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! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

The Ever Failing Justice system

  • 22-08-2012 9:42am
    #1
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭


    This post has been deleted.


«1

Comments

  • #2
    eth0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,635 ✭✭✭eth0


    Terrible, Joe. Lets lock everyone up just in case they commit a crime.


  • #3
    Ted!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 62 ✭✭Ted!


    My kidnappers got away with it too!


  • #4
    Chazz Michael Michaels
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Chazz Michael Michaels


    Noel Gallagher had a good suggestion for knife crime.

    Get caught with a knife:

    Once = Automatic 6 months
    2nd = Automatic 5 years
    3rd = Automatic 10 years
    etc
    etc


  • #5
    Hardonraging
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,641 ✭✭✭Hardonraging


    Shoot them all.. and let one of the deity's descide what to do with em ..


  • #6
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    mathie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,102 ✭✭✭mathie


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    Great input, I see how you twisted my words there! you must be a politician!

    lets try have a serious conversation here lads.

    You've come to the right forum.


  • #8
    the groutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,096 ✭✭✭✭the groutch


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    lets try have a serious conversation here lads.

    In AH?


  • #9
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • #10
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    Great input, I see how you twisted my words there! you must be a politician!

    lets try have a serious conversation here lads.

    Make them all form a giant human centipide, they'll be too busy eating each others £$%&? to be out terrorising auld wans.


  • #11
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »
    Noel Gallagher had a good suggestion for knife crime.

    Get caught with a knife:

    Once = Automatic 6 months
    2nd = Automatic 5 years
    3rd = Automatic 10 years
    etc
    etc
    Yeah that sounds like a cheap easy solution. Can't see any reason to carry a knife.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    twowheelsonly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,270 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    Apparently it's all MCDs' fault so shut them down and everything will be grand!!:rolleyes:


  • #13
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    OP, serious question.... are you a bit stupid??

    The whole article is written from the victims perspective, sure if a victim had their way the bloke who kicked off my car mirror would have been sentenced for 10 years!

    You say you were outraged that the murder was reduced to manslaughter, do you have ANY idea of the facts of that case?? Or are you just going on that womans motto that "if you pick up a knife you are gonna do damage"??

    To make a comment on that change of charge, Id only care what you have to say if you sat thrugh the whole thing like the judge and jury did, not from a 1 scond victim statement!

    Cop on man!


  • #14
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Yeah that sounds like a cheap easy solution. Can't see any reason to carry a knife.

    I usually a swiss army knife or a leatherman multi-tool in my pocket for work, fishing, etc.

    Does this mean I should go to prison for six months because renowned international legal expert and coke head Noel Gallagher thinks its a good idea?


  • #15
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    In this country the laws are there to protect the Criminals.

    And the rules of evidence are there to protect the innocent and peoples right to liberty. Thats why a warrant has to be spot on. If the rules for the Gardai to search peoples houses werent strictly enforced and the warrants had to be perfect, the gardai could be getting half arsed warrants and go around checking peoples private homes willy nilly

    There could be a complete abuse of power.


  • #16
    saiint
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,010 ✭✭✭saiint


    i was in town before
    and a guarda stopped a couple of junkies
    i over heard the guarda say to one of them while searching him
    *its not like you not to carry a knife*
    so obviously before he has not been charged or in jail because of it
    seemed to me like the guard was just gonna take it off him


  • #17
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • #18
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    The man murdered a guy in cold blood with a knife!!

    Cop on man!

    No he didn't. He was convicted of manslaughter. The difference between manslaughter and murder is that manslaughter is not planned i.e. its not commited in cold blood.


  • #19
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    The man murdered a guy in cold blood with a knife!!

    Cop on man!

    Not according to the judge and jury who sat through every shred of evidence in the case. They said he didnt have the mental element to the crime of murder. That means that it becomes manslaughter which is murder without the mens rea for murder.

    Again I ask, are you familiar with the case at all? Did you go and listen while it was in court? Because your opinion based on a newspaper snippet is useless.


  • #20
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • #21
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Pumpkinseeds
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,635 ✭✭✭Pumpkinseeds


    I've met great guards and then some not so great guards. I think a lot of it comes down to human nature and whether or not the particular guard can be bothered to do anything.

