What are your thoughts on the Ian Wright/Patrick O'Brien situation?

partyguinness · 04-02-2021 1:36pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

perhaps that is why there are so many repeat offenders with dozens of convictions.

I am afraid it is not that simple. There is no one size fits all approach. Every prosecution is unique and Courts weigh up all the relevant facts and niceties unique to every case and the individuals involved.

The probability is that we will never hear of this guy again and neither will the Courts. With that in mind the Courts do not see it as remotely beneficial to anyone by sending him to jail and basically ruining the guy’s life at 18. Pretty much everyone is given a second chance the first time up in the District Court.

Posters have suggested "Oh it will teach the guy a lesson". Really? Murderers, rapists, thieves, drug dealers have been sent to jail since time memorial. Jail has not acted as any sort of deterrent.

Drug trafficking in some Asian countries is a straight up death sentence. Still people do it. You murder in the US you can get life without parole or a death sentence. Still people do it.

Jail is not some sort of a cure all.

04-02-2021 1:37pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

perhaps that is why there are so many repeat offenders with dozens of convictions.

I'm pretty confident they'd all have been given a second chance at their very first interaction, assuming not a serious offence.

To err is human- to forgive devine

Any subsequent serious or similar "lapses" should be dealt with very severely. That they're not, is a sentancing/prison capacity issue.
Anyone with multiple convictions, more than likely has served time at some stage.
That they continue to reoffend is evidence our prison rehabilitation efforts may be less than 100% effective , all the more reason to keep people out of prison where possible, where probation services indicate low risk.

Sebastian Dangerfield · 04-02-2021 1:38pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Unless the offender is mentally ill, he should be punished and even made an example of

With the exception of the fella who tried to tax garlic as apples, I cant think of too many times an effort is made to make an example in this country.

This should be one such case, as should the knife crime that killed the lady in Dublin.

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 1:41pm

partyguinness wrote: »

I am afraid it is not that simple. There is no one size fits all approach. Every prosecution is unique and Courts weigh up all the relevant facts and niceties unique to every case and the individuals involved.

The probability is that we will never hear of this guy again and neither will the Courts. With that in mind the Courts do not see it as remotely beneficial to anyone by sending him to jail and basically ruining the guy’s life at 18. Pretty much everyone is given a second chance the first time up in the District Court.

Posters have suggested "Oh it will teach the guy a lesson". Really? Murderers, rapists, thieves, drug dealers have been sent to jail since time memorial. Jail has not acted as any sort of deterrent.

Drug trafficking in some Asian countries is a straight up death sentence. Still people do it. You murder in the US you can get life without parole or a death sentence. Still people do it.

Jail is not some sort of a cure all.

I never said it was simple. don't be so patronising. Until we start to take racism seriously it will only get worse. The courts need to send a message that outright racism like this case will not be tolerated.

Amirani · 04-02-2021 1:51pm

Why can't we have better community service type system in place for things like this?

Sending this idiot to jail with a criminal conviction wouldn't help anyone here, it would probably lead to a worse outcome for most concerned. Ian Wright was kind and reasonable enough to forgive, but he's right, that shouldn't be carte blanche to run off scot-free.

The financial contribution is something, but it's not enough, and it's probably just his parents that paid it. Why can't we have this kid in doing some anti-racist training (paid for by him) followed up by a spell volunteering in some sort of capacity for an charity or organisation that combats racism? Something that may have some hope of changing his stupid worldview and improving things for similar victims.

Shane Driscoll · 04-02-2021 1:52pm

razorblunt wrote: »

Ok new account with 3 posts!

And? My point not valid because I don't have 10 million posts like yourself?

fergiesfolly · 04-02-2021 2:00pm

I don't think a prison sentence would've served anyone any good.
But an appropriate community service to make him think about his actions and their consequences would've been a better call than a few hundred quid fine.
To all those who minimize his actions because of his age or history I'd say this.
It's the first time he's been CAUGHT.
You don't know it's his first time doing it. And just because it's his first, does not mean it's his last. And I really don't understand why some here are giving him an easy ride.
Also, those who think that online racism or other bullying can't be that bad, talk to families who've lot children or siblings to it. Or ask the kids that go through it everyday.

partyguinness · 04-02-2021 2:07pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I never said it was simple. don't be so patronising. Until we start to take racism seriously it will only get worse. The courts need to send a message that outright racism like this case will not be tolerated.

I'm sorry but when you respond with just this and nothing else:-

"perhaps that is why there are so many repeat offenders with dozens of convictions."

