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

Women walks away scot free after admitting making up sexual assault allegations

Options
  • 27-04-2009 1:29pm
    #1
    Duckjob
    Registered Users Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭


    http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0427/hannonm.html
    A 34-year-old Galway man who was wrongly convicted of sexually assaulting a ten-year-old girl has had his conviction declared a miscarriage of justice.

    Michael Feichin Hannon's 1999 conviction was overturned earlier this year after the girl, Una Hardester, of Aughrismore, Cleggan, Co Galway, admitted nine years later that she had made up the allegation.

    The State had opposed his application to have it declared a miscarriage of justice because it argued there was no wrongdoing by the State or any of its agents.
    Advertisement

    However, the Court of Criminal Appeal granted the certificate, describing the case as an alarming and disturbing one.

    The court said Mr Hannon, who received a suspended sentence, was an innocent man.

    The court heard there was a history of animosity between his family and his alleged victim's family relating to disputes between rights of way and land.

    Ms Hardester's allegation of sexual assault was made in detailed terms, and was conspicuous for its graphic and coherent uses of medical and anatomical terms, the court said.

    However, about nine years later she returned from the US and admitted that she had made up the allegation.

    She told gardaí she did it for no other reason than 'he was one of the Hannons'.

    Ms Hardester said she had lived with a 'cancerous guilt' since the event, had found God and was trying to make amends.

    She added: 'I did something terribly wrong and I got away with it. Other people paid a heavy price. I want to clear his name now.'

    Speaking outside the court, Mr Hannon said he was pleased and relieved that his conviction had been quashed and that the court had confirmed he suffered a miscarriage of justice.
    -
    He said he had had to live with the stigma of a conviction and he hopes that lessons could be learned and that more care would be taken in the future to ensure it did not happen again.

    This angers up the blood.

    Apparently, she gets to say sorry and walk away after ruining this mans life.

    I think the sentences served on those found guilty of falsely accusing others of sexual assaults should match those served on people convicted of those crimes.


«134567…11

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,789 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    I agree, but this case is different. She was NOT a woman when the claim was made.
    She was 10 and it's possible I would say that this child was coerced and supported by
    adults in making the claim. These are the real vermin in this case and these should be held responsible


  • Options
    #3
    wudangclan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,883 ✭✭✭wudangclan


    Duckjob wrote: »
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0427/hannonm.html


    This angers up the blood.

    Apparently, she gets to say sorry and walk away after ruining this mans life.

    I think the sentences served on those found guilty of falsely accusing others of sexual assaults should match those served on people convicted of those crimes.

    it doesnt say here,but i believe she was ten at the time she made the accusations and he received a four year suspended sentence.i think she's unlikely to be prosecuted. still a sh*t thing to do ,though.


  • Options
    #4
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 28,120 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    the little bitch should be locked up...that's just wrong, she ruined a guys life...


  • Options
    #5
    Bottle_of_Smoke
    Registered Users Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭Bottle_of_Smoke


    I agree there should be a punishment such as that which you outlined.

    People are gonna say "blah blah it will stop girls from reporting rapes" but no, it won't. For the girl to be convicted it would have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt she falsely accused the man. THere would have to be evidence.

    It wouldn't be a case of "man acquitted, lying slut jailed"

    That said, the girl in this case probably never would have come forward if she was going to be punished.


  • Options
    #6
    Hogzy
    Registered Users Posts: 7,544 ✭✭✭Hogzy


    She shouldnt be jailed, that would just be pointless, she clearly made the accusations for a reason, and in my opinion it was probably a call out for help!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Hunchback
    Registered Users Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭Hunchback


    well, hopefully the God that she found is the vengeful old testament one heh heh


  • Options
    #8
    Blazer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,419 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    Time to sue some people I reckon and I hope he takes them to the cleaners.


  • Options
    #9
    DrumSteve
    Registered Users Posts: 10,799 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    if they bring in a law stating that if you lie about an assault then you go to jail... well it wouldnt work.

    basically then every court case would have someone going to jail... defendant or plaintiff. basically whoever wins the other is ****ed. ( literally)

    It'd stop victims coming forward especially if there is no coherent evidence ya know.

    <SNIP>


  • Options
    #10
    wasper
    Registered Users Posts: 419 ✭✭wasper


    Hogzy wrote: »
    She shouldnt be jailed, that would just be pointless, she clearly made the accusations for a reason, and in my opinion it was probably a call out for help!

    Me thinks you are too way into psycho BS.
    She was obviously coached to say what she said. I think the Gardai should investigate the adults at the time.


