Criminal "Justice" System

Collie D · 06-07-2006 10:52am #1

Reading the paper this morning I came across two reports from the courts yesterday.

1. A man in Dublin who glassed another guy in a pub

2. Another man in Cork who followed a traffic warden in his car and hit him in the face with a hammer for giving him a ticket

Now, both of these people were grown men, not teenage thugs. These were people who should know better and the hammer guy definitely seemed to have intent, rather than it being a spur of the moment thing.

Both of these guys were given community service. How is this a deterrent? Just shows that people can go around and use violence against others and get away with it in the courts (if they ever get there in the first place). Also, in both of these cases compensation was offered (thirty grand by the guy in Cork). Is this a case of buying your way out of trouble? Are we creating a situation where it's one law for the rich and another for the rest of us? Not saying that just because someone is poor and can't afford to offer compo that we should feel sorry for them but a thug is a thug regardless of class or wealth.

Anyway, I'm rambling but my point was why weren't these animals locked up? I'm betting we'll see somebody being locked up tomorrow for stealing, not condoning that either but surely hitting someone with a glass or a hammer is far more serious than shoplifting.

Kiera · 06-07-2006 11:05am

Its ridiculous! How can they jail people for not paying their bin charges or the rossport 5 and let these animals walk free. I agree with you, Collie. If you have money you can buy your way out of trouble! Hopefully the next government can put a stop to all this lark.

It’s the same all over the world. Its pretty sad that all we can do is accept it. There’s a lot more countries out there that are 100 times as bad as us.

humanji · 06-07-2006 11:38am

In fairness, the guy with the hammer was proven to be off his face on medication at the time. He wasn't usually like that, and so the court gave him a 3 year suspended sentence and he had to pay damages to the victim.

But still, it is ridiculous that if you stand up for basic human rights you can go to jail, but if you kill or try to kill somone you can get off scott free.

But I guess what explains it is the thing that links Keira's two example. Rossport and bin charges. They both bringing money, so people care more about that than actual justice.

Trode · 06-07-2006 1:27pm

jomanji wrote:

In fairness, the guy with the hammer was proven to be off his face on medication at the time. He wasn't usually like that, and so the court gave him a 3 year suspended sentence and he had to pay damages to the victim.

But still, it is ridiculous that if you stand up for basic human rights you can go to jail, but if you kill or try to kill somone you can get off scott free.

But I guess what explains it is the thing that links Keira's two example. Rossport and bin charges. They both bringing money, so people care more about that than actual justice.

I'd say its more about open defiance of the law than money. Both of he attackers mentioned were in an altered state at the time, which was likely a factor in their sentence, whereas if either of them had stood up in court and said "I'm going to keep on doing this because I don't like the law that says I can't",as was essentially the case with the other two examples, they'd probably be in for some jail time too.

gamer · 06-07-2006 6:04pm

I heard on radio dublin has the fastest growing crime rate of any city in europe, and read in irish times this week they are thinking of closing down 4 garda stations in the city centre,i believe there are not enough gardai to maintain law and order ,they are overstretched with limited resources,IT WOULD HELP ,IF criminals were charged and fined ,ie you rob a car you have to pay cost of all repairs plus a grand, ie the victim gets financial compensation for any serious crime.In 2006 they dont even have a proper secure digital radio comms system.if this justice system was a car it would be a rusty 90s lada.

Terry · 06-07-2006 9:00pm

i see reports like this in the local paper all the time.
someone up for assault, offers the court a few grand and walks away scot free. it really is a joke and people are buying their way out of jail.
medication or not, that guy should have been locked up. his crime was premeditated. if not prison, then at least some mental health treatment centre.

Paddy_Irishman · 07-07-2006 12:56am

Ye there is far too much leniency in this country. The real problem is not so much people are getting that much more violent it's just that the people committing the crimes are 'generally', not all of course, repeat offenders and as such know that they will either get away with it / pay a small fine / do a small jail sentance.

These repeat offenders also know they will get free legal advice / representation and it will cost them nothing to fight their case as much as possible while costing the irish tax payer a lot of money with costly solicitor fee's with 3 or 4 court dates set to deal with something that needs 1 court date. This is the norm in the court system, I will explain a little later.

The real problem is the courts and judges. The Judges, for the most part, will not impose a heavy sentance even for serious crimes such as the above mentioned ones. The reason? All Judges are afraid of having their judgement challenged in a higher court and having it changed / amended / scrapped, thus undermining their position or stature. It is easier to just give 'let offs' and watered down penalties than it is to punish the crime with the time. <Yes it's kinda catchy

>

Also other judges are reluctant to undermine their fello Judges and as such the appeal processes just create more money for solicitors / barristers. There is a sneaky reason behind why this is done which I was getting at earlier in my post.

Judges will very often push cases back, setting new hearing dates and remand dates for cases so the case can be 'prepared'. This leads to 3 or 4 court dates when 1 is needed. This means alot of extra money for solicitors and barristers. This is done because the judges are doing there 'lesser' colleagues a favour, generating them money. The Judges were solicitors / barristers them selfs at some stage and its all one big boys club < ye there are lady judges 2 of course!>.

If you went into any district court during the week and sat and watched for the day you would see. It's like a market where solicitors / barristers take turns picking clients to defend with big $$$ above each defendants head.

The sad thing is. Decent regular people end up paying for a solicitor because they can afford 1 and want good representation. Even if you were to try to get the free one the judge wouldnt grant a decent regular person 1 because he knows they pay better than state granted aid and he doesnt have 2.

Just my 2 cents from a neutral point of view

.

simu · 07-07-2006 2:49am

Grrr grrr grrr... should be hung and quartered... no respect for other people... what world coming to... deValera would never have tolerated it... bring back corporal punishment... the noose is too good... would you like fries with that... etc

Time Magazine · 07-07-2006 2:55am

gamer wrote:

,IT WOULD HELP ,IF criminals were charged and fined ,ie you rob a car you have to pay cost of all repairs plus a grand, ie the victim gets financial compensation for any serious crime.

Civil proceedings are allowed. Genuinely, if some gobshite decides to beat the crap out of me in town some night he better have his cheque-book at the ready as well as me going to the Gardai.

Black Swan · 07-07-2006 6:59am

Kiera wrote:

If you have money you can buy your way out of trouble!

There's a saying in the States: "Money talks and OJ walks!" OJ Simpson, famous American football player and sports announcer was charged with killing his x-wife and some guy whom he thought was seeing her. He then did the famous "escape" ride down the freeway in his SUV with a host of cop cars surrounding him, and telecast on TV. With his millions of dollars, OJ hired what was later called the "Dream Team," lawyers that only the rich could afford to pay. There are many cases like this one, where dream teams are hired by the rich and when the verdict comes in, they are "proven" innocent.:rolleyes:

seamus · 07-07-2006 10:47am

Actually, we've a bit of a topsy-turvy system in this country. If you're wealthy you're much more likely to feel the full brunt of law compared to the guy who's lived in social housing his entire life cos "He's had it hard".
€30k compensation isn't that much, and anyone and his dog could get this from the bank with no collateral.

The big difference between rich and poor is that a rich guys who's committed a crime is much less likely (through expensive solicitors' wranglings) to end up in court in the first place.

Criminal "Justice" System

Comments