Student set alight in a nightclub, guy who did it gets 5-year sentence

RayM · 09-07-2015 03:00AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Christ what ? What does one expect to happen when one lights a person on fire ? What is ones intention ? Unless one suffers from a severe mental impairment one can imagine the outcome.

Ah now... is there anyone here who can, hand on heart, say that they've never tried to immolate another human being while drunk and having 'the craic'?

Allyall · 09-07-2015 03:02AM

RayM wrote: »

Alcohol-related antisocial behaviour is a big enough problem in this country to justify making an example of perpetrators.

I won't get into "anti-social behaviour"..

But, somebody said earlier in this thread, that alcohol cannot be an excuse. Surely then, it can't be a reason to find them guilty?

shampoosuicide · 09-07-2015 03:15AM

i wonder would it be fair to say that After Hours leans towards the right wing on issues of crime and punishment.

Allyall · 09-07-2015 03:26AM

I personally, think he should be locked up, no excuses and serve proper time.
But I think that also because he ran away, tried to deny it and would have continued using political tactics - only for the fact that somebody told him to take responsibility.

Had he acted honestly, and had the raw guts to admit he was a F*****g moron, done everything within reason to apologise I think then, maybe, 5 years might be enough.

As it is I think he deserves 10 at least.
Mainly because even after this idiot sobered up, he thought his best defence was to continue acting like an idiot.

Electric Sheep · 09-07-2015 03:27AM

RayM wrote: »

Ah now... is there anyone here who can, hand on heart, say that they've never tried to immolate another human being while drunk and having 'the craic'?

Are you such a dry sh!te that you don't understand having the craic? It's especially important that you use the made up fake Irish spelling, it absolved the craic-haver from ever facing repercussions.

Irishguy16 · 09-07-2015 03:44AM

What an absolute idiot, no excuses, drunk or sober, there are no words to describe his actions. 5 years is nothing, not when you have severely damaged someone's life. I remember a few years ago, a guy we knew threw a firework at another guy, missing him by a matter of inches, and also used the excuse, but I was drunk!

If people are going to behave in such a ridiculous way then I would advise them to refrain from drinking alcohol!

Nidgeweasel · 09-07-2015 04:17AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Christ what ? What does one expect to happen when one lights a person on fire ? What is ones intention ? Unless one suffers from a severe mental impairment one can imagine the outcome.

Attempted Murder aye.

shampoosuicide · 09-07-2015 04:24AM

Nidgeweasel wrote: »

Attempted Murder aye.

ffs... he didn't whip out a flamethrower here, he held a lighter up to a costume. i could be horribly wrong but he probably didn't think the costume was as flammable, and the process as fast, as it turned out. genuinely wondering if anyone has thought about this as opposed to jerking their knee. do people really think this guy had murder in mind and was just waiting until the opportune moment that someone was wearing a suitably flammable costume? it was a stupid, stupid mistake.

SmilesInMass · 09-07-2015 04:29AM

Joke of a sentence. Everyone does stupid things when they're young and drunk, that's a given. I know I've done loads myself but setting someone on fire, almost burning them to death is not on. I've not see it clearly but I'm sure the outfit made from cotton wool looked like something that would go up in flames quite fast, and I've no doubts that's exactly what he wanted to see happen.

That victim statement was honestly a hard read, I'm not one to get shocked reading things online but that did it for me. And then the fact the other fella has been off getting his degree and setting up a well paying career for himself just adds insult to injury really.

username2013 · 09-07-2015 05:01AM

Yurt! wrote: »

I believe in the Scottish legal system, being intoxicated is an aggravating factor when a judge is considering sentence. Much preferable to it frequently being used as a mitigating factor here. An incredibly sad case.

Not been familar with the Scottish legal system does this mean if you are drunk and commit a crime it will go against you in court? As in you got yourself into the drunken state and therefore are responsible for your actions?

If so, does the Scottish legal system hand out stiffer terms for alcohol fueled violence etc?

09-07-2015 05:48AM

I know on these threads one is supposed to either post "that's outrageous, he should have got life" or "that's outrageous, it was just a prank".

But I'm gonna go with "that seems appropriate".

Jawgap · 09-07-2015 05:53AM

foggy_lad wrote: »

Can someone who is brainy explain to me how he would not have foreseen the result of his actions because my dopey mind fails to see it. This guy was intelligent and in the third year of a corporate law degree

.......

I'm not brainy, but my understanding is that in other common law jurisdictions if you commit a wholly reckless act for which it would be objectively reasonable to have foreseen the potential outcome, that is treated in the same way as if you intended the outcome.

For example, if I point a gun at your head and say I'm only trying to nick your ear lobe but end up blowing your head off that would be charged as murder in other jurisdictions, here it would probably be run as manslaughter.

