7 and a half year SUSPENDED sentance for convicted sex offender

danniemcq · 28-06-2010 4:10pm #1

Just heard on news at 4 that a 62 year old man has had a 7 and a half year sentance suspended as he's to sick to go to jail. The judge says it'd be like giving him a death sentance. He can't be tagged either because of complications either. He can also leave the house but only for "several hours a day"

it's this s*ite that sickens me in this country. How does the young girl feel now knowing that even though he has been judged to be guilty he is free to walk around. Health grounds should be no reason to get out of jail time for crimes of this nature. Scumbag should be locked up and given medical attention in prison where he belongs. I can't find a linky online as it was breaking news but if i do i'll edit this

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/no-jail-for-abuser-on-medical-grounds-463395.html

Sam Vimes · 28-06-2010 4:12pm

He's fit enough to rape someone but not to go to jail

Overheal · 28-06-2010 4:14pm

Are these Irish prisons so backwards and medieval that you can't incarcerate a less than horse-healthy convict?

Morlar · 28-06-2010 4:17pm

I think this constant litany of insufficient sentences is undermining peoples faith in our legal system and by extension the authority of the state. Once that impression takes hold (that our justice system is repeatedly incapable of administering justice in a meaningful manner) then it will have serious consequences and be very difficult to undo.

carveone · 28-06-2010 4:17pm

Note the difference between the two child abuse image offenders which were sentenced on the same day. One in the South (10 months, 7 suspended) and the North (5 years).

In my view, suspended means bound to the peace. Essentially the same "sentence" as the law abiding person abides by every day of their life. It's hardly a sentence to be bound to the same standards of behaviour as everyone else.

Hasmunch · 28-06-2010 4:18pm

Send him to jail... if he dies so be it.

Mike 1972 · 28-06-2010 4:21pm

OP your point would be better made if your original post (or better still its title) actually outlined the nature of the offence the guy was convicted in a bit more detail than just "sex offender"

People have been branded as "sex offenders" for having a slash down a laneway FFS

danniemcq wrote: »

Scumbag should be locked up and given medical attention in prison

But such medical attention should not be of any better quality or delivered in a more timely manner than would be recieved by a regular patient in the public health system.

NothingMan · 28-06-2010 4:22pm

The only expense spent for these people should be the price of a bullet on conviction after his final appeal.

Edit: Obviously what Mike says is true. An actual rapist/paedophile should get what I said, not some 15 year old boy who has sex with a 15 year old girl. Common sense should always apply. Pity it doesn't.

easyeason3 · 28-06-2010 4:25pm

Why is the same thread started at least once a week?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i · 28-06-2010 4:26pm

easyeason3 wrote: »

Why is the same thread started at least once a week?

Different threads

Doesn't say much for our justice system really does it. If your dying, it's ok to commit a crime...

Dravokivich · 28-06-2010 4:27pm

easyeason3 wrote: »

Why is the same thread started at least once a week?

You don't come here often do you?

Mike 1972 · 28-06-2010 4:29pm

danniemcq wrote: »

Health grounds should be no reason to get out of jail time for crimes of this nature

Heatlh (or age) grounds should be no reason to get out of jail time for crimes of any nature.

Guess what Im not feeling the best today. What do you reckon I could get away with.............:rolleyes:

carveone · 28-06-2010 4:29pm

Gracelyn Black Barrel wrote: »

Doesn't say much for our justice system really does it. If your dying, it's ok to commit a crime...

Depressingly, we've come a long way. 50 years ago, she'd have gone to jail.

Nijmegen · 28-06-2010 4:34pm

carveone wrote: »

Depressingly, we've come a long way. 50 years ago, she'd have gone to jail.

Go to the right part of the world today and she'd be executed.

But I digress.

Fit or unfit, our judges are constantly letting people walk free with the joke of suspended sentences, serving light sentences thanks to concurrant sentencing (when raping someone, why not murder them? Less evidence and you'll get both sentences run together); and then we let prisoners out early, only to see them reoffend and come in... For more of the same!

We need a constitutional change in how we run our judicial system and treat criminals.

easyeason3 · 28-06-2010 4:36pm

Gracelyn Black Barrel wrote: »

Different threads

Doesn't say much for our justice system really does it. If your dying, it's ok to commit a crime...

Well I would say it doesn't say much for us as a society to accept this.

craggles · 28-06-2010 4:38pm

I think you should get a 7 and a half year sentence for not being able to spell.

stupidusername · 28-06-2010 4:42pm

And there was another case I heard about just the other day about a former school principal who was caught with child porn images on his computer, and got 3 months for it! I know it's not the same as rape or him actually abusing a child (though he is facilitating it), but it's still pretty damn bad surely? Three months? that's like a shíttin holiday for the lad...

Supposedly part of his defence was that since he retired he had become bored(!) How mental is that. It would be my belief that people who view child porn would eventually actually act on their urges... So why is it only three months?!

What is wrong with the system in this country?

As others have said, he should be thrown in prison, never mind him being ill, whatever it is that's wrong. Why should someone who could commit such a horrible crime be allowed away with it which is essentially what is happening here.