    I had a conversation with a neighbour recently about their childs bicycle having been stolen by someone living across the street from them. The people that stole it are scumbags with criminal records and are notorious in the town, so this person didn't want to approach them about it so they went to the guards. They told the guards that they could plainly see the bicycle in these peoples garden, guards said there was nothing that they could do about it.

    Maybe that particular family are guarda informants or something as they do as they please and break the law however they please, on a regular basis and seemingly without consequence. And why wouldn't they? They get free legal aid when they supplement their benefit payments burgling peoples homes. If somebody isn't bothered about going to jail then jail is not a punishment in their eyes. The legal system costs the taxpayer and not the criminal.


  • #23
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    "He stabbed the 28-year-old five times and also stabbed 30-year-old Carroll, who survived a knife wound to the heart."

    Murder.

    Have you studied murder or manslaughter and all the intricacies of both?


  • #24
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    A couple of weeks ago I read that men convicted of a tiger kidnapping where released from jail on a technicality. They were caught red handed but because the warrant for their arrest was in the wrong category they were released.

    Unconstitutionally obtained evidence is not a technicality. That case was decided by the Supreme Court and the issue had been flagged for years. Doesn't mean I want to see those chaps and others walk, but the issue re obtaining evidence in this case raised issues regarding the fundamental rights of all citizens of the state. (Articles 40.4.1 and 40.5 of the Constitution) http://www.constitution.org/cons/ireland/constitution_ireland-en.htm
    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    Manslaughter is me speeding down a road and killing a child, not choosing to pick up a knife and stick in somebodys heart! or stabbing him 5 times for that matter. It was Murder and he got away with it.

    What a ridiculous statement

    No it's not. The definition of manslaughter is unlawful homicide that does not amount to murder. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter

    If you want to have a proper debate about the Justice System take it to Legal Discussion. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=633

    If you want everyone to simply agree with you then write a letter to the Daily Mail or the Herald.

    If you want to be taken seriously you should at the very least you should try to do a wee bit of research in to the subject before posting.


  • #25
    CreepingDeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,015 ✭✭✭CreepingDeath


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    A couple of weeks ago I read that men convicted of a tiger kidnapping where released from jail on a technicality.

    Throw them into the tiger enclosure in Dublin zoo and tell them to try kidnapping them.


  • #26
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • #27
    chops018
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭chops018


    Section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1964:

    4.—(1) Where a person kills another unlawfully the killing shall not be murder unless the accused person intended to kill, or cause serious injury to, some person, whether the person actually killed or not.

    (2) The accused person shall be presumed to have intended the natural and probable consequences of his conduct; but this presumption may be rebutted.

    Obviously, as NoQuarter has said numerous times, the jury has felt the accused did not have the necessary mens rea. There is a very high burden of proof for murder. They would have had every little detail possible given to them to analyse before coming to their decision. It would not have been done lightly, of course the victim and their families would not be happy with such a decision - they or their family member did get very badly injured or suffered death. But, as stated above, if the accused did not have the necessary mens rea then he cannot be culpable of murder. Don't forget they will have been presumed to have intended the natural and probable consequences of there actions but this may be rebutted. It is not as simple as someone stabbed someone 5 times = murder. There are so many things that have to be asked. , what if there was a novus actus interviens, thus breaking the chain of causation. What if the accused was provokved, what is he had a sudden loss of self control.

    If you are that passionate about it read the case of DPP .v. Murray (1977) IR 360. It discusses the recklessness and intention and what is needed for the mens rea of murder. Even the English cases (of which Ireland usually adopts) are very interesting. The jury has too much discretion in my opinion. Actually read this: http://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/consultation%20papers/cpHomicideMentalElement.htm

    Then come back and see if you have the same opinion.


  • #28
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • #29
    twowheelsonly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,270 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    chops018 wrote: »
    Section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1964:

    4.—(1) Where a person kills another unlawfully the killing shall not be murder unless the accused person intended to kill, or cause serious injury to, some person, whether the person actually killed or not.

    (2) The accused person shall be presumed to have intended the natural and probable consequences of his conduct; but this presumption may be rebutted.

