Six year sentence for the rape of two children

Dravokivich wrote: »

Since when did castration prevent a re-occurrence of sexual assault?

It has a huge impact, due to it killing the sex drive almost completely. It's mostly done chemically.

Have a watch of the Louis Theroux series on pedophiles if you want to learn more.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Can we just drop the garlic stuff?

Every. Legal. Discussion.

Garlic importer, garlic importer, garlic importer. He was caught in a 1.5 million euro tax fraud, initially given 6 years and that was reduced to 2 on appeal. He deserved every day of it.

It is comparing 2 completely different issues.

Your not wrong, in fairness. Somehow, though, I think the two kids suffered more than the fat pigs collecting revenue for their trough in Europe.

Winterlong wrote: »

A minor who is old enough to rape a child - yeah I would have no problem castrating them and protecting society.
And a good kicking too.

Bad idea. I often wondered if "neutering" a human would work like it does with a dog, but in sentient men, the removal of testosterone production can lead to - among many things - frustration, which could boil over. If we're lucky, they'll top themselves. If we're not, they'll take it out on someone else...
Easier to just do the topping for them. And cheaper...

Outragustice - anger prompted by lenient sentences for serious crimes.

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Out of interest, were the sentences concurrent or consecutive? Not that it makes much difference in terms of leniency.

Hopefully it can be appealed.

Concurrect - 3 years per victim plus 5 year supervision afterwards annnndd sexual offenders therapy..

Deleted User wrote: »

This could be the third time you have posted about my job.

Yes, I understand the law. It's my job to do so. This seems to bother you.

I don't care what job you do if you would have the good grace not to often come on and excuse the joke sentences handed out by our so called legal system.
BTW I would be far more bothered that I believe you campaigned for that leeching bull crapper legal professional from Kerry.

Deleted User wrote: »

But yes, it tires me when people without the first iota make nonsensical posts, like assuming everything in Irish law relates back to fraud on garlic.

We know it doesn't, but you have to say that it stinks to high hell when it appears you get a longer jail term for defrauding the state of some cash than for violating the body of a child.

Can you not see that or are you able to see the splinter in my eye, but not the 2x4 in the eyes of our justice system.

If the garlic smuggler got 6 years and a child rapist got 20 then no one would be dragging up the case of a garlic smuggler.

The same judge that sentenced to jail the garlic smuggler, the social welfare fraudster and the madam/prostitute on the other hand gave suspended sentences to an attempted rapist, a hammer wielding attempted murderer.
If an attempted rapist got 10 years in actual jail then far fewer would have compared it to the 6 years handed out by the same judge.
If a kid that hammered the head off another had gotten 10-20 years rather than a suspended sentence how many would have raised the garlic smuggling case.

It appears money is more important criteria to measure a crime to that ex Garda who sits on the bench than how much physical damage a criminal does to another humans body or mind.

And even then it is all so selective within the justice system.
Some smugglers go to jail, some tax evaders go to jail, others get to sit in our parliament.
Some who defraud the state of a few hundred grand go to jail whilst other stick the state for multiple millions get a free pass.

On some threads (like case of aforementioned Foxrock hammer wielding teenager) people state it is those with money that get off.
I always argue is not those with money, but those with connections.

Deleted User wrote: »

If you think I am part of some conspiracy to prevent questions about the Judiciary...oh dear. Maybe take the tinfoil off the head?

No but we all know how the legal system works, much like some other areas of the state, where ranks close and the system must be protected from those who of course don't know what they are talking about.

I always believe common sense and call me a tinfoil hat wearer for never trusting people who talk down to you all the while they fleece your pockets.
To me a lot of the legal profession are just interested in the law and justice is an alien concept.

Checkmate19 wrote: »

One thing USA do well is proper sentences for crimes like this. In the USA he probably get 20-30 years and it would be right. Two lifes ruined yet this filth bag is out in four years max. The judge should hang is head in shame. He should be jailed for this sentence. Its a total mockery. Also this filth bag will almost defo reoffend and you will hear the same ****e again. Animals like this need locking up for a long time in general population so they get a good kicking every so often.

We wouldn't need to look that far for an example - the UK have stronger sentences for child abuse crimes.

A sentence as soft as this one would make a parent consider taking the law into their own hands. Why would you put your child through the trauma of Gardai interviews, giving testimony etc when the outcome is that someone can be out walking the streets in three years.