Essentially you are saying that maybe there would not be so many repeat offenders if more jail time was dished out. That is simplistic and in fact studies from around the world over many decades indicate the very opposite effect.

Racism should be dealt with absolutely. But this guy was caught and brought before the Courts so IMO he did not get away with it at all. Sticking him in jail woudl have been OTT.

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 2:11pm

partyguinness wrote: »

I'm sorry but when you respond with just this and nothing else:-

"perhaps that is why there are so many repeat offenders with dozens of convictions."

Essentially you are saying that maybe there would not be so many repeat offenders if more jail time was dished out. That is simplistic and in fact studies from around the world over many decades indicate the very opposite effect.

Racism should be dealt with absolutely. But this guy was caught and brought before the Courts so IMO he did not get away with it at all. Sticking him in jail woudl have been OTT.

he didn't even get a criminal conviction for some really nasty racism. He got away with it.

04-02-2021 3:00pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he didn't even get a criminal conviction for some really nasty racism. He got away with it.

He didn't get away with it.
He was caught, and punished in accordance with our criminal justice system for first time offenders, unlikely to come to the attention of the courts again.

Lenient? I think so.
But its the system we have.

beggars_bush · 04-02-2021 3:06pm

If you don't pay your tv licence fine you are sent to prison

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 3:10pm

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

He didn't get away with it.
He was caught, and punished in accordance with our criminal justice system for first time offenders, unlikely to come to the attention of the courts again.

Lenient? I think so.
But its the system we have.

he barely got a slap on the wrist. he got away with it.

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 3:10pm

beggars_bush wrote: »

If you don't pay your tv licence fine you are sent to prison

nobody is sent to prison for not paying their tv licence.

beggars_bush · 04-02-2021 3:11pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

nobody is sent to prison for not paying their tv licence.

If you don't pay the court fine.
ie - tv licence fine. The fine for not paying your licence

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 3:13pm

beggars_bush wrote: »

If you don't pay the court fine.
ie - tv licence fine. The fine for not paying your licence

people are committed to prison in lieu of fines. that is not the same as being jailed for not having a tv licence.

ByTheSea2019 · 04-02-2021 3:18pm

Saying you forgive someone and coming back saying they haven't been punished harshly enough makes it look like the "forgiveness" was just for PR. If you don't forgive them, fine, stick to your guns and say you want to go through the trial and see them punished. But don't try to look forgiving if you're not.

nullzero · 04-02-2021 3:20pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he didn't even get a criminal conviction for some really nasty racism. He got away with it.

Do you think a criminal conviction and all that goes hand in hand with that is proportionate in this case?

A young person has the capacity to change, something which will have weighed on the mind of the judge. He has been punished for what he did, a criminal conviction in this case would not have been a wise decision as it could have the potential to lead this person down a dark path as a result, something the judge would have also taken I to consideration.

Racism is abhorrent, but sentencing a teenager to a term in prison for calling a retired footballer names on the Internet is a flight of fancy.

This young man has been publicly shamed and his behaviour set out for all to see. He has been given the opportunity to set himself straight, it's up to him to take it as much as it is up to society to recognise he wasn't allowed away with what he did.

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 3:25pm

nullzero wrote: »

Do you think a criminal conviction and all that goes hand in hand with that is proportionate in this case?

A young person has the capacity to change, something which will have weighed on the mind of the judge. He has been punished for what he did, a criminal conviction in this case would not have been a wise decision as it could have the potential to lead this person down a dark path as a result, something the judge would have also taken I to consideration.

Racism is abhorrent, but sentencing a teenager to a term in prison for calling a retired footballer names on the Internet is a flight of fancy.

This young man has been publicly shamed and his behaviour set out for all to see. He has been given the opportunity to set himself straight, it's up to him to take it as much as it is up to society to recognise he wasn't allowed away with what he did.

I absolutely do think a criminal conviction is warranted. As somebody else said this probably isn't the first time for him, just the first time somebody made a complaint to the police. His age doesn't excuse him. he was old enough to know that calling a black person a monkey isn't on. What he did was very wrong. he was old enough to know it was wrong.

JimmyVik · 04-02-2021 3:26pm

I think back to some of the things I said when I was a teenager.
I never really meant any of it. I just said it for shock value.
Id be inclined to give the kid a pass on this and say, dont do it again. Pretty sure he wont.

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 3:27pm

JimmyVik wrote: »

I think back to some of the things I said when I was a teenager.
I never really meant any of it. I just said it for shock value.
Id be inclined to give the kid a pass on this and say, dont do it again. Pretty sure he wont.

did you ever call a black person a coon monkey?

