Insensitive comments by judge

Gyalist · 18-02-2014 12:19PM #1

A man who raped a woman he had asked to clean his house has been sentenced to 7½ years, after a judge said he couldn’t “buy himself out” of a custodial sentence.

Thomas Egan (47), Cahermurphy, Kilmihill, Co Clare, paid over €10,000 in court to be forwarded to his victim, who has since returned to Brazil.

Mr Justice Barry White also said that on reading the victim impact report, he did not believe the rape had “a profound psychological effect” on her.

“It strikes me that your victim is more interested in compensation rather than anything else,” he said.

He sentenced Egan to 7½ years in prison with the final 3½ years suspended. He directed that €50 given by Egan to the woman at the time of the offence be sent to the St Vincent de Paul. He noted that Egan had a previous “unblemished record” apart from a minor road traffic offence.

LINK

What an outrageous comment by the judge! It is as if he believes that the victim somehow tricked the defendant into raping her.

Newaglish · 18-02-2014 12:39PM

Gyalist wrote: »

LINK

What an outrageous comment by the judge! It is as if he believes that the victim somehow tricked the defendant into raping her.

I don't understand how you get from your first comment to your second comment.

Senna · 18-02-2014 12:41PM

It strikes me that your victim is more interested in compensation rather than anything else

This is the comment that should be in bold.

FTA69 · 18-02-2014 12:42PM

Un-f*cking-believable. Rape is rape like, and by the sounds of it the judge nearly felt sorry about sentencing a convicted sex-offender as he "hadn't used gratuitous violence" (as if all rape was accompanied by battery). The comments about the victim beggar belief, almost as if she was some sort of foreign siren after this poor man's money. This bastard now will be lucky to serve 18 months for a crime of this nature.

There seems to be a systemically sh*t attitude to women where things like this are concerned.

seamus · 18-02-2014 12:42PM

Newaglish wrote: »

I don't understand how you get from your first comment to your second comment.

This.

It would be moronic of anyone to comment on what the judge said unless they heard or read the victim impact statement themselves.

Tzardine · 18-02-2014 12:43PM

Maybe he is right. Maybe it did not have a profound psychological affect on her.

He has after all got the victim impact statement and has listened to all the evidence.

I am not for one second saying that rape does not have a psychological affect on people, but it is possible that for some they can deal with it.

vitani · 18-02-2014 12:46PM

I can only hope that the full phrase was 'thankfully, the rape did not have a profound psychological effect' on the victim.

Tombo2001 · 18-02-2014 12:49PM

Look.....the issue here is not that Judge would be out of touch on the issue of sexual crimes......because we know that already.

The issue here is that there is no accountability.

The reason he is saying what he is saying is that the last Judge who said / did something similarly ignorant and stupid was not held accountable for it.

Tombo2001 · 18-02-2014 12:50PM

Tzardine wrote: »

Maybe he is right. Maybe it did not have a profound psychological affect on her.

He has after all got the victim impact statement and has listened to all the evidence.

I am not for one second saying that rape does not have a psychological affect on people, but it is possible that for some they can deal with it.

I'm sure she is delighted that the Judge is sitting there saying.....'look at her, she's grand'

Tombo2001 · 18-02-2014 12:55PM

FTA69 wrote: »

The comments about the victim beggar belief, almost as if she was some sort of foreign siren after this poor man's money. .

I agree completely.

If this was a local Doctor's daughter would he be speaking this way about her.

But if its some Latvian or Lithuanian.....

DeanAustin · 18-02-2014 12:58PM

seamus wrote: »

This.

It would be moronic of anyone to comment on what the judge said unless they heard or read the victim impact statement themselves.

Exactly. A lot of knee jerk PC nonsense on this thread.

What the judge said may have been insensitive and hurtful. Or it may have been pretty accurate. None of us know because we don't have all the facts in front of us.

gramar · 18-02-2014 01:02PM

He directed that €50 given by Egan to the woman at the time of the offence be sent to the St Vincent de Paul.

Egan gave her 50€ at the time of the offence and now she has to send it to the SvdeP? That doesn't make any sense.

FTA69 · 18-02-2014 01:10PM

seamus wrote: »

This.

It would be moronic of anyone to comment on what the judge said unless they heard or read the victim impact statement themselves.

Anyone who says rape doesn't have a psychological impact on a victim has a deeply sh*t view of the subject.

ArmaniJeanss · 18-02-2014 01:15PM

gramar wrote: »

He directed that €50 given by Egan to the woman at the time of the offence be sent to the St Vincent de Paul.

