WTF??? That is NOT punishment!!!!!!

Donkey Oaty · 22-12-2013 02:15AM

jhegarty wrote: »

It's because it was 30 years since it happened. All physical evidence is long since gone.

Are you saying that he could have easily got off the charge?

Donkey Oaty · 22-12-2013 02:17AM

HighClass wrote: »

I'd be more inclined to think rationally about it like that if the judge wasn't already known for giving sex offenders very lenient sentences.

The difficulty is that these cases are often very complex...does he really have that reputation?

HighClass · 22-12-2013 02:20AM

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

The difficulty is that these cases are often very complex...does he really have that reputation?

I don't know a whole lot about him or his past cases, but anytime I've seen his name brought up on here or elsewhere online it's been down to him letting sex offenders off very lightly.

Bepolite · 22-12-2013 02:26AM

Spring Onion wrote: »

I agree with the 10 years but the 7 years suspended is a disgrace.

See below.

timthumbni wrote: »

As a parent I wouldn't even think that 10 years served is sufficient tbh. This is a 4 yr old we are talking about. Jaysus that is terrible.

The way sentences are calculated is to give the appropriate sentence then reduce it for factors such as co-operation and mitigation. Frankly a stiffer sentence with a similar suspension would probably have been better in my view (say 15 years 7 suspended) but I'm not privy to all the facts.

michael999999 wrote: »

Carney needs to face a court and explain some of the sentences he has been handing down, ****ing three years for raping a kid. Hell be out in 2.

allym wrote: »

How Paul Carney is still a judge is beyond me. It's seems like 9/10 times if there's a ridiculously low sentence given or lots of years suspended, particularly in cases of sexual crimes, it's him behind it.

If he's giving out unduly lenient sentences then the DPP will appeal them and he would face measures. To suggest 9/10 of his sentences are too light is frankly ridiculous. Have you conducted a study of his sentences are do you just jump on the bandwagon of the ones that are reported on?

nc19 wrote: »

Its about time we had universal sentences

75 years for rape or killing of a child (child being 0-12)

50 years for rape or killing of an adult

40 years for dealing any amont of class A

Big time may make people think twice

Manslaughter and statutory rape would be looked at individually

I dont claim it to be a prefect system but when gilligan gets 17 yrs and rapists get 6 something needs to be done

Knock on effects would be similar to the issues with mandatory drug sentencing. It doesn't work and doesn't act as a deterrent. Lets say someone raped your kid and you found the c**t and killed them. 50 years fair for that crime? I don't think so.

HighClass wrote: »

I'd be more inclined to think rationally about it like that if the judge wasn't already known for giving sex offenders very lenient sentences.

He does a huge amount of sentencing. He gets some wrong, he gets the majority right. The ones that are wrong get appealed. He's only known because he's high profile, not because his sentences are particularly lenient most of the time.

People compare the Irish system to the US and see 'light' sentences. The US system is simply bonkers, our system might be slightly off kelter as we simply can;t afford to keep people locked up but do we really want the US system with all the issues that it brings with it? The US system is completely failing yet we seem to want to import it? Why?

Bepolite · 22-12-2013 02:29AM

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Are you saying that he could have easily got off the charge?

Very easily - the case from what I've read was almost completely based on his admissions to the accusation. The Irish system, in my view, has a bias for believing the accusers, however there is usually some additional evidence required.

JJayoo · 22-12-2013 02:34AM

It amazes me how the media are so terrified of investigating Carney. His face and record should be plastered across every single paper and media outlet.

Bepolite · 22-12-2013 02:38AM

JJayoo wrote: »

It amazes me how the media are so terrified of investigating Carney. His face and record should be plastered across every single paper and media outlet.

They're terrified the truth will come out. If it does his name will stop selling papers as people will realise it's a tiny proportion of his cases that attract attention, and it wouldn't matter if Mother Teresa was resurrected from the dead and appointed to the bench, the sentence would probably have been similar given the facts.

If you're so concerned, investigate! All the info is in the public domain. A new career beckons!

Holsten · 22-12-2013 02:46AM

nc19 wrote: »

Its about time we had universal sentences

75 years for rape or killing of a child (child being 0-12)

50 years for rape or killing of an adult

Thank god people like you are never in charge.

Laws like this mean a hell of a lot of dead people.

If people are not happy with the sentences handed down then get onto your local TD, or write to the minister for justice.

Moaning on here won't do anything about it. These judges know 100% more about the case than anything you'll read in a newspaper, they get it right more often than not.

Donkey Oaty · 22-12-2013 02:47AM

Bepolite wrote: »

it's a tiny proportion of his cases that attract attention

Very true.