This idiot should've been done for attempted murder because of the recklessness of his act, plus he didn't change his plea until the last minute so, imo, the judge should've lashed him for that.

The offence was treated by the DPP as being at the upper end of the scale of seriousness (with life being the maximum sentence) and judge gives the guy a 42 month custodial sentence, meaning he'll be out in about 2 years - what a joke!

Plus they're great here at turning the perpetrator into the victim - as evidenced by the mitigation allowed in respect of his taking of anti-depressants etc

Jesus, you can only imagine the screams of the victim who was burned, and the system allows the guy who did it to use his mental state as mitigation!

Luke92 · 09-07-2015 06:18AM

People have done 3 and 5 year sentences after getting caught with cannabis for sale. It really shouldn't matter if he will reoffend or not. Jail and jail sentences are there for people who do bad things. Not just people who will do it again. This is a ridiculous sentence.

09-07-2015 07:23AM

Luke92 wrote: »

People have done 3 and 5 year sentences after getting caught with cannabis for sale.

Ah in fairness now, most getting caught - even with tens of thousands worth of cannabis - would expect a suspended sentence if they plead guilty.

09-07-2015 07:30AM

Jawgap wrote: »

This idiot should've been done for attempted murder because of the recklessness of his act, plus he didn't change his plea until the last minute so, imo, the judge should've lashed him for that.

For murder you need to be able to form the intent, not merely be reckless, and drunkenness may preclude that. Presume attempted murder requires the same mens rea. Can't speak for other common law jurisdictions but afaik both here and in England, you will not be convicted of murder where intent cannot be formed, though you may well be convicted of manslaughter...or in the case where the person survives assault causing actual bodily harm.

4zn76tysfajdxp · 09-07-2015 07:43AM

Deleted User wrote: »

He knowingly set someone on fire, causing burns over 75% of his body (just picture that, go on)

It sounds like you're getting off on it.

S. Goodspeed · 09-07-2015 07:46AM

A "prank" to me is something harmless and funny you do to a friend and laugh about afterwards.

This was assault on a stranger and should be punished as such.

The attacker also fled the scene, an honourable thing to do...

09-07-2015 07:52AM

S. Goodspeed wrote: »

This was assault on a stranger and should be punished as such.

It was. And so he was convicted for the assault and punished.

Whether the punishment is appropriate is another matter.

Diamond Doll · 09-07-2015 07:55AM

Nidgeweasel wrote: »

A student, probably absolutely rotten, in Galway at Haloween.

"There's a buck covered in cotton wool, light abit of his costume there for the craic."

Clearly just a young lad, locked out his mind, that made a terribly stupid mistake which got drastically out of hand. Not mentally ill, not a sociopath- just young, full of beer and stupid.

Sad case. Two lives wrecked.

He's not an idiot, he was studying law. I think even someone with a below-average IQ, no matter how drunk they were, would have to have had some foresight as to what happens if you set someone's clothes on fire. Even if the victim wasn't in fancy dress at all, he'd have been lucky to escape with only minor burn injuries while attempting to put out the fire. That's common sense, and anyone could predict that outcome.

Maybe he didn't foresee the extent of the injuries that would be caused, but who the f*ck thinks it's good craic to even cause what you expect will be minor burn injuries to a complete stranger for no reason?

It's like deciding to drunkenly push someone you don't know down a flight of stairs, expecting they'll "only" break a few bones, but unfortunately they end up paralysed for life. Your only possible intention could have been to cause them harm; maybe not as much harm as you'd intended, but the intention was malicious all the same - even if you didn't intend for them to end up with such permanent serious injuries. Who the hell does that to a total stranger for absolutely no reason?

It's not just a bit of drunken craic. It was a really messed up thing to do.

And while I consider five years to be lenient, I do accept that the perpetrator will most likely have suffered permanent damage to his professional career because of this. I don't get any satisfaction out of that - it's a pity two lives were ruined - but on the other hand, it does seem only just and fair, when he's done so much damage to the victim's life and career prospects.

Cushie Butterfield · 09-07-2015 07:59AM

shampoosuicide wrote: »

ffs... he didn't whip out a flamethrower here, he held a lighter up to a costume.

He then proceeeded to ignite the lighter & set the victim ON FIRE.

shampoosuicide wrote:

i could be horribly wrong

You are horribly wrong.

shampoosuicide wrote:

but he probably didn't think the costume was as flammable, and the process as fast, as it turned out. genuinely wondering if anyone has thought about this as opposed to jerking their knee. do people really think this guy had murder in mind and was just waiting until the opportune moment that someone was wearing a suitably flammable costume? it was a stupid, stupid mistake.

