Sundays Nally March Cancelled

billy the squid

Matamoros wrote:

Dear Board Members, Mr. Nally seems to have been in a bad place mentally. Mr Ward was in the wrong place. A simple rule of thumb for Travellers might be, don't go onto anyone's property even if you have a proposal to make them. Mr. Ward had a history of crime and mental ill-health, one look at his son who was interviewed on TV would tell us all we need to know about their intentions. The truth must be said about Travellers, they exist mainly outside the rule of law or at best on the very edge of it. Defruading old people of large sums of money in the pretence of fixing "broken" gutters is the best of their endeavours. The old " I was asking about the car" ruse is laughable. I often wondered, how many times would we hear stories about people being robbed or beaten like the Publican who got a chair broken over his face until somebody finally cracked and replied with devastating force. If we are men and I really think we are not worthy of the name, we must face down this group, they threaten while we cower, admit it, they scare us. I have some experience of these guys and let me tell you they are cowards when you put it up to them.

It was people like this which caused the atlone protest to be cancelled.

unadulterated and unwashed bigotry. making a claim like that against a minority.

I could respect people siews on how someone deals with an intruder, and would support mr. nalley after he shot mr. Ward once and even go so far as to support him for giving ward a hiding afterwards. but the buck stops at going back into the house to reload the gun, and coming back out to finnish him off while he was fleeing the scene.

I am reminded of the case in the UK where a farmer shot an intruder and was sentenced to jail. the same thing happened here people, That man went to jail also. it might not be right in your opinion, but it is the law,

billy the squid

billy the squid wrote:

I am reminded of the case in the UK where a farmer shot an intruder and was sentenced to jail. the same thing happened here people, That man went to jail also. it might not be right in your opinion, but it is the law,

Tony Martin. The poster boy for the right wing 'they have it coming' brigade in England. Had none of the extenuating circumstances of the Nally case, in the sense that far from fearing burglars the testimony of neighbours suggest he welcomed and anticipated it as a chance to hit back. Just used a 16 year old kid, who was a gypsy and had a record, who was breaking in for target practice, blasting the kid through the back as he tried to get away. Neighbours had warned about Martin's behaviour. He had expressed views that gypsies should be interned and killed, and seemed to live like Travis Bickel, just waiting for the day when he could unleash his violence. Convicted of murder, reduced on appeal to manslaughter, and served only three years of a five year sentence. How he is walking the streets is yet another indictment of the British legal system.

billy the squid

If you ask me it has many of the circumstances similar to the nally case.

There is no denying similarities. And maybe it's only perception, but to me it seems that Nally went way too far in a situation that he didn't welcome, but Martin achieved exactly what he wanted. That's just imho and in particular from what neighbours said about each...

Dave!

Matamoros wrote:

The truth must be said about Travellers, they exist mainly outside the rule of law or at best on the very edge of it. Defruading old people of large sums of money in the pretence of fixing "broken" gutters is the best of their endeavours. The old " I was asking about the car" ruse is laughable. I often wondered, how many times would we hear stories about people being robbed or beaten like the Publican who got a chair broken over his face until somebody finally cracked and replied with devastating force. If we are men and I really think we are not worthy of the name, we must face down this group, they threaten while we cower, admit it, they scare us. I have some experience of these guys and let me tell you they are cowards when you put it up to them.

hear hear

tbh watching billy the squid defending them is annoying the hell out of me. Oh well, if you wanna defend scum, then knock yourself out...

Zombrex

DaveMcG wrote:

hear hear

Really? Which parts exactly, because to me that post was just nonsensical rambling...

I mean ..

"If we are men and I really think we are not worthy of the name, we must face down this group, they threaten while we cower, admit it, they scare us."

If we are men we must "face down" travellers? I suppose we should all go out and shoot a few like Nally did .. sure it will be a good bonding expereince for the young'ens ... Pa! Get me m'a shot-gun we shooting us some knackers tonight!

billy the squid

DaveMcG wrote:

hear hear

tbh watching billy the squid defending them is annoying the hell out of me. Oh well, if you wanna defend scum, then knock yourself out...

It is my constitutional right to defend travellers, can you point out where exactly in my many posts where i "defended scum?"

didn't think so.

oh and its too late to edit your post dave, its been quoted.

DaveMcG

DaveMcG wrote:

Oh well, if you wanna defend scum, then knock yourself out...

For clarification, when you say 'scum', are referring to Ward in particular or travellers in general? Tbh, I can't see any post defending Ward so I presume the latter, but then I think that noone can hold those opinions in this century so it must be the former...

