Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Man who knocked down burglar in court

Options
  • 14-02-2012 7:17pm
    #1
    Sunnyisland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,562 ✭✭✭✭


    http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0214/mccaugheym.html


    A 47-year-old Dundalk businessman who drove after and twice knocked down a burglar, has gone on trial in the local Circuit Criminal Court.
    Martin McCaughey from Mount Avenue in the town denies a charge of endangerment at Clann Chulainn Park on 27 June, 2008 and a charge of assault causing harm to Daniel McCormack on the same occasion.
    Mr McCormack admitted to the court that he broke into the home of Mr McCaughey on the morning of 27 June 2008.
    He said he was drunk at the time and when he found himself in an upstairs ensuite bathroom he saw jewellery and he took it.
    He then heard a voice and ran downstairs, out a back door and across a field.
    He ran to Clann Chulainn Park where he lived which was very close by.
    The witness said he remembered being hit a car, getting up and being hit again.
    Mr McCormack said he heard the defendant saying he would kill him if he got up again.
    Both his legs were broken in the incident and he spent two and a half weeks in hospital as a result.
    Under cross examination by Brendan Grehan SC for the defendant, the witness accepted he may have tried to rob another house in the area minutes before he went into the home of the accused.
    He accepted also that he had committed burglaries in the past but that he had been treated leniently by the courts.
    Mr McCormack said he could not recall if he went into the bedrooms of the three children in the accused's house.
    He accepted that he would have had to go into the bedroom of Mr and Mrs McCaughey to get into the bathroom where the jewellery was.
    As he ran from the house he said he could hear someone shouting but he did not stop.
    The jury heard that Mr McCaughey was in his bare feet and only wearing boxer shorts when he drove after the witness.
    Mr Grehan put it to Mr McCormack that his client was trying to stop him and box him in with his car when he was hit.
    He did not stop the first time but the second time he was hit he sustained injuries to his legs.
    The witness confirmed that he successfully sued the defendant and received €175,000 in damages.
    The trial before a jury of six men and six women continues tomorrow.


    :mad: If that was my house and I chased the burglar in my car I would do the same or maybe worse :mad:


«134567…29

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    chin_grin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,808 ✭✭✭✭chin_grin


    This is the funniest line in the article.
    He said he was drunk at the time and when he found himself in an upstairs ensuite bathroom he saw jewellery and he took it.

    "Oh! I seem to be in someone elses house!"
    "Oh! A bathroom. Better go for a p!ss."
    "Oh! Jewellery? Ah sure, mine now." <stuff pockets>


  • Options
    #3
    Kristopherus
    Registered Users Posts: 11,907 ✭✭✭✭Kristopherus


    That driver should get a medal, not be put on trial:mad:


  • Options
    #4
    DarkJager
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,960 ✭✭✭DarkJager


    He did a bad job....should have crushed the scumbag under the wheels then reversed over him.


  • Options
    #5
    Laisurg
    Registered Users Posts: 810 ✭✭✭Laisurg


    can't go around running people over, burglar or not :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #6
    LK_Dave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 376 ✭✭LK_Dave


    Laisurg wrote: »
    can't go around running people over, burglar or not :rolleyes:


    mores the pity.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    He had three kids in the house, I'm not at all surprised he saw red. I'll shake him by the hand if I ever meet him.


  • Options
    #8
    ballsymchugh
    Registered Users Posts: 7,936 ✭✭✭ballsymchugh


    how did he remember what the defendant said, but wasn't sure what rooms he went into, or whether or not he tried to rob other houses?


  • Options
    #9
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    realies wrote: »
    He said he was drunk at the time and when he found himself in an upstairs ensuite bathroom he saw jewellery and he took it.

    The driver of the car should have said the same thing.
    Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander


  • Options
    #10
    Degag
    Registered Users Posts: 9,952 ✭✭✭Degag


    Laisurg wrote: »
    can't go around running people over, burglar or not :rolleyes:

    Perhaps, but i don't think burglars should be protected by the law, which is exactly what is happening here.


  • Options
    #11
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    im ashamed of that driver. He should have killed that scumbag, and then sued the scumbags family for damage to the car ....isnt that how it works when you hit animals


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,059 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    He was an idiot to go after the burglar. Why? Because he's now on trial for it and stands to be punished more severely than the burglar himself. It doesn't matter if people agree with it or not, that's the law. You're allowed to protect yourself and your home, but chasing and driving over somebody twice is plain fcuking stupid when you know you're going to be done for it.


  • Options
    #13
    stovelid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,252 ✭✭✭✭stovelid


    Laisurg wrote: »
    can't go around running people over, burglar or not :rolleyes:

    Exactly.

    Should have followed him home to see where he lived and then hit and run him at a later date so he wouldn't know who it was.