    Obviously, as NoQuarter has said numerous times, the jury has felt the accused did not have the necessary mens rea. There is a very high burden of proof for murder. They would have had every little detail possible given to them to analyse before coming to their decision. It would not have been done lightly, of course the victim and their families would not be happy with such a decision - they or their family member did get very badly injured or suffered death. But, as stated above, if the accused did not have the necessary mens rea then he cannot be culpable of murder. Don't forget they will have been presumed to have intended the natural and probable consequences of there actions but this may be rebutted. It is not as simple as someone stabbed someone 5 times = murder. There are so many things that have to be asked. , what if there was a novus actus interviens, thus breaking the chain of causation. What if the accused was provokved, what is he had a sudden loss of self control.

    If you are that passionate about it read the case of DPP .v. Murray (1977) IR 360. It discusses the recklessness and intention and what is needed for the mens rea of murder. Even the English cases (of which Ireland usually adopts) are very interesting. The jury has too much discretion in my opinion. Actually read this: http://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/consultation%20papers/cpHomicideMentalElement.htm

    Then come back and see if you have the same opinion.

    IMO as well this was Murder no matter how you try to dress it up.
    I also feel, by his statement, that the Judge was feeling the same way.

    Juries are generally made up by 12 people that were too stupid to get off Jury Duty. Unfortunately they also usually contain one or two over-enthusiastic members who see it as their job to concentrate on the defence aspect of the case. I've seen it on numerous occasions where the mindset seems to be 'Ok, the prosecution says he killed/assaulted/stole, let's see what the defence has to say against that...' and they tend to concentrate on that.

    Don't have the current figures but a short few years ago the conviction rate in Kerry Circuit Courts was 22%. Are we really to believe that 4 out of every 5 cases was either maliciously brought by the Gardai or that the defendants were all genuinely innocent??


  • #30
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    I once tried to have a mouse indicted for B & E into my home. The guards did ****ing nothing, told me it was a domestic issue!!! I had no choice but to kill him. What should happen to me? Should I be charged with manslaughter or murder, for simply defending my threshold from a dangerous intruder? I did what had to be done, to protect my family.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    chops018
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭chops018


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    I will read that now, if it is a case that it was manslaughter, then the law should be changed. The fact people can get away with stabbing somebody 5 times,killing him and then stabbing another in the heart out of rage to me seems absolutely ludicrous

    Even if they are convicted of manslaughter they will still be sentenced. You don't just get away with stabbing someone.


  • #32
    Odysseus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,754 ✭✭✭Odysseus


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    I will read that now, if it is a case that it was manslaughter, then the law should be changed. The fact people can get away with stabbing somebody 5 times,killing him and then stabbing another in the heart out of rage to me seems absolutely ludicrous

    Why should the law be changed, because you think it should? I'm not being funny here, but these threads that state people should just be locked up, like what you think should happen to the kidnappers. If the law can't jail them; then they should be free. We may not like it, but we need to work within the laws.

    I dislike the high levels of crime we have here, however, I also spend a lot of my time working with those criminals, ranging from the guys who have 100+ convictions for petty crimes to those who have used knifes like your other example.

    At the end of the day, these quys are human like us, just like us. This notion of just locking them up, so joe public can forgoet about them; will just not work. I don't claim to have the answer, I have seen a lot of guys turn their lives around, but like wise I also seen guys that went or may go to their graves without changing.

    Now of course we need to punish those who break the law, but without a focus on rehab nothing will really change. However, people won't shout about the nee for rehab, only the need to lock people up, which doesn't do much and of course cost money.

    We like to see money being spend on punishing, but spend it on addressing various issues and people cry that we are running holiday camps.


  • #33
    chops018
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭chops018


    WoollyRedHat wrote: »
    I once tried to have a mouse indicted for B & E into my home. The guards did ****ing nothing, told me it was a domestic issue!!! I had no choice but to kill him. What should happen to me? Should I be charged with manslaughter or murder, for simply defending my threshold from a dangerous intruder? I did what had to be done, to protect my family.

    That would be a case of lawful use of force provided for under ss 18-20 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against The Person Act 1997, to which of course you can use no more than is reasonably necessary to an imminent threat to you or another person. A jury will decide if it was reasonably necessary in the circumstances :P


  • #34
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    From your link on murder

    "murder requires either the intent to kill – a state of mind called malice, or malice aforethought– or the knowledge that one's actions are likely to result in death"

    does stabbing a guy 5 times and another in the heart qualify?