Dave!

Wicknight wrote:

Really? Which parts exactly, because to me that post was just nonsensical rambling...

I mean ..

"If we are men and I really think we are not worthy of the name, we must face down this group, they threaten while we cower, admit it, they scare us."

If we are men we must "face down" travellers? I suppose we should all go out and shoot a few like Nally did .. sure it will be a good bonding expereince for the young'ens ... Pa! Get me m'a shot-gun we shooting us some knackers tonight!

Yeah the last bit certainly was a bit OTT, lol... I was agreeing with the sentiment that they live outside the law and that everyone's afraid of them, and that they're not as stupid as they seem/pretend, they're fraudsters, basically.

billy the squid wrote:

It is my constitutional right to defend travellers, can you point out where exactly in my many posts where i "defended scum?"

didn't think so.

It just seems that every one of your posts is on the side of travellers and they can't seem to do any wrong in your eyes...

billy the squid wrote:

oh and its too late to edit your post dave, its been quoted.

damn that

DaveMcG

DaveMcG wrote:

It just seems that every one of your posts is on the side of travellers and they can't seem to do any wrong in your eyes...

I note your address is Tallaght! Well I do seem to remember a time when that address was a byword for criminality throughout the island - I presume you have no difficulty with people making assumptions about you on the basis of your own environment...

Isn't there a saying about people in glass houses? What next, residents of Fatima Mansions slam people in high rise inner city working class areas...

billy the squid

DaveMcG wrote:

Yeah the last bit certainly was a bit OTT, lol... I was agreeing with the sentiment that they live outside the law and that everyone's afraid of them, and that they're not as stupid as they seem/pretend, they're fraudsters, basically.

in your opinion.

It just seems that every one of your posts is on the side of travellers and they can't seem to do any wrong in your eyes...

this could not be further from the truth. I think all criminals whether they be a burgler in Mayo, or a bank robber in Adare, should all be treated equally. through the courts. it doesnt matter if he is a traveller, black person yellow person, immigrant, refugee, tourist, birdwatcher, trainspotter or whatever.

I just take issue with biggoted generalisations like yours and the other poster.

Dave!

Well I'm afraid my experience has given me that opinion... I'm a very open-minded person and have no problems with different ethnicities or sexual preferences or anything like that (why would I), because I've not had any negative (or no more than usual) experiences with them, but I've never seen a traveller do anything positive; the only time I see them, they're trespassing on someone's land, starting fights, robbing houses, etc., etc.. They're not all scumbags, no, but as far as I can see, the vast majority are born of criminals and grow up to breed more criminals. It seems to be part of their culture, just like getting an education and then a job is part of ours.

Oh well..

billy the squid

DaveMcG wrote:

Well I'm afraid my experience has given me that opinion... I'm a very open-minded person and have no problems with different ethnicities or sexual preferences or anything like that (why would I), because I've not had any negative (or no more than usual) experiences with them, but I've never seen a traveller do anything positive; the only time I see them, they're trespassing on someone's land, starting fights, robbing houses, etc., etc.. They're not all scumbags, no, but as far as I can see, the vast majority are born of criminals and grow up to breed more criminals. It seems to be part of their culture, just like getting an education and then a job is part of ours.

Oh well..

so you have met all 21,000 travelllers then.

should I have the same opinion about people from tallaught? the only time i see the place mentioned in the paper is when someone is up in court usind the defence "oh my fathers an alcoholic and my mother ran away please judge give me a suspended sentence."

No i think I am better than that. I prefer to judge each person individually rather than where they came from. anything less can't be considered open minded.

lego

If he hadn't been in Nally's house illegally, Nally would not have shot him. The traveller would not be dead and Nally would not be in prison. Any burglar/rapist or other serious criminal who gets injured/killed while in the business of committing their crime deserves it - tough luck. If you wern't committing the crime, you would not have been injured/killed.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/11/11/story229779.html

Eamon McCann and other people of socialist leaning summed up the "socialist smoke and mirrors policy" perfectly. It involves ignoring the fact that a man in fear of his life had his privacy, safety and property rights compromised and saying that life is more prescious than property. They then pull out the race card (since when have travellers been a different race?????) and saying that if the man who died was not a traveller, Nally's sentense would be longer. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people out the country are not bigots, but they do have a deep seated hatred of ALL burglars whether they be travellers, a criminal gang down from Dublin or otherwise.

