Killer could avoid prison because he's deaf.

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 08:32AM #1

Guy with 60+ convictions convicted of manslaughter for punching a guy and knocking him under a bus. The judge doesn't propose to send him to prison if it can be avoided because of the lack of facilities for deaf people.

What kind of facilities could he possibly need that would stop him being sent down for killing someone ?

Cant post link to story but its on the Indo site.

Son0vagun · 05-06-2014 08:33AM

Whaaatttt?

Sunnyisland · 05-06-2014 08:36AM

I hear ya...

Sunglasses Ron · 05-06-2014 08:37AM

I misread that initially as "killer could avoid prison because he's dead"

While I think there is a bit too much wrist slapping in the court system, jailing a dead man is a bit too much even for me.

genericguy · 05-06-2014 08:42AM

He's a junkie, so either way should be incinerated not incarcerated.

kneemos · 05-06-2014 08:43AM

I believe the judge described the man falling under the bus as near an accident as the law would permit.
You should contact the judge,obviously your understanding of the law is much better.

Outrage.

danniemcq · 05-06-2014 08:43AM

Story Link

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/homeless-killer-whose-victim-was-crushed-by-bus-could-avoid-prison-30330776.html

Banjo String · 05-06-2014 08:48AM

Was he touching all the candy again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCMrWFhu2GU

rawn · 05-06-2014 08:50AM

He's in prison atm and currently can only communicate with anyone once a month for an hour when his mam visits. The man is already fragile due to years of being a drug addict. He would be beyond help after years of this. However, a disability should not spare anyone prison time if they deserve it. Surely he could be put on lockdown in a rehab facility that could accommodate for him, and be required to meet certain conditions before being released?

Del2005 · 05-06-2014 08:58AM

rawn wrote: »

He's in prison atm and currently can only communicate with anyone once a month for an hour when his mam visits. The man is already fragile due to years of being a drug addict. He would be beyond help after years of this. However, a disability should not spare anyone prison time if they deserve it. Surely he could be put on lockdown in a rehab facility that could accommodate for him, and be required to meet certain conditions before being released?

The prison service should sell all the game consoles that they bought to hire a signing interpreter, they could then teach some staff and prisoners to sign so the person can do their time. They use interpreters all the time for non English speakers, and some English speakers I need interpreters, so it's not unusual.

Gongoozler · 05-06-2014 08:58AM

He should go to prison. Out of interest, what facilities would be deaf person need?

I'd hardly call it as close to an accident as you can get, he punched a man so close to the road that he went under a bus. . And then lied about it. Yeah he likely didn't mean to kill him but it's not as if he hugged him under the bus.

KD11 · 05-06-2014 09:01AM

Wait, are you sure you weren't just watching Fargo?

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 09:04AM

rawn wrote: »

He's in prison atm and currently can only communicate with anyone once a month for an hour when his mam visits. The man is already fragile due to years of being a drug addict. He would be beyond help after years of this. However, a disability should not spare anyone prison time if they deserve it. Surely he could be put on lockdown in a rehab facility that could accommodate for him, and be required to meet certain conditions before being released?

30 years of age, 64(I think) convictions when he was charged with the killing. Serial violent criminal. Convicted killer. Suspect in another killing where he couldn't be prosecuted. He was also arrested twice for assault and robbery and attempting to mug an undercover Garda while on bail for this manslaughter charge before he was sent to prison for breach of bail. And along with this was convicted of two other incidents of threatening with syringes in muggings last year.

I'd say the guy is already beyond help. I'd have some understanding in some way but this isn't a guy who's going to do anything but continue being a violent criminal. Deaf or not he belongs in prison and whatever impact that has on him is his own fault.

kneemos · 05-06-2014 09:10AM

Gongoozler wrote: »

He should go to prison. Out of interest, what facilities would be deaf person need?

I'd hardly call it as close to an accident as you can get, he punched a man so close to the road that he went under a bus. . And then lied about it. Yenah he likely didn't mean to kill him but it's not as if he hugged him under the bus.

Judge knows law,Judge says accident=accident.

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 10:24AM

kneemos wrote: »

I believe the judge described the man falling under the bus as near an accident as the law would permit.
You should contact the judge,obviously your understanding of the law is much better.

Outrage.

kneemos wrote: »

Judge knows law,Judge says accident=accident.

You seem to be under the impression that judges are infallible and cannot be wrong. They are just people, they are not beyond scrutiny and their rulings have been known to get overturned on occasion.

This also isn't a matter of being outraged or thinking I know more than the judge. I'm simply analysing and questioning and trying to understand. Not all of us are happy to be told what's what and simply accept it.

kneemos · 05-06-2014 10:29AM

Pugsly wrote: »

You seem to be under the impression that judges are infallible and cannot be wrong. They are just people, they are not beyond scrutiny and their rulings have been known to get overturned on occasion.

This also isn't a matter of being outraged or thinking I know more than the judge. I'm simply analysing and questioning and trying to try understand. Not all of us are happy to be told what's what and simply accept it.