  • Options
    #11
    niceirishfella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,538 ✭✭✭niceirishfella


    Am I allow to use the C word here, Cos she's one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Kipperhell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,477 ✭✭✭Kipperhell


    Mathew Reilly wrote: »
    Time to sue some people I reckon and I hope he takes them to the cleaners.

    +1
    I would find it impossible to believe a 10 year old would be capable of this on their own. It doesn't actually state she was the 10 year old though so maybe she was an adult stating her relative who was 10 was assaulted.

    There is obviously something wrong with our system if a conviction can be given out based on a single persons statement against another. Sounds very like a witch trial in the literal sense where a child can make a statement that can destroy a person's life.


  • Options
    #13
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Hogzy wrote: »
    She shouldnt be jailed, that would just be pointless, she clearly made the accusations for a reason, and in my opinion it was probably a call out for help!
    She told gardaí she did it for no other reason than 'he was one of the Hannons'.
    Little b|tch. It's cases like this that make people not believe others when they call rape.

    =-=

    Cache 22. If there was a peanlty for lying, once the accused was convicted, the "victim" wouldn't come forward to clear the accuseds name, as the "victim" be charged for lying. On the other hand, the rape word has been used when two drunks have sex, and the husband/boyfriend/parents/etc later finds out, which can cause a lot of harm to ones name, even if they are proved innocent.


  • Options
    #14
    Das Kitty
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 17,231 Mod ✭✭✭✭Das Kitty


    a) she was 10
    b) she didn't have to come forward but did
    c) I do think an investigation into the circumstances should be made, but the onus will be on the falsely accused man whether he wants to push for a civil action, I very much doubt criminal proceedings will be taken.


  • Options
    #15
    nomorebadtown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 634 ✭✭✭nomorebadtown


    Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were 10 years old when they murdered little James Bulger in 1993. They were released in 2001. The courts saw fit to incarcerate these 10 year olds. There are numerous examples of "cold cases" in which people are convicted of crimes they committed decades ago. This 10 year old girl committed a crime (coerced or not). Now she has come clean to ease her conscience. If she really sought to make amends, she would face the consequences of her actions. But despite the fact that natural justice would see her punished in some way, she probably checked her legal position and made sure that she was untouchable before she made this heartfelt confession.


  • Options
    #16
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Duckjob wrote: »
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0427/hannonm.html


    This angers up the blood.

    Apparently, she gets to say sorry and walk away after ruining this mans life.

    I think the sentences served on those found guilty of falsely accusing others of sexual assaults should match those served on people convicted of those crimes.

    She was 10 when she made the allegations. When she reached maturity she realised what she'd done and retracted.
    Drunkmonkey wrote:
    the little bitch should be locked up...that's just wrong, she ruined a guys life... .

    So she should be jailed for being the one who got his name cleared, or do you suggest going back in time and jailing the 10 year old version?
    nomorebadtown wrote:
    Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were 10 years old when they murdered little James Bulger in 1993. They were released in 2001. The courts saw fit to incarcerate these 10 year olds. .

    ...in one of the most pathetic state aided 'lynch mob' reactions of recent history.
    nomorebadtown wrote:
    This 10 year old girl committed a crime (coerced or not). Now she has come clean to ease her conscience. If she really sought to make amends, she would face the consequences of her actions. But despite the fact that natural justice would see her punished in some way, she probably checked her legal position and made sure that she was untouchable before she made this heartfelt confession. .

    ..wild speculation that ignores the fact all she had to do was keep her gob shut.


  • Options
    #17
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    Whatever about a criminal case, there is surely grounds for a civil one.


  • Options
    #18
    TheTubes
    Registered Users Posts: 721 ✭✭✭TheTubes


    Kiera wrote: »
    Joking about rape isnt very nice, Sean.

    Rape is no laughing matter... unless you're raping a clown.

    credit where credit is due


  • Options
    #19
    nomorebadtown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 634 ✭✭✭nomorebadtown


    Nodin wrote: »
    ..wild speculation that ignores the fact all she had to do was keep her gob shut.
    nope, i dont ignore that fact at all.

    I heard Hannon's brief on newstalk, he will be seeking compensation from the state on the grounds of miscarriage of justice.


  • Options
    #20
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Duckjob wrote: »
    I think the sentences served on those found guilty of falsely accusing others of sexual assaults should match those served on people convicted of those crimes.
    If they are caught lying then yes.

    If they voluntarily confess, then no.

    Why?