RobbieTheRobber · 04-02-2021 3:29pm

JimmyVik wrote: »

I think back to some of the things I said when I was a teenager.
I never really meant any of it. I just said it for shock value.
Id be inclined to give the kid a pass on this and say, dont do it again. Pretty sure he wont.

So racism is ok for adults as long as its for shock value?

JimmyVik · 04-02-2021 3:30pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

did you ever call a black person a coon monkey?

Worse.
Called Dubs and Kerrymen worse too.

And if I heard any of it out of my kids mouths - a slap on the back of the head and say cop yourself on and dont let me hear you ever say that again. Job done.

04-02-2021 3:36pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he barely got a slap on the wrist. he got away with it.

Again, you might think the punishment inadequate. Thats an opinion.

As far as the criminal justice system is concerned, he didn't get away with anything.
He was held to account, and judged and punished appropriately, by people far more qualified in these matters.

So its false to claim he got away with it.

partyguinness · 04-02-2021 3:36pm

The only abuse I have ever heard at football games in England came not from young fellas but white middle aged men. Vile.

I have no idea how anyone can get so worked up about an opposition footballer. And I also had to hear abuse at an Irish player and about that player's nationality. I'm sittng there hoping to God the same guys don't turn around speaking to me.

mynamejeff · 04-02-2021 3:38pm

gas that no one seems to have mentioned the cultural background of the offender here .

its is not uncommon for people from that background to be racially abusive in a manner that would be unacceptable to most of the rest of humanity

cant understand why people who regularly claim to the victims of racism so often get away with horrendously racist actions themselves

JimmyVik · 04-02-2021 3:40pm

partyguinness wrote: »

The only abuse I have ever heard at football games in England came not from young fellas but white middle aged men. Vile.

I have no idea how anyone can get so worked up about an opposition footballer. And I also had to hear abuse at an Irish player and about that player's nationality.

Its a tribal thing. Its like them against the world and they say stuff to get under the skin. Id say in private half of them would be nice as pie. Half of those yobs wouldnt be either mind you.
Ever with a group of Catholics or protestants up the north when none of the other side are around and hear what they say?
Worse again in Glasgow.

Shane Driscoll · 04-02-2021 3:41pm

mynamejeff wrote: »

gas that no one seems to have mentioned the cultural background of the offender here .

its is not uncommon for people from that background to be racially abusive in a manner that would be unacceptable to most of the rest of humanity

cant understand why people who regularly claim to the victims of racism so often get away with horrendously racist actions themselves

He was a traveller?

JimmyVik · 04-02-2021 3:41pm

mynamejeff wrote: »

gas that no one seems to have mentioned the cultural background of the offender here .

its is not uncommon for people from that background to be racially abusive in a manner that would be unacceptable to most of the rest of humanity

cant understand why people who regularly claim to the victims of racism so often get away with horrendously racist actions themselves

What backrgound?

JimmyVik · 04-02-2021 3:42pm

Shane Driscoll wrote: »

He was a traveller?

ahh.
Then I guess it would be racist if he got sent to jail.

04-02-2021 3:47pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I absolutely do think a criminal conviction is warranted. As somebody else said this probably isn't the first time for him, just the first time somebody made a complaint to the police. His age doesn't excuse him. he was old enough to know that calling a black person a monkey isn't on. What he did was very wrong. he was old enough to know it was wrong.

So now we're basing sentencing on what Boardsies are saying...

Its a not an entirely unreasonable assumption to think anyones first time in court on a charge is the first time they were caught, but its a principle of our judicial system, "innocent until proven guilty" in most cases.

When you're brought before the courts at any time in your criminal career, its assumed this is your first time committing a particular offence. At sentencing, record is taken into account.

We don't judge people on the basis "sure they must have been getting away with it for years, they just been caught this time".

The Inbetween is mine · 04-02-2021 4:11pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I absolutely do think a criminal conviction is warranted. As somebody else said this probably isn't the first time for him, just the first time somebody made a complaint to the police. His age doesn't excuse him. he was old enough to know that calling a black person a monkey isn't on. What he did was very wrong. he was old enough to know it was wrong.

Criminal convictions are not given out on "probably"
Absolute spoofer

nullzero · 04-02-2021 4:22pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I absolutely do think a criminal conviction is warranted. As somebody else said this probably isn't the first time for him, just the first time somebody made a complaint to the police. His age doesn't excuse him. he was old enough to know that calling a black person a monkey isn't on. What he did was very wrong. he was old enough to know it was wrong.