Egan gave her 50€ at the time of the offence and now she has to send it to the SvdeP? That doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps she doesn't want anything to with that specific €50 note because it is from the day of the rape?

*******

In general the Irish Times appear to have done a terrible job here with their selective quotes from the judges sentencing speech. It appears to be just random phrases taken from it, with absolutely no context given or whether they relate to something the judge had referred previously.

You'd really need to see the entire sentencing speech to get an idea whether the judge is actually being insensitive or not.

Tombo2001 · 18-02-2014 01:17PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Perhaps she doesn't want anything to with that specific €50 note because it is from the day of the rape?

*******

In general the Irish Times appear to have done a terrible job here with their selective quotes from the judges sentencing speech. It appears to be just random phrases taken from it, with absolutely no context given or whether they relate to something the judge had referred previously.

You'd really need to see the entire sentencing speech to get an idea whether the judge is actually being insensitive or not.

Why do you need context for his statement that she hasnt suffered deep psychological distress?

What sort of context makes that remark acceptable?

Please tell me? i'd like to know.......

Tzardine · 18-02-2014 01:19PM

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone who says rape doesn't have a psychological impact on a victim has a deeply sh*t view of the subject.

But you cant say how it affects everybody.

Look at people who were fighting in wars such as Vietnam. They all saw some truly horrific stuff , but not all of them got PTSD. Some people have a capability to deal with the worst of situations.

DeanAustin · 18-02-2014 01:20PM

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone who says rape doesn't have a psychological impact on a victim has a deeply sh*t view of the subject.

Except that's not what the judge said.

He said it didn't seem to have a 'profound psychological impact'.

If you accept for a second that there is a possibility, however remote, that a woman could be raped, not be profoundly affected by it and use it to get compensation then the judge's comments could be fair. I think it's unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility so I find it hard to damn the judge without more information or context.

jane82 · 18-02-2014 01:23PM

I find it strange that she never said no, never put up a fight, yer man never raised his voice or used violence.
The victim was too afraid to.
Im sure there is something missing in the story.

WellThen? · 18-02-2014 01:25PM

What the hell is wrong with some of you...whether she's distraught for the duration of the rape or for months/years afterwards the woman was bloody raped. And oh she's looking for compensation...too fu*king right.

That judge is an out of touch ,uneducated waste of our tax money.

I am 100% against women using this as a tool, crying rape..makes me sick. But this guy has confessed.

FTA69 · 18-02-2014 01:26PM

DeanAustin wrote: »

Except that's not what the judge said.

He said it didn't seem to have a 'profound psychological impact'.

If you accept for a second that there is a possibility, however remote, that a woman could be raped, not be profoundly affected by it and use it to get compensation then the judge's comments could be fair. I think it's unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility so I find it hard to damn the judge without more information or context.

Sorry, I don't accept that rape won't have a profound psychological impact. It's one of the worst things you can do to a person which is why in normal society's eyes, it's one of the most serious crimes.

ArmaniJeanss · 18-02-2014 01:27PM

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Why do you need context for his statement that she hasnt suffered deep psychological distress?

What sort of context makes that remark acceptable?

Perhaps he spoke in relative depth re the physical,psychological and social effects of what happened, pointed out that they are never zero but that in this case that the psychological effects seem to be at the lower end of the scale. For example, perhaps she hasn't let the event stop her socialising, working, commuting, holidaying and that she is getting on with life compared to other victims who are unable to do these things because of the effect it has. Therefore to use his phrase 'not profound'.

I wasn't there so I don't know, and the summation in the paper doesn't help.

wilser · 18-02-2014 01:31PM

WellThen? wrote: »

I am 100% against women using this as a tool, crying rape..makes me sick. But this guy has confessed.

could you please direct me to where in the op link he confessed, he said they had consensual sex, cant find it myself.

mitosis · 18-02-2014 01:32PM

WellThen? wrote: »

What the hell is wrong with some of you...whether she's distraught for the duration of the rape or for months/years afterwards the woman was bloody raped. And oh she's looking for compensation...too fu*king right.

That judge is an out of touch ,uneducated waste of our tax money.

I am 100% against women using this as a tool, crying rape..makes me sick. But this guy has confessed.

The article would not support your assertion.

Det Garda Colette Acton told the court that during Garda interviews, Egan maintained there had been consensual sex.

Collie D · 18-02-2014 01:33PM

WellThen? wrote: »

What the hell is wrong with some of you...whether she's distraught for the duration of the rape or for months/years afterwards the woman was bloody raped. And oh she's looking for compensation...too fu*king right.