    Because otherwise they'll just shut their mouths forever, and leave a man to rot in jail.

    As much as 50% of rape accusations that are reported are false, we need to ensure that as many of these retract their statements as possible.


  • Options
    #21
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,789 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    It is my belief that a ten year old would almost certainly have needed support, coercion and coaching to make this claim stick; unless she really was an advanced ten year old.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Surely the chap is going to be able to sue somebody. Probably the state.


  • Options
    #23
    Trog
    Closed Accounts Posts: 456 ✭✭Trog


    <SNIP>


    On Topic:
    It wasn't the 10 year old girl that was responsible for the miscarriage of justice, it was the court that condemned him for something he didn't do. He deserves compensation from them, which he will undoubtedly get if he pursues it, to the tune of a good few million yo yo's. So all's well that ends well. Messy situation, but resolved as fairly as possible.

    I'd have a lot of sympathy for her, she has to live with the consequences of her actions, but I doubt she was fully aware of them at the time. Fair play for stepping up to the plate though.


  • Options
    #24
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    niceirishfella wrote: »
    Am I allow to use the C word here, Cos she's one.
    the_syco wrote: »
    Little b|tch. It's cases like this that make people not believe others when they call rape.
    She was 10 years old and used explicit terminology - do you really think she was capable of that all on her own?
    nomorebadtown wrote: »
    Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were 10 years old when they murdered little James Bulger in 1993. They were released in 2001. The courts saw fit to incarcerate these 10 year olds.
    But it wasn't revealed she made a false allegation until long after she was 10. And what those two boys did... well they hardly weren't going to face consequences. I don't understand your citing of the case.
    There are numerous examples of "cold cases" in which people are convicted of crimes they committed decades ago. This 10 year old girl committed a crime (coerced or not). Now she has come clean to ease her conscience. If she really sought to make amends, she would face the consequences of her actions. But despite the fact that natural justice would see her punished in some way, she probably checked her legal position and made sure that she was untouchable before she made this heartfelt confession.
    Why have you jumped to this conclusion?
    Nodin wrote: »
    ...in one of the most pathetic state aided 'lynch mob' reactions of recent history.
    Ah in fairness, they were guilty.


  • Options
    #25
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Dudess wrote: »

    Ah in fairness, they were guilty.

    Thats not in dispute, merely the 'justice' in the method of their trial and punishment.


  • Options
    #26
    Mr.Lizard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,476 ✭✭✭Mr.Lizard


    As an aside how exactly did this 34 year old man know this 10 year old girl (surely they had to know each other, been in same location alone together etc)?

    Plus, a convicted nonse isn't going to have a pleasant time in prison so her lie was a double-whammy of sorts.


  • Options
    #27
    nomorebadtown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 634 ✭✭✭nomorebadtown


    Hannon got four years suspended but i presume he was treated as a pariah and bogieman in his community for the last 10 odd years.

    I cited the Bulger case as an example of 10 year old kids knowingly doing something extremely wrong and being punished.


  • Options
    #28
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    I'm not being smart but I still don't get the relevance.


  • Options
    #29
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Mr.Lizard wrote: »
    As an aside how exactly did this 34 year old man know this 10 year old girl (surely they had to know each other,

    The article says they were neighbours and their families had been in a long term property dispute.


  • Options
    #30
    nomorebadtown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 634 ✭✭✭nomorebadtown


    Dudess wrote: »
    I'm not being smart

    clearly.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    grumpytrousers
    Registered Users Posts: 1,884 ✭✭✭grumpytrousers


    Isn't part of the problem, perhaps, that in certain cases, the same rigour isn't applied to a witness who makes an accusation as it is in others?

    We've all seen it - somebody makes an allegation of assault, for instance, against another adult, and the person slinging around the accusation can have plenty of stuff chucked at him during cross examination. If it's a case being brought by the Gardai, then the accusor is their witness and the solicitor/barrister for the defendant can go to town on the witness.

    This option isn't available where a child is making an accusation, and certainly not where the complaint is of a sexual nature. For this reason, and in such circumstances, I think that there is a responsibility on the part of either the DPP or the Gardai to ensure that the accuser is genuine.

    An accused is entitled, as a matter of course, to put up a vigourous defence, but where there's a child calling sexual assault, it's never gonna be like that. The accused effectively has to 'fight' with one or both hands tied behind his back. The prosecution should have to stand over their witnesses; it's not enough to bring a case on the basis of a complaint and statement being made - the prosecution should be willing and able to stand full square behind their witness.

    they evidently couldn't in this case.


Advertisement