Unless you were in court and have legal training and experience I'll stick with the judges opinion.

paulbok · 05-06-2014 10:39AM

Gongoozler wrote: »

He should go to prison. Out of interest, what facilities would be deaf person need?

I'd hardly call it as close to an accident as you can get, he punched a man so close to the road that he went under a bus. . And then lied about it. Yeah he likely didn't mean to kill him but it's not as if he hugged him under the bus.

Pen and paper?

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 10:41AM

kneemos wrote: »

Unless you were in court and have legal training and experience I'll stick with the judges opinion.

If you're happy to limit your understanding of the situation to "judge is right because he's a judge" and dismiss whatever anyone else has to say on the grounds they weren't in court so their opinion doesn't matter then that's fine work away.

Doesn't really mean much though considering you're basically making your own statement meaningless given you weren't there either.

hatrickpatrick · 05-06-2014 10:47AM

The bit that really pisses me off:

He said the incident was as close to an accident as can be by law.
Referring to Connors' background he said: "It's hard to conceive someone who has come from tougher circumstances."

How in hell was this close to an accident? The guy was going around threatening people with a syringe to begin with, he's clearly an absolute scumbag with no respect for other human beings at all. If you start a scrap unprovoked, then whatever results from it is ultimately your own responsibility. And secondly, coming from tougher circumstances does not force anyone to become a violent scumbag - plenty of people come from tough circumstances, hell plenty of people are heroin addicts and don't go around threatening people and acting aggro in public.

F*ck our judiciary. Seriously. It's gone beyond a joke how easy it is to get away with crime in this country. :mad:

humanji · 05-06-2014 10:55AM

The reason the judge is hesitant to send him to prison is because while he was there, as there were no facilities for the deaf, he spent most of his time locked in his cell unable to communicate with anyone. The judge isn't saying he shouldn't be punished at all. He's saying that treating a prisoner like a dog in a kennel would mean we're no less scumbags. And as such, if an option that would benefit everyone is available, it should be taken. The state has a duty of care for it's prisoners. While some here think there's no hope for the guy and he should never see the light of day again, that's not the stance a responsible state should take.

hatrickpatrick · 05-06-2014 10:59AM

humanji wrote: »

The reason the judge is hesitant to send him to prison is because while he was there, as there were no facilities for the deaf, he spent most of his time locked in his cell unable to communicate with anyone. The judge isn't saying he shouldn't be punished at all. He's saying that treating a prisoner like a dog in a kennel would mean we're no less scumbags. And as such, if an option that would benefit everyone is available, it should be taken. The state has a duty of care for it's prisoners. While some here think there's no hope for the guy and he should never see the light of day again, that's not the stance a responsible state should take.

A family has lost their son for absolutely no good reason, and this man for all intents and purposes killed him in cold blood also for absolutely no good reason. If he gets off with some ridiculously light punishment of the sort that one might get for breaking a window or pissing in public, the state has failed in its duty to the dead man's family, to allow them to see justice done for the crimes which have destroyed so much that they cared for.

humanji · 05-06-2014 11:00AM

If the state locks him in a small room with no way of communicating with anyone else in the prison, so the majority of the day, the state has failed everyone.

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 11:05AM

humanji wrote: »

The reason the judge is hesitant to send him to prison is because while he was there, as there were no facilities for the deaf, he spent most of his time locked in his cell unable to communicate with anyone. The judge isn't saying he shouldn't be punished at all. He's saying that treating a prisoner like a dog in a kennel would mean we're no less scumbags. And as such, if an option that would benefit everyone is available, it should be taken. The state has a duty of care for it's prisoners. While some here think there's no hope for the guy and he should never see the light of day again, that's not the stance a responsible state should take.

I accept that it cant be pleasant for him being deaf in prison but I'd dispute that it would be "treating him like a dog in a kennel". He's a violent criminal with a long history of convictions and he's just been convicted of manslaughter. He shouldn't be excused from a custodial sentence simply because prison is not going to be easy for him. Its not pleasant for anyone and they all have to deal with it based on their own particular circumstances.

I'd also disagree with your statement that locking this guy up for the rest of his life is not a stance a responsible state should take. It may not be a stance this state can take but a state also has a responsibility to its law abiding citizens that they not be subjected to the likes of this guys persistence violent offences.

ArmaniJeanss · 05-06-2014 11:06AM

I'm guessing that
a) the judge has seen the cctv recording of the incident multiple times as it was part of the evidence of the court case
b) no-one on After Hours has seen the cctv recording of the incident.

So who is best placed to decide how highly it ranks on the accident...murder scale?
AH it seems.

nelly17 · 05-06-2014 11:09AM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I'm guessing that
a) the judge has seen the cctv recording of the incident multiple times as it was part of the evidence of the court case
b) no-one on After Hours has seen the cctv recording of the incident.

So who is best placed to decide how highly it ranks on the accident...murder scale?
AH it seems.