Sam Vimes · 28-06-2010 4:52pm

stupidusername wrote: »

It would be my belief that people who view child porn would eventually actually act on their urges... So why is it only three months?!

If someone smokes cannabis should they be convicted for heroin related crimes because they would have eventually moved onto it? People should be convicted of the crime they committed tbh, not possible future crimes that you think they would have committed

stupidusername · 28-06-2010 4:55pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

If someone smokes cannabis should they be convicted for heroin related crimes on the basis that they would have eventually moved onto it? People should be convicted of the crime they committed tbh, not possible future crimes that you think they would have committed

Right, obviously I didn't quite write it properly, as that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is a person guilty of viewing child porn should be given more than a three month sentence.

28-06-2010 5:16pm

easyeason3 wrote: »

Well I would say it doesn't say much for us as a society to accept this.

Well said, both of you.
We really should be ashamed of what we put up with. Why the hell isnt the Minister FOr Justice and (cough cough) Law Reform, doing his bloody job. How can he stand over a system that allows men to sexually assualt young women and walk away.
Still it wasnt the Ministers child, so its ok then..

easyeason3 · 28-06-2010 5:20pm

Jake1 wrote: »

Well said, both of you.
We really should be ashamed of what we put up with. Why the hell isnt the Minister FOr Justice and (cough cough) Law Reform, doing his bloody job. How can he stand over a system that allows men to sexually assualt young women and walk away.
Still it wasnt the Ministers child, so its ok then..

Or you could ask why we allow it to happen.
Until people say enough is enough & demand a realistic justice system then we will be posting threads like this one every second day.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm sickened at how blasse I have become to the most disgusting crimes possible because they are happening in such regularity that I've become immune to it.

It's pathetic really.

charlemont · 28-06-2010 5:24pm

if it was drugs you would not get a suspended sentence, how come the common masses cannot see there is something suspiciously wrong with all these light sentences handed down, :eek:

28-06-2010 5:27pm

easyeason3 wrote: »

Or you could ask why we allow it to happen.
Until people say enough is enough & demand a realistic justice system then we will be posting threads like this one every second day.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm sickened at how blasse I have become to the most disgusting crimes possible because they are happening in such regularity that I've become immune to it.

It's pathetic really.

I hear ye. As someone posted earlier, its a deliberate undermining of our sense of security. Im raging, and I do want to do something, but where we do start? I wish I knew the answers. I dont. Im just festering with anger that this was allowed to happen. I wonder will Justice Tony Hunt sleep tonight. Or would he have any thought to what his decision has done to that little girl, and her family. :mad:

easyeason3 · 28-06-2010 5:29pm

Jake1 wrote: »

I hear ye. As someone posted earlier, its a deliberate undermining of our sense of security. Im raging, and I do want to do something, but where we do start? I wish I knew the answers. I dont. Im just festering with anger that this was allowed to happen. I wonder will Justice Tony Hunt sleep tonight. Or would he have any thought to what his decision has done to that little girl, and her family. :mad:

Same as.

28-06-2010 5:30pm

I wonder has this Justice got previous, handing down light sentences to Paedos? Maybe we do need to keep an eye on these Judges.

How does a populace get rid of a Judge anyway? Can people complain somewhere is it taken into account??? Does any one know?

Sam Vimes · 28-06-2010 5:32pm

Jake1 wrote: »

How does a populace get rid of a Judge anyway? Can people complain somewhere is it taken into account??? Does any one know?

I don't think so. Afaik the judges are totally independent so that no one can put political pressure on them to give certain judgements. Which is all well and good until we want to put such pressure on them

thebigbiffo · 28-06-2010 5:32pm

if it was one of my kids he assaulted, he'd be dead before he got onto the footpath outside the courtroom. fact.

and you can be sure i'd f'uckin go to jail for it....but i'd go gladly knowing that scumbag wasn't around any longer

28-06-2010 5:33pm

What did he do anyway? No way someone should evade a sentence that long based on medical reasons..
If there's nowhere else, throw him into a mental hospital and you'll soon see him fit for prison.

easyeason3 · 28-06-2010 5:34pm

Jake1 wrote: »

I wonder has this Justice got previous, handing down light sentences to Paedos? Maybe we do need to keep an eye on these Judges.

How does a populace get rid of a Judge anyway? Can people complain somewhere is it taken into account??? Does any one know?

Don't know but I'd imagine if legislation was changed then they would have to adhere to it?

Minimum sentence for rape: 30 years
Maximum sentence for rape: 60 years

Up to the Judge then how many years to give the criminal within that spectrum.

If only it was that simple.

The_Kew_Tour · 28-06-2010 5:38pm

Welcome to Ireland, where it pays to be a criminal.

sam34 · 28-06-2010 6:40pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

He's fit enough to rape someone but not to go to jail

he was sentenced for sexual assault

the rape he committed was 27 years ago,not recently

7 and a half year SUSPENDED sentance for convicted sex offender

Comments