  • Options
    #14
    GLaDOS
    Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 23,202 Mod ✭✭✭✭GLaDOS


    Under cross examination by Brendan Grehan SC for the defendant, the witness accepted he may have tried to rob another house in the area minutes before he went into the home of the accused.
    He accepted also that he had committed burglaries in the past but that he had been treated leniently by the courts.
    For fúck sake

    Cake, and grief counseling, will be available at the conclusion of the test



  • Options
    #15
    Icepick
    Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭Icepick


    He accepted also that he had committed burglaries in the past but that he had been treated leniently by the courts.
    ...
    The witness confirmed that he successfully sued the defendant and received €175,000 in damages.
    Why is this country so scumbag-friendly?


  • Options
    #16
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    It just go to show that crime really dose pay. :rolleyes:

    Its a pity your man wasn't driving a steam roller.


  • Options
    #17
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    stovelid wrote: »
    Exactly.

    Should have followed him home to see where if lived and then hit and run him at a later date so he wouldn't know who it was.

    Do you honestly think that would have worked? I'm not terribly fit, but I'm fairly sure that if there were some 47-year old chasing after me, not trying to catch me but just observe where I went, at night, either in a car or on foot, I'm fairly confident that I could make good my escape.


  • Options
    #18
    TheZohanS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,583 ✭✭✭✭TheZohanS


    He shouldn't have ran him over but I can understand why he did. The €175k should not be given to the burglar, it should be donated to charity with a strong message that crime doesn't pay.

    I'd like to see a law introduced where a person committing a crime can no be paid any damages and any monies awarded to them are automatically forfeited to charity.


  • Options
    #19
    mikemac1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,395 ✭✭✭✭mikemac1


    The jury are just ordinary people, like you or me

    They know what he's charged with and the judge will give them instructions but they might let him walk away.

    Natural justice I suppose even if it's not strictly following the law books


  • Options
    #20
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    You cannot take the law into your own hands and expect to get away with it.

    The witness has all ready received €175,000 in damages, nice little earner for breaking into some ones home.


  • Options
    #21
    Professey Chin
    Registered Users Posts: 51,054 ✭✭✭✭Professey Chin


    Ficheall wrote: »
    Do you honestly think that would have worked? I'm not terribly fit, but I'm fairly sure that if there were some 47-year old chasing after me, not trying to catch me but just observe where I went, at night, either in a car or on foot, I'm fairly confident that I could make good my escape.

    If you were apparently drunk enough to "somehow" be in the wrong house then I dont think you could


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    flanders1979
    Closed Accounts Posts: 638 ✭✭✭flanders1979


    You would be able to flush him down the jacks when I would have finished with him.


  • Options
    #23
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    Same Daniel McCormack as this: http://www.argus.ie/news/court-in-brief-629246.html
    but different to this: http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1207/joycej.html
    shall we assume?


  • Options
    #24
    turbobaby
    Closed Accounts Posts: 927 ✭✭✭turbobaby


    Pathetic country.


  • Options
    #25
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    The Great Chinholio wrote: »
    If you were apparently drunk enough to "somehow" be in the wrong house then I dont think you could

    Ah, alcohol - the completely credible Irish excuse for absolutely anything.


  • Options
    #26
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    175k to the burglar? I don't remember hearing about this.

    Imagine the thoughts of someone breaking into your house and possibly going into your kids rooms.


  • Options
    #27
    DarkJager
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,960 ✭✭✭DarkJager


    hmmm wrote: »
    175k to the burglar? I don't remember hearing about this.

    Imagine the thoughts of someone breaking into your house and possibly going into your kids rooms.

    Yeah and the only bedroom he'd be going in to after it is a refrigerated drawer in the morgue.


  • Options
    #28
    Follow the Plan
    Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭Follow the Plan


    Icepick wrote: »
    Why is this country so scumbag-friendly?

    Because it was/is being run by scumbags but they wear suits instead of balaclavas


  • Options
    #29
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    Ficheall wrote: »
    Same Daniel McCormack as this: http://www.argus.ie/news/court-in-brief-629246.html
    but different to this: http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1207/joycej.html
    shall we assume?

    What do you want us to assume?


  • Options
    #30
    JonathanAnon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭JonathanAnon


    The only mistake the house owner made was not killing him outright so that he couldnt sue him... Any incident like this, where a person is injured while in the process of committing a crime, should be considered as "misadventure" and the crime itself should prevent the perpetrator from being allowed to take a civil case against the victim of the their crime.. Those civil rights crowds have the country fkd up..

    Looked like a junkie from what I saw of the scumbag..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    benway
    Registered Users Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭benway


    Ah here. World's gone mad. All the law cares about is "scumbags", what's the country coming to when a decent citizen can't maim an intruder when he's running away? I mean, it's not like he could've called the cops on him having followed him home. Of course, the judiciary are all a bunch of wooly liberals anyway, amirite? :rolleyes:

    Personally, I have no sympathy for the guy. If he'd used reasonable force to drive the burglar out of his house, he'd have no problem. If he'd run the guy down once with his car, he might be able to raise a defence of provocation at a stretch.

    But going for him the second time? Attempting to murder someone who posed no threat to him or his family at the time? Over a few trinkets?

    Can understand his outrage and everything, but he took it too far. Deserves what he gets imho. If it's more severe than the burglar's punishment, that's because house breaking and petty larceny are less serious offenses than trying to kill someone.


Advertisement