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.

This is ****ing infuriating!!

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    buried
    Registered Users Posts: 9,675 ✭✭✭buried


    Email Charlie Flanagan thinking he gives a $hit?

    You may as well stand on the Cliffs of Moher and take a piss off the edge hoping your pants don't get wet.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Options
    #33
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users Posts: 13,806 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    I really can't see how the DPP came to this decision. I really can't. The juvenile program, I've used it (whatever good it does, only seems to work on young fellas from good backgrounds, scrote kids nearly laugh while pretending to be genuine in the remorse). I just really cannot see how this can fall under the remit of the juvenile program. I was under the impression that the injured party, or their parent/guardian was supposed to accept this. A quick Google tells me otherwise. It should definitely be a prerequisite for a caution to be administered; acceptance by the injured party. Still baffling to think this could even be considered under the program. I would consider this 'serious harm' as per the Non-Fatal Offences Act 97:

    "“serious harm” means injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious disfigurement or substantial loss or impairment of the mobility of the body as a whole or of the function of any particular bodily member or organ;"

    And I was pretty sure Assault Causing Serious Harm is not something that can be considered, but a quick Google again lets me know that all crimes can be considered. Jesus I'm happy I left when I did, I couldn't face the parents of this child and tell them the scum walk free.


  • Options
    #34
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users Posts: 23,443 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Saying that this is a disgrace does not do justice to how bad this is. A juvenile caution for a very serious offence will do feck all to stop this happening again and the punishment in no way fits the crime. Totally ridiculous.

    The Healy Raes just the other day were essentially told "first conviction, you walk" after battering an English tourist and leaving him with scars.

    Vigilantism is the end point here because the justice system is not protecting the people of Ireland.


  • Options
    #35
    Optimalprimerib
    Registered Users Posts: 1,885 ✭✭✭Optimalprimerib


    Are there many pedophiles jailed? We should try to make use of them by giving them a cellmate.


  • Options
    #36
    Calhoun
    Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    Potential-Monke wrote: »
    I really can't see how the DPP came to this decision. I really can't. The juvenile program, I've used it (whatever good it does, only seems to work on young fellas from good backgrounds, scrote kids nearly laugh while pretending to be genuine in the remorse). I just really cannot see how this can fall under the remit of the juvenile program. I was under the impression that the injured party, or their parent/guardian was supposed to accept this. A quick Google tells me otherwise. It should definitely be a prerequisite for a caution to be administered; acceptance by the injured party. Still baffling to think this could even be considered under the program. I would consider this 'serious harm' as per the Non-Fatal Offences Act 97:

    "“serious harm” means injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious disfigurement or substantial loss or impairment of the mobility of the body as a whole or of the function of any particular bodily member or organ;"

    And I was pretty sure Assault Causing Serious Harm is not something that can be considered, but a quick Google again lets me know that all crimes can be considered. Jesus I'm happy I left when I did, I couldn't face the parents of this child and tell them the scum walk free.

    Crazy to think this is happening during the watch of the so called party of law and order.

    Not surprising though as too many in Ireland make a living from giving scum a second chance.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Blazer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,415 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    buried wrote: »
    The treat the criminals softly approach doesn't work for society but it sure works well for the law racket's greasy pockets. Keep the scum free outside so they can keep coming back for the same offences using the same free legal aid we all pay for. Its a F**king disgrace but what can you do. The law society racket has the game sown up and not one political party wants to do anything about it. And sure why would they when they all hang out together laughing their holes off at the rest of us.

    And there you’ve hit the nail on the head.
    Between lawyers , Judges and the Gardaí they’re all on nice little earners at the top and it’s a whole merry go around.
    Not to mention the scum themselves.
    I’d quite happily put all 4 segments onto their own little island and then see how they handle the vermin.
    Somehow I doubt they’d be so lenient then.


  • Options
    #38
    twowheelsonly
    Registered Users Posts: 2,268 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    Vic_08 wrote: »
    Proper only leave prison in a cheap wooden box life sentences. Not Irish dog-year out in 10 life sentences.

    Can you name anyone doing a life sentence that got out in 10 years ? I can't.
    It's closer to 20 these days with many doing even longer.
    Potential-Monke wrote: »
    I really can't see how the DPP came to this decision. I really can't. The juvenile program, I've used it (whatever good it does, only seems to work on young fellas from good backgrounds, scrote kids nearly laugh while pretending to be genuine in the remorse). .

    That's the million dollar question in this instance. I'd love to know the background of the perpetrators in this case. Everyone presuming that it's the 'usual suspects' but in my experience the 'usual suspects' would have been packed off to Oberstown by now. It tends to be the 'good kids' from 'good families' that benefit most from Juvenile Cautions. The fact that the perpetrators seem to have reached 16/17 without coming to Garda attention would suggest that they may indeed come from 'good' families.

    Disgraceful decision from the DPP.


  • Options
    #39
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users Posts: 13,806 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    Seems to be the case here. Wish I stayed in proper contact with a few ex-colleagues, they might have been able to fill me in!

    Still doesn't excuse it though. Will the same apply to all crimes if you've never come to Garda attention before? I'd love to know the cut-off, like which crime would be just over the limit for caution. Again, bring in the requirement that the injured party has to agree, will solve a lot of this.