Nothin new there

kneemos · 05-06-2014 11:13AM

Pugsly wrote: »

I accept that it cant be pleasant for him being deaf in prison but I'd dispute that it would be "treating him like a dog in a kennel". He's a violent criminal with a long history of convictions and he's just been convicted of manslaughter. He shouldn't be excused from a custodial sentence simply because prison is not going to be easy for him. Its not pleasant for anyone and they all have to deal with it based on their own particular circumstances.

I'd also disagree with your statement that locking this guy up for the rest of his life is not a stance a responsible state should take. It may not be a stance this state can take but a state also has a responsibility to its law abiding citizens that they not be subjected to the likes of this guys persistence violent offences.

He wasn't on trial for his long history of convictions,he's already been tried for those.
He was on trial for something the judge deemed to be very close to an accident and didn't want him locked up for twenty three hours a day.

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 11:17AM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I'm guessing that
a) the judge has seen the cctv recording of the incident multiple times as it was part of the evidence of the court case
b) no-one on After Hours has seen the cctv recording of the incident.

So who is best placed to decide how highly it ranks on the accident...murder scale?
AH it seems.

By AH you mean one poster who said:

"I'd hardly call it as close to an accident as you can get, he punched a man so close to the road that he went under a bus. . And then lied about it. Yeah he likely didn't mean to kill him but it's not as if he hugged him under the bus."

?

That's hardly "AH thinking its in a better position than the judge to decide how highly it ranks" now is it ?

The fact that the judge is seeking an alternative to a custodial sentence because the guy is deaf and prison lacks the facilities means that the crime however serious it was was judged to be worthy of a custodial sentence. So you don't really have to be a judge to discuss it.

humanji · 05-06-2014 11:18AM

Pugsly wrote: »

I accept that it cant be pleasant for him being deaf in prison but I'd dispute that it would be "treating him like a dog in a kennel". He's a violent criminal with a long history of convictions and he's just been convicted of manslaughter. He shouldn't be excused from a custodial sentence simply because prison is not going to be easy for him. Its not pleasant for anyone and they all have to deal with it based on their own particular circumstances.

It's different when you can't read, write, hear or talk and the only proper interactions with others that he can have, come every three or four months. The judge has said that a prison sentence will have a detrimental to his mental state, which will make him more of a danger to society, not less. The judge is trying to find out if there's some way of making the guy less of a problem and less of a burden on the rest of us. It's the correct decision to make. If no alternative is found, the guy will be sent to prison. There really is nothing to be so upset about.

Pugsly wrote: »

I'd also disagree with your statement that locking this guy up for the rest of his life is not a stance a responsible state should take. It may not be a stance this state can take but a state also has a responsibility to its law abiding citizens that they not be subjected to the likes of this guys persistence violent offences.

That's neither justice nor punishment. It's hiding a problem away instead of dealing with it. And remember it's everyone else who pays to keep people in prison.

Guy:Incognito · 05-06-2014 11:20AM

humanji wrote: »

If the state locks him in a small room with no way of communicating with anyone else in the prison, so the majority of the day, the state has failed everyone.

Have they not also failed the next person he assaults and/or robs? Because going on form it is going to happen shortly after he's on the streets.

Who deserves more protection?

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 11:22AM

kneemos wrote: »

He wasn't on trial for his long history of convictions,he's already been tried for those.
He was on trial for something the judge deemed to be very close to an accident and didn't want him locked up for twenty three hours a day.

He doesn't have to be on trial for it, it just has to be taken into account when figuring out what to do with him. He cant justifiably be sent to anger management classes once a week when there is a high risk he'll re-offend given his record.

Awkward Badger · 05-06-2014 11:32AM

humanji wrote: »

It's different when you can't read, write, hear or talk and the only proper interactions with others that he can have, come every three or four months. The judge has said that a prison sentence will have a detrimental to his mental state, which will make him more of a danger to society, not less. The judge is trying to find out if there's some way of making the guy less of a problem and less of a burden on the rest of us. It's the correct decision to make. If no alternative is found, the guy will be sent to prison. There really is nothing to be so upset about.

I'm not upset about this I'm just discussing it, don't be so dismissive. I understand that the judge is trying to find the best way out of this I never said otherwise nor do I believe otherwise. However it seems to me like he's taking a lot into consideration in order to mitigate this guys crime. And I'd be very worried given the lax sentencing in the Irish judicial system that the alternative found will not match the degree of the crime. And I also think that the reasons for avoiding a custodial sentence are not entirely valid. For example prison being detrimental to his mental state shouldn't be a realistic concern. Its detriment to the mental state of anyone who would be imprisoned. This is the consequences for committing such crimes.

That's neither justice nor punishment. It's hiding a problem away instead of dealing with it. And remember it's everyone else who pays to keep people in prison.

Its both depending on your particular view. And mine is that serial violent criminals being permanently locked up is both and is currently the best way to deal with the problem of violent serial offended in society. Because on all current evidence repeated short custodial sentencing and suspending sentences are not working. The fact that so many people have so many convictions is proof of that. For some individuals its simply letting them out time and again to continue having a negative impact on society. Are you telling me that is the actions of a responsible state ?

Killer could avoid prison because he's deaf.

Comments