That judge is an out of touch ,uneducated waste of our tax money.

I am 100% against women using this as a tool, crying rape..makes me sick. But this guy has confessed.

Det Garda Colette Acton told the court that during Garda interviews, Egan maintained there had been consensual sex.

Don't think he confessed. Does seem to be something off about this case but as I don't know all of the evidence or circumstances I have no option but to accept the jury's verdict.

DeanAustin · 18-02-2014 01:35PM

FTA69 wrote: »

Sorry, I don't accept that rape won't have a profound psychological impact. It's one of the worst things you can do to a person which is why in normal society's eyes, it's one of the most serious crimes.

I agree with your general point but people deal with things differently. Without knowing the detail of this case, I think it's harsh to damn the judge on the basis of that report.

Filling in the blanks, it seems like yer man came to an agreement with his victim on compensation that would have meant him not doing any time and she was happy with that. The judge wasn't having it and ensured he got locked up. That's me guessing but that report raises more questions than it gives answers.

Tombo2001 · 18-02-2014 01:39PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Perhaps he spoke in relative depth re the physical,psychological and social effects of what happened, pointed out that they are never zero but that in this case that the psychological effects seem to be at the lower end of the scale. For example, perhaps she hasn't let the event stop her socialising, working, commuting, holidaying and that she is getting on with life compared to other victims who are unable to do these things because of the effect it has. Therefore to use his phrase 'not profound'.

I wasn't there so I don't know, and the summation in the paper doesn't help.

turn it on its head.

is there a possibility that, if this woman was raped, as the judge is saying she has been.....that she has sufferred deep pyschological distress?

Yes, undoubtedly there is.

Even if she 'doesnt appear to', is it still possible that she has sufferred deep pyschological distress.

Without doubt yes.

In that scenario, do you come out publicly and announce to the public in a courtroom that she 'doesnt appear to have sufferred deep psychological distress'.....no absolutely you do not say that. Because if she has sufferred deep psychological distress, then that is just an almighty kick in the gut.

WellThen? · 18-02-2014 01:43PM

wilser wrote: »

could you please direct me to where in the op link he confessed, he said they had consensual sex, cant find it myself.

Well I obviously read that article wrong! See what happens when you skim down a story and comment....

Apologies....i'll just get back to work

ArmaniJeanss · 18-02-2014 01:45PM

Tombo2001 wrote: »

turn it on its head.

is there a possibility that, if this woman was raped, as the judge is saying she has been.....that she has sufferred deep pyschological distress?

Yes, undoubtedly there is.

Even if she 'doesnt appear to', is it still possible that she has sufferred deep pyschological distress.

Without doubt yes.

In that scenario, do you come out publicly and announce to the public in a courtroom that she 'doesnt appear to have sufferred deep psychological distress'.....no absolutely you do not say that. Because if she has sufferred deep psychological distress, then that is just an almighty kick in the gut.

I don't disagree with your general point.

But as I understand the judge gets handed various reports to read, victim impact report, victim impact statements etc where an attempt is actually made to quantify these things, and as part of the standard sentencing speech he makes reference to them and the conclusions they've come to.

So what I think you are saying is because these reports/conclusions may be incorrect that he shouldn't actually refer to them at all. Which is fine I suppose, but would be a fairly major upheaval of the way things are done.

Dravokivich · 18-02-2014 01:47PM

Tombo2001 wrote: »

turn it on its head.

is there a possibility that, if this woman was raped, as the judge is saying she has been.....that she has sufferred deep pyschological distress?

Yes, undoubtedly there is.

Even if she 'doesnt appear to', is it still possible that she has sufferred deep pyschological distress.

Without doubt yes.

In that scenario, do you come out publicly and announce to the public in a courtroom that she 'doesnt appear to have sufferred deep psychological distress'.....no absolutely you do not say that. Because if she has sufferred deep psychological distress, then that is just an almighty kick in the gut.

The comment isn't about rape in itself, it's about how the victim has represented herself. His comment is solely in reference to her. She doesn't appear to see herself as a victim, from the line following what that was bolded:

“It strikes me that your victim is more interested in compensation rather than anything else,” he said.

Gyalist · 18-02-2014 01:49PM

jane82 wrote: »

I find it strange that she never said no, never put up a fight, yer man never raised his voice or used violence.
The victim was too afraid to.
Im sure there is something missing in the story.

Yes, it wasn't a legitimate rape.

SEPT 23 1989 · 18-02-2014 01:54PM

What is it about the judiciary and sex crimes in this country?

Insensitive comments by judge

Comments