the way they began to clean up crime in New York by cracking down hard on the minor stuff. I can't help thinking that in every town and village in ireland there is some local thug with 10, 15, 20 etc convictions out robbing, assaulting and creating havoc as we speak. If there was a 5 or 10 strike and you are going to jail for 10 years policy there may be less of these guys on the streets.

dharn · 13-04-2013 04:00PM

catallus wrote: »

But he is your and my equal.

And don't you forget it.

If it was your son ,would you be so broadminded, 85 convictions?....

Odysseus · 13-04-2013 04:03PM

Praetorian Saighdiuir wrote: »

85 convictions and I am sure he has a long list that he was not convicted for. Maybe my mention of moral boundaries was not apt but I believe a person of his calibre has little or no regard for laws and has little or no social conditioning. I dont feel I was taking an easy way out of anything. he has 85 covictions, it's not like he brought a book to the library back late.

The subject feeling guilt or remorse after the act is a non issue. If it was a redeeming factor, surely these feelings would inhibit his possible future criminal acts....with 85 convictions and rising. He seems fine with the fact that he killed someone, so im not sure where his boundary would be.

That may be true, but im sure not for all petty criminals.

I see no distinction between violent and non violent criminal acts. I would not be leniant towards a repeat offender who has committed their first violent act.

I can be acknowledged alright...but so should the fact that this may have just been a graduated scale. He is moving up the ranks to more serious crimes, so time to stop it before it gets worse.

Yes.

See because it is a complex area, I can't agree with statement that just write people off because the have X amount of conviction, seeing them as scum and stating that they will never address their lifestyle.

There are plentlt of people who do, sadly not enough. However, I have seen plently of people turn their lifes around and they have better jobs etc than me.

I acknowledge that me presenting the above as applying to all, is just as messed up as writing people off.

However, I regular have people sit across from me in my office, a general history would go along the lines of something like this.

Getting involved in various anti-social activies such as petty crime,
drug and alcohol use/abuse,
leaving school before or just after junior, maybe even earlier.
As time goes by the petty crime increases in its severity.
Introduction to the justices system through JLO or similar at 14-16,
St Pats around 17,
The joy by 19,

The list could go on

But what I'm leading up to is a question I sometimes ask myself when I hear similar or worse histories. The question being, how much has the State failed this person that the end up sitting in front of me with a history like this?

By asking such a question I am not negating the significance of personal responsiblity, however, is The State not supposed to intervene in such cases?

If The State has intervene, and we still have the same situation, what is going wrong here?

My name is URL · 13-04-2013 04:07PM

woodoo wrote: »

I agree, remember the way they began to clean up crime in New York by cracking down hard on the minor stuff. I can't help thinking that in every town and village in ireland there is some local thug with 10, 15, 20 etc convictions out robbing, assaulting and creating havoc as we speak. If there was a 5 or 10 strike and you are going to jail for 10 years policy there may be less of these guys on the streets.

That'd be great and all, until the monumental costs of such a thing hits home and then people would be moaning about that instead.

85 convictions and free to kill?

Comments