On Prime Time, Eamon McCann asked where the close knit community around Nally was when this incident happened. The answer is that they were probably in their own homes protecting their own property from these burglars. (They can't just abandon their own property and move in with Nally for the rest of his life, nor should they have to in order for Nally to be safe from these burglars, that is not a real solution and it only shows McCann's ignorance of the practicalities of the situation.)

The fact that the man who died had been on Nallys property illegally before just adds insult to injury. He had 30 previous convictions.
Also, if a gang of criminals comes to your house and you shoot one of them in self defense, when it gets to court they have the upper hand ( It is one individual's story against a gang of criminals who will probably have agreed their own version of events shortly after the incident (edited in their favour of course).

Q. Why was he not kept in prison for life after he hade it obvious that he was a violent burglar?

A. Solicitors & judges are in cahoots, they all have law degrees and they all help one another. Judges continually give extremely short sentenses for burglars, rapists, pedophiles, people who are convicted of aggravated assault etc knowing full well that they are very likely to reoffend. This in turn keeps the solicitors (and other Judges) in the money. The judiciary are not trying to keep dangerous people off the streets because they know that if they gave a sentense long enough to fit the crime, they would have no work. The vast majority of crimes are comitted by people who are re-offending. If these people were taken off the street for once and for all, the crime rate would hit rock bottom. Most people in ireland do not have any criminal record, many of those who do, and are not in prison are likely to be involved in crime again.

billy the squid

If he hadn't been in Nally's house illegally, Nally would not have shot him. The traveller would not be dead and Nally would not be in prison. Any burglar/rapist or other serious criminal who gets injured/killed while in the business of committing their crime deserves it - tough luck. If you wern't committing the crime, you would not have been injured/killed.

He wasnt in his house when Naly went back in to reload the gun, he was further away from the house when Nally came back out again and shot him in the back.

lego

He was coming out the door of the house when nally first shot him. There were two of them and, he was on his own, he wanted to incapacitate John Ward by any means at his disposal so that ward would no longer pose a threat to his life.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/11/11/story229779.html

billy the squid

lego wrote:

He was coming out the front door of the house when nally first shot him.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/11/11/story229779.html

and when he shot him the second time? you can't go accusing those "nasty socialists" of omitting facts when your omitting facts yourself.

lego

Just because he was running away does not mean that Nally was safe, for all Nally knew, a large gang could be back to kill him in revenge for what he did.

Don't forget that a "violent struggle" followed, after the first shot. John ward was still physically capable of causing harm to Nally.

billy the squid

lego wrote:

Just because he was running away does not mean that Nally was safe, for all Nally knew, a large gang could be back to kill him in revenge for what he did.

Don't forget that a "violent struggle" followed, after the first shot. John ward was still physically capable of causing harm to Nally.

Nally was STILL able to re-enter the house and get more ammunition.

Ward was shot IN THE BACK as he fled. Ward's accomplice had already fled.

Whilst nally had a right to defend his property, he had no right to play God and take someone's life out of revenge. Punnishment for crime is a matter for the state to deal with (and before you say it I know they are doing a **** job of it) not the individual.

all the woulda coulda shoulda's in a pot is worth the pot in my opinion. he should have called the guards after ward and his acomplice had fled rather than following him out and killing him.

pete

lego wrote:

Just because he was running away does not mean that Nally was safe, for all Nally knew, a large gang could be back to kill him in revenge for what he did.

Ah, the "he might have thought that there might have been a large gang who might have turned up and might have wanted to kill him" defense.

Don't forget that a "violent struggle" followed, after the first shot. John ward was still physically capable of causing harm to Nally.

I'm sure this has been quoted before, but let's see what the State Pathologist had to say:

According to Marie Cassidy, the State Pathologist, John Ward, a Mayo Traveller, was shot twice on October 14, 2004. The first shot injured John Ward in the hand and hip. The second shot was fired from above and John Ward was in a crouched position at the time. The person who shot him was standing over him and the shot was fired at close range.

Ward was also very badly beaten around the head, according to Cassidy. He had suffered at least ten blows to the head, and there were open wounds on his head, opened right through to his skull. He had also suffered a fracture to his left arm.

According to a garda, Michael Conway, who gave evidence in the trial of Mayo farmer Padraig Nally, who was charged with the murder of Ward, Nally told him on the day after the killing, that he (Nally) had shot Ward the second time (the time that Ward was killed), having followed him down a lane.

He described hitting Ward and said: “It was like hitting a stone or a badger, but you could not kill him.”

Yeah, sure sounds like Ward was a threat to him....

pete

lego wrote:

He was coming out the front door of the house when nally first shot him.