Well I absolutely think you're talking waffle.

Have you ever been into a district court in this country? Ever heard the constant flow of violent criminal acts committed by offenders with dozens of previous convictions being given suspended sentences? All these clowns deserve their records and should be locked up but there's nowhere to put them. But you think this stupid kid should be locked up?

Racism is abhorrent, we all know that but the idea that a kid should carry a criminal conviction for their entire life for being a d1ckhead on the Internet as a teenager is preposterous.

What sort of precedent does that set? Every idiot who uses a slur in future ends up in prison at the expense of the taxpayer? It might satisfy you but it's the people who foot the bill for housing these idiots in prisons.
If we can't lock up violent repeat offenders how can we lock up teenagers using racial slurs over the Internet?

The Inbetween is mine · 04-02-2021 4:23pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No. try thinking smarter.

Physician heal thyself

04-02-2021 4:26pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No. try thinking smarter.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

don't be so patronising.

Ah lad...

Do as I say eh?

TomTomTim · 04-02-2021 4:28pm

nullzero wrote: »

Well I absolutely think you're talking waffle.

Have you ever been into a district court in this country? Ever heard the constant flow of violent criminal acts committed by offenders with dozens of previous convictions being given suspended sentences? All these clowns deserve their records and should be locked up but there's nowhere to put them. But you think this stupid kid should be locked up?

Racism is abhorrent, we all know that but the idea that a kid should carry a criminal conviction for their entire life for being a d1ckhead on the Internet as a teenager is preposterous.

What sort of precedent does that set? Every idiot who uses a slur in future ends up in prison at the expense of the taxpayer? It might satisfy you but it's the people who foot the bill for housing these idiots in prisons.
If we can't lock up violent repeat offenders how can we lock up teenagers using racial slurs over the Internet?

It's not just that it's a conviction, it's what he was convicted for. A former bank robber would have more of a chance getting a job than someone who was once judged as being racist.

ohnonotgmail · 04-02-2021 4:29pm

It says a lot about the state of this country that public embarrassment is sufficient punishment for very nasty racism. It would make you wonder about the people who think his punishment was sufficient.

Chris_Heilong · 04-02-2021 4:30pm

Montage of Feck wrote: »

Was this really racism? He made disgusting insulting and threatening comments that is undeniable and he should face consequences. But he made them with the intent to cause insult and fear due to an bizarre and illconceived sense of aggrivement rather than from outright racist beliefs.

You can insult people without bring racial elements into it but these were targeting his race which in my mind is racist. Losing access to twitter and public shaming should be the only consequences IMO.

The Inbetween is mine · 04-02-2021 4:37pm

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

You can insult people without bring racial elements into it but these were targeting his race which in my mind is racist. Losing access to twitter and public shaming should be the only consequences IMO.

Why should he lose access to twitter?

nullzero · 04-02-2021 4:42pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

It says a lot about the state of this country that public embarrassment is sufficient punishment for very nasty racism. It would make you wonder about the people who think his punishment was sufficient.

Nasty racism?

He didn't commit a racially motivated assault on somebody.

His language was repugnant but he was minor when he said what he said.

Think about proportionality in relation to this before you start locking every idiot who has used the N word up in imaginary prisons that don't exist.

BrianD3 · 04-02-2021 4:49pm

JimmyVik wrote: »

Its a tribal thing. Its like them against the world and they say stuff to get under the skin. Id say in private half of them would be nice as pie. Half of those yobs wouldnt be either mind you.
Ever with a group of Catholics or protestants up the north when none of the other side are around and hear what they say?
Worse again in Glasgow.

I know a few highly intelligent and decent people (including a university professor) who were football hooligans in their twenties. The primal and tribal nature of the sport results in people doing things they wouldn't dream of doing otherwise. I'd say many of those who threw bananas at black players in the past are mortified about it - but at the same time if they were in that atmosphere again, they might do something similar and then regret it again.

I well remember when I was a kid the slagging that went on about English football teams. One of the slags was about the number of black players - i.e. Liverpool may be ahead of Man Utd but Liverpool also have more black players therefore Utd are actually better than Liverpool. Have I and the people i went to school with turned out to be terrible racists - I don't think so.