Son Of A Vidic · 22-12-2013 06:00AM

Bepolite wrote: »

it's a tiny proportion of his cases that attract attention

But none of his sentencing should be attracting attention. He is overpaid to do a job and do it competently. Yet some of his judgements continue to cause shock, outrage and insult the victims of crime and their families. He has demonstrated a disturbing tendency to give very favorable 'sentencing', to some of the lowest and twisted dregs of our society. The Court of Criminal Appeal has on numerous occasions, had to overturned some of his very lenient sentencing. As a man once said “The problem with incompetence is its inability to recognize itself.” And that for me sums up Carney in a nutshell. Time someone sent him on a very long sabbatical .

Dotsie~tmp · 22-12-2013 06:12AM

Look, if they lock these degenerates up they'll get no return custom. They got kids to put through expensive schools you know.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 22-12-2013 06:33AM

The facts of the case are that he himself was between childhood and adulthood at the time 16-19, had no criminal record and admitted his guilt. This is why got a light sentence.

Mitigating factors are what the Irish justice system looks for. Obviously we're not privy to the finer details of the case but I like many here feel that this sentence is lenient considering this was a 7 to 9 year old girl. She must be scarred from the abuse she suffered at the time.

Brian? · 22-12-2013 06:59AM

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

But none of his sentencing should be attracting attention. He is overpaid to do a job and do it competently. Yet some of his judgements continue to cause shock, outrage and insult the victims of crime and their families. He has demonstrated a disturbing tendency to give very favorable 'sentencing', to some of the lowest and twisted dregs of our society. The Court of Criminal Appeal has on numerous occasions, had to overturned some of his very lenient sentencing. As a man once said “The problem with incompetence is its inability to recognize itself.” And that for me sums up Carney in a nutshell. Time someone sent him on a very long sabbatical .

I'd be interested to know the proportion of the sentences he hands down that are "favourable".

I'm guessing it's very small, tiny in fact. You hear of him so often because he's such a well regarded judge he tends to get the highest profile cases.

I had the unique "pleasure" of sharing a court room with him for a couple of weeks in 2005, I was on the jury of a murder trial, his clarity of explanation when it came to the technicalities of the legal system were excellent.

Bepolite · 22-12-2013 11:32AM

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

But none of his sentencing should be attracting attention. He is overpaid to do a job and do it competently. Yet some of his judgements continue to cause shock, outrage and insult the victims of crime and their families. He has demonstrated a disturbing tendency to give very favorable 'sentencing', to some of the lowest and twisted dregs of our society. The Court of Criminal Appeal has on numerous occasions, had to overturned some of his very lenient sentencing. As a man once said “The problem with incompetence is its inability to recognize itself.” And that for me sums up Carney in a nutshell. Time someone sent him on a very long sabbatical .

So you belive that all sentancing should reflect the opinion of the masses? Masses who are not in posession of all the facts.

Sunnyisland · 22-12-2013 11:42AM

Bepolite wrote: »

So you belive that all sentancing should reflect the opinion of the masses? Masses who are not in posession of all the facts.

A man has been sentenced to ten years with the final seven years suspended for raping his then four-year-old neighbour and sexually abusing both her brother and their neighbour in a Cavan town 30 years ago.
The now 46-year-old man, who cannot be named to protect the identity of his three victims, pleaded guilty at the Central Criminal Court to two counts of raping the girl when she was aged between four and six years old and two charges of indecently assaulting her over the same period between July 1983 and July 1985.
He also admitted indecently assaulting her brother on a date in July 1983, while he was aged between seven and nine years old and indecently assaulting their female neighbour, while she was aged between six and seven years old on a date between January 1986 and June 1986.
The court heard that the man was aged between 16 and 19 years old himself at the time.

He deserves more than three years in prison for the above,IMO.

allym · 22-12-2013 12:58PM

Bepolite wrote: »

See below.

If he's giving out unduly lenient sentences then the DPP will appeal them and he would face measures. To suggest 9/10 of his sentences are too light is frankly ridiculous. Have you conducted a study of his sentences are do you just jump on the bandwagon of the ones that are reported on

If you'd like to read that again I didn't actually say that 9/10 of his sentences were too low. I said that when cases like this receive really low sentences it seems like he is the Judge in the case 9/10 times. Quite different.

Bepolite · 25-12-2013 12:21PM

allym wrote: »

If you'd like to read that again I didn't actually say that 9/10 of his sentences were too low. I said that when cases like this receive really low sentences it seems like he is the Judge in the case 9/10 times. Quite different.

And equally illinformed as he's a judge that does a lot of sentancing, he's not the trial judge in many cases.