The court was told Nally arrived at his farmhouse on the afternoon of October 14, 2004 when he spotted a suspicious-looking car parked beside an overgrown lane next to the house with a man sitting in the driver`s seat.

The court was told Nally approached the vehicle and told the driver that whoever was on his land would not be coming back.

When he checked around the farmhouse, the court was told Nally discovered 42-year-old Mr Ward at his back door.

The farmer grabbed a loaded shotgun from one of the sheds and shot Mr Ward in the side.

Garda sergeant James Carroll, one of the first officers on the scene, told the court there was no forensic evidence to show that Mr Ward had been in Nally`s house.

The court heard that after shooting Mr Ward, Nally shoved him into a bed of nettles. He then beat him repeatedly with a two-foot stick. Mr Ward tried to run away, limping and bleeding from the shotgun wound. He struggled to make it off Nally`s land, the court heard.

Sgt Carroll said Nally went back his shed and loaded the single barrel shotgun.

He followed Mr Ward to the edge of the land and as he tried to flee, Nally shot him a second time. He then dumped the body over a wall.

http://u.tv/newsroom/indepth.asp?id=67035&pt=n

Blackjack

While the argument continues whether Ward was in Nally's House, not in Nally's house, on Nally's land, not on Nally's land etc, I have to wonder. Does Nally deserve the sentance, or does he not.

Personally, Nally had to get a Custodial sentance. He went back, reloaded a weapon and shot a man dead. It was clearly a moment of madness, and whether you agree or not, was, according to those who know him, well out of character. He could have claimed insanity and got away with a much lighter sentance. He co-operated with the Gardai at every instance, and this had to be taken into account.

Do I have sympathy for Ward?. Very little to be honest. He did not deserve to die, but he had no right to be where he was. Whether he was a traveller or not, is really not the issue. It's very easy to make it a Traveller vs Settled community issue. If he was from, let's say, an underpriveledged area of Dublin or Cork, would this have received the same attention?.

Nally gets a Custodial sentance, which he deserved. Someone gets killed by a Drunk driver, stabbed by a lunatic carrying a knife, or, in more recent cases gets kicked to death outside of Annabelles.
I've not seen anyone get more than 6 years for any of those crimes. Why is it unfair for Nally to get 6 or less?.

murfie

The man should be set free as he was defending himself and his property. Ward was a scumbag criminal suspected by the guards on a few murder cases and a load of other charges, he had it coming. I'm from Castlebar so i have heard alot more than the majority here about the case.
And i had to laugh at the crap the family were saying on prime time the other night, the man was evil and the world is a tiny bit more a better place now.

billy the squid

the free-Nally campaigners keep forgetting that he returned to the house, reloaded it, and went back out and shot him while he was crouched on the ground.

Ward was a scumbag criminal suspected by the guards on a few murder cases and a load of other charges, he had it coming.

it is not for the general public to inflict punnishment on another person for a crime, it is for a judge to do this.

the_syco

billy the squid wrote:

he returned to the house, reloaded it,

Are you sure he didn't go back to the barn, as thats where he kept the shotgun, as h was afraid of it "being used against him" if he kept it in his house.

murfie

billy the squid wrote:

it is not for the general public to inflict punnishment on another person for a crime, it is for a judge to do this.

Ya agreed, but the problem is that everyone knew he did these things including the guards but because of our backwards legal system nothing was done about it.

Six years is far to long, Nally is not a danger to society in any way and i would think just wants his life back which he will never get. And before anyone says what about Wards life, well I have no sympathy, simple as that.

billy the squid

the_syco wrote:

Are you sure he didn't go back to the barn, as thats where he kept the shotgun, as h was afraid of it "being used against him" if he kept it in his house.

does it matter, the fact remains that he went back, reloaded it, went back out and shot Ward while he was crouched on the ground, as per the pathologists report.

billy the squid

murfie wrote:

Ya agreed, but the problem is that everyone knew he did these things including the guards but because of our backwards legal system nothing was done about it.

Then more needs to be done to reform the way Gardai and the judiciary works. Like I have said before, had the system worked properly, Ward would be alive (in prison) and Nally would be free.

Six years is far to long, Nally is not a danger to society in any way and i would think just wants his life back which he will never get.

By the sounds of it Nally was on tenderhooks, so I would say he was a danger, given that he could have taken a pot shot at some random hiker onto his land.

And before anyone says what about Wards life, well I have no sympathy, simple as that.

neither would I, death or injury is an occupational hazard of burglary, and Ward was a nasty piece of work. However I still believe that Nally crossed the line by shooting him a second time.