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

Questioning character in court

Options
  • 26-11-2004 12:04pm
    #1
    magpie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,643 ✭✭✭


    Looking through the reports on the dismissal of Sean Mackey's appeal on the Anabels sentence the issue of the fact that his defence team had called into question the character of the deseased (Murphy) was again mentioned as a viable reason why Mackey was given 2 years, whereas Desmond Ryan's team did not and he only received 9 months. While other factors influenced sentencing this is one that was brought up again.

    Is there any legal precedent for this?

    Is it not a standard part of a defence team's job to try and discredit the opposition? Or are you not allowed to speak ill of the dead?

    I'm slightly baffled by this.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,417 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    He effectively said "I didn't do it, but he was a bad person anyway.", but was convicted which is worse than "I didn't do it." which is worse than "I did do it, but he was a bad person anyway, please have sympathy on me" and attracts appropriate sentencing.


  • Options
    #3
    magpie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,643 ✭✭✭magpie


    I could understand the logic if you were 12 and in front of the headmaster, but it seems like a very catholic mea culpa scenario for a court of law. Is there anything equivalent in Britain, or the continent?


Advertisement