Bepolite · 25-12-2013 12:24PM

realies wrote: »

A man has been sentenced to ten years with the final seven years suspended for raping his then four-year-old neighbour and sexually abusing both her brother and their neighbour in a Cavan town 30 years ago.
The now 46-year-old man, who cannot be named to protect the identity of his three victims, pleaded guilty at the Central Criminal Court to two counts of raping the girl when she was aged between four and six years old and two charges of indecently assaulting her over the same period between July 1983 and July 1985.
He also admitted indecently assaulting her brother on a date in July 1983, while he was aged between seven and nine years old and indecently assaulting their female neighbour, while she was aged between six and seven years old on a date between January 1986 and June 1986.
The court heard that the man was aged between 16 and 19 years old himself at the time.

He deserves more than three years in prison for the above,IMO.

That's certainly your right. I'd prefer people on the bench who have done atleast 12 years as a lawyer and then done several years in a lower court but if you prefer some kind of magistrate system or phone in vote fair enough.

GalwayGuy2 · 25-12-2013 03:34PM

EDIT: Completely misread the opening!

My first reaction is to throw the book at him, but I'd rather he was monitored than acquitted.

up for anything · 25-12-2013 04:42PM

My name is URL wrote: »

A former soldier was given a five-year suspended prison sentence by a judge at the Central Criminal Court today after a jury found him guilty of the manslaughter of the 18-month-old son of his first cousin.

Mr Justice Paul Carney said that a relatively small quantity of poteen had "a unique, inexplicable and extraordinary effect'' on John Reilly and "he had no control over his body or his actions'' and was functioning like an epileptic or diabetic in a bad state of a hypo or hyper.

The judge said that the case had been "unique in the criminal law of this country".

He said he was satisfied that a prison sentence would serve no purpose and he sentenced Reilly to five-years imprisonment suspended on Reilly's own bond of €1,000, on condition that he keep the peace for five years and that he does not carry a Leatherman (a multi tool knife used in the killing ) of any other similar device.

You'd wonder why "he had no control over his body or his actions'' and was functioning like an epileptic or diabetic in a bad state of a hypo or hyper that he didn't mow all the lawns in the neighbour, treat all the kids to a MacDonalds, paint a pensioner's house from top to bottom and pay for the paint himself!!! Why is it always bad deeds that people do when they lose control - why doesn't anyone over the good deeds?

Frank Lee Midere · 25-12-2013 04:51PM

Bepolite wrote: »

That's certainly your right. I'd prefer people on the bench who have done atleast 12 years as a lawyer and then done several years in a lower court but if you prefer some kind of magistrate system or phone in vote fair enough.

I think we'd prefer more competent judges at all levels.

Guy:Incognito · 25-12-2013 05:00PM

So we're all agreed that Carney is fair and honest with his sentences. With that in mind , would the sentence be the same if the 4 year old in question was Carney own child?

NTMK · 25-12-2013 06:12PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

... or he just takes other things into account you guys don't know about?

Prosecution has the ability to appeal lenient sentences - ever think about why they don't? Are are they pedo-sympathisers too?

what other things are there to consider in this case?

steddyeddy · 25-12-2013 06:14PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

... or he just takes other things into account you guys don't know about?

Prosecution has the ability to appeal lenient sentences - ever think about why they don't? Are are they pedo-sympathisers too?

Hey raped a four year old.....

Brian? · 25-12-2013 06:16PM

NTMK wrote: »

what other things are there to consider in this case?

As clearly stated earlier; guilty plea, age at time of offenses, low likelihood of conviction if it went to trial.

Wabbit Ears · 25-12-2013 06:16PM

Carney, Oh, How shocking that pedo sympathizer lets another one off basically scott free... That dude has serious moral compass issues.

NTMK · 25-12-2013 06:20PM

Brian? wrote: »

As clearly stated earlier; guilty plea, age at time of offenses, low likelihood of conviction if it went to trial.

WTF does this have to do with the case theres Doing dumb **** as a 16 year old and then theres raping a 4 year old

The guilty plea should be the only thing stopping him from serving life

ardle1 · 25-12-2013 06:26PM

The judge obviously didn't find this person to be as sick and twisted as he obviously is...... Very worrying very worrying indeed :mad:

steddyeddy · 25-12-2013 06:41PM

Brian? wrote: »

As clearly stated earlier; guilty plea, age at time of offenses, low likelihood of conviction if it went to trial.

Yeap all BS in to context of raping a four year old. Carney also has a dubious track record when it comes to people like this.

daRobot · 25-12-2013 06:57PM

My name is URL wrote: »

Paul Carney strikes again... how is he still a judge?

You would seriously have to question, just why exactly a judge is handing down sympathetic sentences to sex offenders of this nature?

It certainly makes me suspicious of just what they might be up to in their own lives.

WTF??? That is NOT punishment!!!!!!

Comments