We all do or say things when we are young and stupid or in the heat of battle that we may later regret. Ian Wright himself was a controversial player during his career. Sent to anger management classes. Regular run ins with refs referring to them as "Little Hitlers", is such a statement offensive to Jews given how Jews suffered under Hitler in WW 2?. Also Wright was involved in numerous physical altercations in his career including "accidentally" kneeing Steve Ogrizovic in the nose, punching David Howells, two footed studs up lunge at Schmeichel's legs. Assault if it happened off the pitch. Loved by fans, showed his passion.

04-02-2021 5:02pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

It says a lot about the state of this country that public embarrassment is sufficient punishment for very nasty racism. It would make you wonder about the people who think his punishment was sufficient.

See, now you're just soap boxing and casting aspersions on those who have given you a reasoned and logical argument against your point.
"Ah but sure the rest of ye are just racists" disagreeing with me.

You haven't provided a scintilla of justification why he should be treated any different by the criminal justice system for a first time offender for non serious crime. only "because Boardsies are saying" and emotion, and stuff.

Thankfully, the courts aren't presided over by members of the outraged mob.

RobbieTheRobber · 04-02-2021 5:03pm

BrianD3 wrote: »

Also Wright was involved in numerous physical altercations in his career including "accidentally" kneeing Steve Ogrizovic in the nose, punching David Howells, two footed studs up lunge at Schmeichel's legs. Assault if it happened off the pitch. Loved by fans, showed his passion.

Ian wright is a bad person that makes the racism ok

RobbieTheRobber · 04-02-2021 5:05pm

nullzero wrote: »

Nasty racism?

nasty
/ˈnɑːsti/
adjective
1.
very bad or unpleasant.

2. behaving in an unpleasant or spiteful way.

racism
/ˈreɪsɪz(ə)m/
noun
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.

Yeah seems an ok interpretation to me

BrianD3 · 04-02-2021 5:12pm

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Ian wright is a bad person that makes the racism ok

RobbietheRobber doesn't understand plain English. Point out where I said that - go on.

I think Wright is great and I suspect I know far more about his career and history than you do.

The point is, as I already said, we do or say things in the heat of battle or when we are young that are deemed unacceptable or offensive. Wright probably feels bad about Steve Ogrizovic's nose now just as O'Brien would likely have felt bad about his comments in a few years, court case or no court case.

RobbieTheRobber · 04-02-2021 5:18pm

BrianD3 wrote: »

RobbietheRobber doesn't understand plain English. Point out where I said that - go on.

I think Wright is great and I suspect I know far more about his career and history than you do.

The point is, as I already said, we do or say things in the heat of battle or when we are young that are deemed unacceptable or offensive. Wright probably feels bad about Steve Ogrizovic's nose now just as O'Brien would likely have felt bad about his comments in a few years, court case or no court case.

So the heat of battle makes racism ok and in this case the heat of battle we are referring to is playing computer games.
So playing computer games makes racism ok?

blackvalley · 04-02-2021 5:32pm

So the question of racism rages unabated but the question of sanity is overlooked.
How can anyone who is playing an online game , using characters that they themselves have picked then blame these imaginary characters for performing badly . " Mad as a brush " is the term i would use .

is_that_so · 04-02-2021 5:36pm

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So the heat of battle makes racism ok and in this case the heat of battle we are referring to is playing computer games.
So playing computer games makes racism ok?

It certainly makes people say very stupid things and often reach for angry childish insults they think are likely to offend or hurt people. It is unacceptable behaviour but not evidence on its own that it exists in RL.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 04-02-2021 5:39pm

The punishment was a bit lenient. HOWEVER, he was old enough to be named. So his name will come up in internet searches. This will affect him in the future. He has a fairly commonplace name though so I feel sorry for those who share his name and who might have their CVs binned because of it.

Tombo2001 · 04-02-2021 5:46pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The punishment was a bit lenient. HOWEVER, he was old enough to be named. So his name will come up in internet searches. This will affect him in the future. He has a fairly commonplace name though so I feel sorry for those who share his name and who might have their CVs binned because of it.

So its a punishment now that people know he did it.

TBH it was the judges commentary as much as the sentence that annoyed me.

If you stab someone, can a judge give you leniency for being 'young and naive'?

Why is this different.

Regarding the sentence, my only words of explanation would be that its consistent with many other serious crimes that have resulted in suspended sentences.

weldoninhio · 04-02-2021 5:49pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The punishment was a bit lenient. HOWEVER, he was old enough to be named. So his name will come up in internet searches. This will affect him in the future. He has a fairly commonplace name though so I feel sorry for those who share his name and who might have their CVs binned because of it.

Can't you have it removed from google.

What are your thoughts on the Ian Wright/Patrick O'Brien situation?

Comments