    The link I provided was for manslaughter not murder. Theres a subtle clue where manslaughter is written in really big letters at the top of the wikipedia page.

    For the crime to have been classed as murder it needed to have both actus reus (the Guilty act) and Mens Rea (a guilty mind).To secure a conviction for manslaughter only the guilty act/actus reus has to be proven.

    Here's a report form the Indo on the case.
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/dubliner-found-guilty-of-killing-one-friend-and-injuring-another-after-night-drinking-3111952.html

    The fact that the three lads were all drinking togehter and playing cards for the for the evening is a pretty clear evidence that the guilty party had not planned the killing in advance. In addition, the lad who was injured was winding up both the killer and the victim by making repeated prank calls.

    The judges on the court of criminal appeal (who know a hell of a lot more about the law than you or I) agreed that the original conviction was incorrect as he should have been tried for manslaughter not murder.

    However, I do think the sentence in this case was too lenient, but thats a completley seperate issue to the point you are trying to make.


  • #35
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    chops018 wrote: »
    That would be a case of lawful use of force provided for under ss 18-20 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against The Person Act 1997, to which of course you can use no more than is reasonably necessary to an imminent threat to you or another person. A jury will decide if it was reasonably necessary in the circumstances :P

    Thank you for that. The guy was just taking the piss as well, eating food that was clearly marked mine, didnt give a ****


  • #36
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    A conviction for manslaughter is not "getting away with" anything. It's an observance of the details of the law. Not like they gave him a few quid and bus fare for his troubles and sent him on his merry way.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    Heres an article written by the Irish Times on the Justice system in Ireland. It talks alot about Social acceptance of petty crime...

    I hear there's some bloke who attended a rally up in Cavan, that he is now costing the rest of the country a billion or so cos' of his antics...

    Some there seems to overlook his antics "sure he was a grand chap and made a few jobs" - and they want to see him get off.

    Nothing surprises me any more. :(


  • #38
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • #39
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,510 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    twowheelsonly wrote: »
    Apparently it's all MCDs' fault so shut them down and everything will be grand!!:rolleyes:

    The name that shalt not be spoken! :eek:


  • #40
    DipStick McSwindler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭DipStick McSwindler


    This post has been deleted.


  • #41
    chops018
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭chops018


    IrishFeeney92 wrote: »
    The sentencing is far to easy.In this case is just 1 of many examples. If you go back a couple of pages on this forum you will see the thread about the 3 sexual assaults in which men received Ridiculously light and/or suspended sentences sentences, and 1 and had to pay 75000 to the victim, maybe the courts could have taken half that money off him and used it to rehabilitate him?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056715242


    I agree that the emphasis should be on rehabilitation, but you cant re-rehabilitate a sexual predator while hes in the public and he can be tempted at any time or given opportunity. The sentencing is too light in this country, I guarantee Joe O Reilly will be out after about 10 years for that murder. which is completely immoral and unjustified.

    Your right the rehabilitation is underfunded, but the sentencing is far to light. This results in criminals getting off with things they shouldn't be, and not getting treated in the correct manner. hence the title of this thread

    Sentencing is not an easy process. The sentence must be proportionate. There are numerous factors to be taken into account, did he plead guilty? Any aggravating or mitigating factors? etc etc.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    RustyNut
    Registered Users Posts: 3,430 ✭✭✭RustyNut


    twowheelsonly wrote: »
    Don't have the current figures but a short few years ago the conviction rate in Kerry Circuit Courts was 22%. Are we really to believe that 4 out of every 5 cases was either maliciously brought by the Gardai or that the defendants were all genuinely innocent??

    It would appear that the people who heard all the facts thaught so. Unless you can show different.


  • #43
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    The judiciary are playing with fire. When justice isn't seen to be done, law and order can break down very quickly.