What do you mean by ''as flamable''? Flamable is flamable. As for the process being ''as fast'' in that scenario you're still stating that he knew that the costume was flamable & that he through caution to the wind & decided to set the victim alight anyway.

You seem to think that it was some sort of prank gone wrong - a prank is shaving a friend's eyebrows off when they're passed out drunk or chaining them naked to a railing on a stag party. Setting a person on fire is NOT a prank. He wasn't too drunk to run away & leave the victim engulfed in flames squirming in agony, fighting for his life. Can you not see the difference?

This ''prank gone wrong'' excuse is pure rubbish. Maybe if the two guys were friends & one said 'hey, lets set your costume on fire & see how quick it burns' & the other said 'yea go for it ha ha this will be great fun' it could be described as a prank gone wrong, but approaching a complete unsuspecting stranger from behind & setting them on fire when drunk or sober is NOT a prank in any way shape or form. It's a cowardly act of malice & there's no excuse for what happened.

Jawgap · 09-07-2015 08:04AM

Deleted User wrote: »

For murder you need to be able to form the intent, not merely be reckless, and drunkenness may preclude that. Presume attempted murder requires the same mens rea. Can't speak for other common law jurisdictions but afaik both here and in England, you will not be convicted of murder where intent cannot be formed, though you may well be convicted of manslaughter...or in the case where the person survives assault causing actual bodily harm.

Well without getting too technical and dragging the thread off topic, the defence of intoxication is conditional and is useful in negating 'specific' intent and less so in relation to 'general' or 'basic' intent. Common law murder, iirc, in England and Wales is a 'basic intent' offence.

Anyway, courts here seem more willing to admit intoxication as a defence and/or mitigation.

seamusk84 · 09-07-2015 08:07AM

I'd say the medical bills were huge, potentially six figure. What about that, can he sue for them?
Could they possibly put an order on the salary of Keane so for the rest of his life 30% has to go to the victim?

kylith · 09-07-2015 08:13AM

Yurt! wrote: »

I believe in the Scottish legal system, being intoxicated is an aggravating factor when a judge is considering sentence. Much preferable to it frequently being used as a mitigating factor here. An incredibly sad case.

Good on Scotland. "I was drunk" should automatically add 25% to the sentence.

Nidgeweasel wrote: »

A student, probably absolutely rotten, in Galway at Haloween.

"There's a buck covered in cotton wool, light abit of his costume there for the craic."

Clearly just a young lad, locked out his mind, that made a terribly stupid mistake which got drastically out of hand. Not mentally ill, not a sociopath- just young, full of beer and stupid.

Sad case. Two lives wrecked.

And the fact that while his victim screamed in agony he sauntered off home? That was a bit of craic too?

frostyjacks · 09-07-2015 08:21AM

What a coward. Sounds like he only apologised at the very end when he was staring down the barrel. It didn't sound very sincere at all. "I wish you the best", after destroying his life? He should have got the max, 12 years and no possibility of parole.

09-07-2015 08:27AM

It'd only be justice if it was an eye for an eye. Horrific article to read.

inforfun · 09-07-2015 09:02AM

A prank is putting salt in the sugar shaker. Or unscrewing the lid of the salt shaker

Not setting someone on fire.

Just treat it like it is, attempted murder.

"i was drunk" and "it was a prank" used as an excuse should mean there are few years added to a sentence.

razorblunt · 09-07-2015 09:08AM

To call this a "prank" is an insult to anyone with intelligence.
It falls into the "it was only bantaa" defense.

The victim's life is change significantly, the accused will do a couple of years in prison come out and live his life with his health all be it on a different career path than he imagined.

09-07-2015 09:09AM

When I read the OP, I was expecting it to be an actual prank gone wrong - like, I dunno, messing with his sambuca or something. But no, he walked up to the guy, and set fire to him. That's not a fcuking prank. How can it even be considered a prank.

Isn't it nice for him to be getting his life back in 3 and a half years isn't it.

Jesus christ.

kirving · 09-07-2015 09:09AM

seamusk84 wrote: »

I'd say the medical bills were huge, potentially six figure. What about that, can he sue for them?
Could they possibly put an order on the salary of Keane so for the rest of his life 30% has to go to the victim?

I doubt it. Either the victim will be left with the financial burden on top of his injuries, or you and I will end up paying for it either through taxes or insurance premiums. Don’t get me wrong, I’m delighted to live in a country where we the patient isn’t faced with massive medical bills, but in cases where those bills are 100% the attackers fault, it pisses me off no end that they get a few years holiday to study, play Playstation, sleep all day, and the cost to society is completely forgotten about.

Niemoj · 09-07-2015 09:13AM

Absolutely awful, poor guys life will never be the same and all his attacker got was 5 meessily years?

That's not right.

Student set alight in a nightclub, guy who did it gets 5-year sentence

Comments