  • Options
    #40
    NewbridgeIR
    Registered Users Posts: 3,713 ✭✭✭NewbridgeIR


    Have the Left condemned this yet? They’re frequently silent when it comes to
    violent crime.

    In this instance, I presume the attackers are from posh backgrounds


  • Options
    #41
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 31,828 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    NewbridgeIR wrote: »
    Have the Left condemned this yet? They’re frequently silent when it comes to
    violent crime.

    In this instance, I presume the attackers are from posh backgrounds
    I am not sure what this has got to do with left or right? Most sane people would think this is horrendous and the lack of any sentence vile nothing to do with left or right


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    tritriagain
    Registered Users Posts: 1,156 ✭✭✭tritriagain


    So dunnes stores have to pay 56k to a woman cos they didn't put a warning on a box but these scumbags get away scott free. Seems fair.


  • Options
    #43
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    BeerWolf wrote: »
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/alleged-perpetrators-of-acid-attack-on-teenagers-will-not-be-charged-1.4112087?mode=amp

    That boy who had a promising football career that was attacked with acid earlier this year in Waterford, the ****ers that did it are only receiving a caution???

    WTF?!!!

    The absolute leniency on juvenile delinquents in Ireland's "Justice" system is so ****ing repugnant...

    But you can get 56k for a bloody jug from dunnes exploding. The “ justice” system ? It’s primary purpose is a gravy train for all involved !


  • Options
    #44
    Lewis_Benson
    Registered Users Posts: 1,881 ✭✭✭Lewis_Benson


    tastyt wrote: »
    How do the judges look at themselves in the mirror eh.

    Probably because they know the little scrotes that they let back out on the streets won't be walking around their neighbourhoods in howth, dalkey and killiney.

    They don't give a **** about normal working people having to deal with anti social and criminal behaviour everyday because its a different world to them.

    They can sit there smugly in their sheltered life and lecture people about rehabilitation and giving people chances .

    **** off

    It's a business.
    They need scumbags on the streets to keep themselves in a job.


  • Options
    #45
    NewbridgeIR
    Registered Users Posts: 3,713 ✭✭✭NewbridgeIR


    gmisk wrote: »
    I am not sure what this has got to do with left or right? Most sane people would think this is horrendous and the lack of any sentence vile nothing to do with left or right


    Yes - most people would consider this an appalling attack. Sentencing is weak across the board and left wing politicians (and their supporters) do not appear to have any appetite to tackle this.


  • Options
    #46
    Airyfairy12
    Registered Users Posts: 3,390 ✭✭✭Airyfairy12


    DPP make decisions about cases based on their own opinion - opinions can be wrong, unethical and stupid and shouldnt be given such weight. There needs to be clearly outlined rules and punishment for crimes.


  • Options
    #47
    washman3
    Registered Users Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭washman3


    tastyt wrote: »
    How do the judges look at themselves in the mirror eh.

    Probably because they know the little scrotes that they let back out on the streets won't be walking around their neighbourhoods in howth, dalkey and killiney.

    They don't give a **** about normal working people having to deal with anti social and criminal behaviour everyday because its a different world to them.

    They can sit there smugly in their sheltered life and lecture people about rehabilitation and giving people chances .

    **** off


    This post sums it all up in a nutshell. This is unfortunately where Ireland is at today.


  • Options
    #48
    LeBash
    Registered Users Posts: 3,504 ✭✭✭LeBash


    buried wrote: »
    Email Charlie Flanagan thinking he gives a $hit?

    You may as well stand on the Cliffs of Moher and take a piss off the edge hoping your pants don't get wet.

    Of course he doesnt give a $hit. He does want to have good public opinion going into the next election though.


  • Options
    #49
    Jonybgud
    Registered Users Posts: 463 ✭✭Jonybgud


    Wibbs wrote: »
    HangHighGallows.jpg
    Problem solved. And yes I'd quite happily pull the lever.

    Too good for them, imo.

    There are some instances where mob justice is the only answer. This is one of those cases, imo.

    The entire judicial system needs to be overhauled. A lot of crusty old has-beens imposing their self assumed state of importance and lording it over all and sundry, need to be forcibly retired.


  • Options
    #50
    X111111111111
    Closed Accounts Posts: 349 ✭✭X111111111111


    If the acid was thrown at an ATM the sentence would have been harsher.


  • Options
    #51
    washman3
    Registered Users Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭washman3


    tritriagain wrote: »
    So dunnes stores have to pay 56k to a woman cos they didn't put a warning on a box but these scumbags get away scott free. Seems fair.


    Add another €20-25k they have to pay on top of that to the legal profession, sorry i mean legal industry. :mad:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Its on Claire Byrne show now. I have been looking on in horror over the years at the acid attacks in UK. I've always believed its a crime that should carry a very stiff sentence. I hoped acid attacks wouldn't become something that happened in Ireland. Naively i thought if it did happen it would be punished very severely.

    Now to see that a few scumbags carried out a horrific acid attack in Ireland and they get off with a caution. I am just flabbergasted at the leniency. Whoever made the decision to let them off with a caution really is not fit for their job. Acid attacks should 100% of the time carry a serious custodial sentence. These attacks are really not something we want to see become commonplace here.


Advertisement