  • #44
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    chops018 wrote: »
    That would be a case of lawful use of force provided for under ss 18-20 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against The Person Act 1997, to which of course you can use no more than is reasonably necessary to an imminent threat to you or another person. A jury will decide if it was reasonably necessary in the circumstances :P

    Actually the self defence authority for murder/manslaughter is found in the common law. The NFOAP Act only provides a defence of self-defence to non-fatal offences. :D


  • #45
    chops018
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭chops018


    NoQuarter wrote: »
    Actually the self defence authority for murder/manslaughter is found in the common law. The NFOAP Act only provides a defence of self-defence to non-fatal offences. :D

    I stand corrected, what if he claimed provocation?


  • #46
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    chops018 wrote: »
    I stand corrected, what if he claimed provocation?

    Im not familiar with the facts of the case but if he was charged with murder and is successful with his provocation defence, the charge is reduced to manslaughter. That may have been what happened here but I havent read the case.

    But as you know, provocation is a common law defence too(MacEoin) and doesnt rely on self-defence. I'm sure both defences could be ran at the same time.


  • #47
    Mint Sauce
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,293 ✭✭✭✭Mint Sauce


    Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »
    Noel Gallagher had a good suggestion for knife crime.

    Get caught with a knife:

    Once = Automatic 6 months
    2nd = Automatic 5 years
    3rd = Automatic 10 years
    etc
    etc

    If you get caught for the same crime more than three times, you are either preety stupid, or you dont give a sh!t.

    Country needs to consider a three strikes rule similar to what they have in some of areas of the US.


  • #48
    JonathanAnon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭JonathanAnon


    Just heard that sixteen year old involved in the tiger kidnapping in Limerick was let out on bail.. cant be named cos he's a minor, entitled to free legal aid, ordered to obey a curfew, not to talk to persons a b and c, and not to go to particular parts of the City... fkn ridiculous.. If he's old enough to be involved in the crime then he should be named.. and the bail conditions are just a joke, how the hell are they gonna stop him talking to particular people? Break his dialing hand?


  • #49
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    JonathanAnon wrote: »
    Just heard that sixteen year old involved in the tiger kidnapping in Limerick was let out on bail.. cant be named cos he's a minor, entitled to free legal aid, ordered to obey a curfew, not to talk to persons a b and c, and not to go to particular parts of the City... fkn ridiculous.. If he's old enough to be involved in the crime then he should be named.. and the bail conditions are just a joke, how the hell are they gonna stop him talking to particular people? Break his dialing hand?

    He is 15 according to the radio reports?

    Anyways whats the big deal about being let out on bail, he is innocent until proven guilty ffs.

    Entitled to free legal aid? so what? Its a massively serious offence and he obviously doesnt have the money to pay a legal team himself, thats what free legal aid is there for!

    By your logic, every bail condition is a joke! Usual bail conditions are a curfew, staying in the country, signing into a police station every day, none of these can be enforced if the person doesnt want to! There is a legal argument about granting bail between the DPP and the defence team, if the kid isnt a flight risk, he will be bailed usually!


  • #50
    Gee Bag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    irish-stew wrote: »
    If you get caught for the same crime more than three times, you are either preety stupid, or you dont give a sh!t.

    Country needs to consider a three strikes rule similar to what they have in some of areas of the US.

    The three strikes law has done little to reduce crime levels in California but has caused an explosion in the prison population and associated costs (more prisons, prison officers, etc.) helping to almost bankrupt the state.

    It has also led to ridiculous sentences being imposed like that on Santos Reyes whose third strike was for lying on an application for a driving licence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santos_Reyes_(prisoner)

    I do think that we should have more prison spaces here so that convicts serve their full sentence, but no way should we ape failed American policies for the sake of being seen to do something.


  • #51
    Mint Sauce
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,293 ✭✭✭✭Mint Sauce


    Gee Bag wrote: »
    The three strikes law has done little to reduce crime levels in California but has caused an explosion in the prison population and associated costs (more prisons, prison officers, etc.) helping to almost bankrupt the state.

    It has also led to ridiculous sentences being imposed like that on Santos Reyes whose third strike was for lying on an application for a driving licence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santos_Reyes_(prisoner)

    I do think that we should have more prison spaces here so that convicts serve their full sentence, but no way should we ape failed American policies for the sake of being seen to do something.

    Well I wouldn't consider minor crimes as reason to send someone down for a long time, but it should be maybe considered depending on the severty, with your more serious ones having automatic long term sentences, and life meaning life and not 15 years and getting out in less than 10.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement