Victim impact statement offensive...what did they expect?

Dudess

I don't think people are objecting to the family's reaction, just explaining why the judge deemed the victim impact statement to be perhaps detrimental to the case, as a victim impact statement is only supposed to do what it says on the tin, nothing more.
There's no hippy liberal stuff here - just an example of how the law should operate without prejudice.

littlefriend

OutlawPete wrote: »

Guess those criminals were fun loving ones as they were heard singing on the way back to their cells:

"Barry White, saved our lives".

OutlawPete wrote: »

In fairness, that judge just wants love.

Right now, I'd say he is on a large heart shaped bed, with a few female court clerks naked, hanging on every single word he utters, with his deep authoritative, seductive voice.

He's on a mission to bring soul to our justice system.

Ah Pete, they are so bad!

Overheal

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

I don't think it would be a bad idea to have some restrictions on freedom of movement so that foreign criminals can't enter the country and settle here. Most sane countries have something in place to deal with these situations.

To import crime is senseless, considering we've got enough of it already.

I don't think that's being argued: the fact that it showed up on an impact statement however, is being argued. The origin of the criminals has no bearing on the impact the crime has had on the victims. Unless they wish to possibly convey to the court that they now have become xenophobes as a result of the murder.

Laminations

Overheal wrote: »

I don't think that's being argued: the fact that it showed up on an impact statement however, is being argued. The origin of the criminals has no bearing on the impact the crime has had on the victims. Unless they wish to possibly convey to the court that they now have become xenophobes as a result of the murder.

Of course it should. From what I've read I see no xenophobia, I see criminalophobia. They are not saying 'keep foreigners out', they're saying 'keep criminals out'. The origin matters because if we didn't import criminals this could've been avoided. If faulty kettles were being imported from china and one blew up in your mums face, killing her, I'm sure you'd question why these faulty kettles were being imported when we have our own faulty kettle problems. You can make this point without it meaning you disagree with any imports from china or that you hate the Chinese. I didn't read into that statement that they hated foreigners or wanted to stop immigration, but as people have said, we've yet to read the full statement.

As for the points about the justice system, these weren't political points, they influence how the crime has affected them. How the courts deal with individuals who were involved in the butchery of your family member impacts on you as the victim. These guys got off a murder charge on a technicality. Also as someone mentioned, there should be no such thing as over-sentencing in this case or others involving such grotesque violence. Life for a life. They have been convicted of trying to dispose of the body which means they either did it or know who did it, are we to believe that their memory is as transient as Berties or isn't it obvious they are/were uncooperative with gardai.

Describing these men as animals is apt, generalising to 'all foreigners are animals' is offensive and xenophobic but is not what was said from what I've read. So the statement was offensive to whom?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Laminations wrote: »

Of course it should. From what I've read I see no xenophobia, I see criminalophobia. They are not saying 'keep foreigners out', they're saying 'keep criminals out'. The origin matters because if we didn't import criminals this could've been avoided. If faulty kettles were being imported from china and one blew up in your mums face, killing her, I'm sure you'd question why these faulty kettles were being imported when we have our own faulty kettle problems. You can make this point without it meaning you disagree with any imports from china or that you hate the Chinese. I didn't read into that statement that they hated foreigners or wanted to stop immigration, but as people have said, we've yet to read the full statement.

As for the points about the justice system, these weren't political points, they influence how the crime has affected them. How the courts deal with individuals who were involved in the butchery of your family member impacts on you as the victim. These guys got off a murder charge on a technicality. Also as someone mentioned, there should be no such thing as over-sentencing in this case or others involving such grotesque violence. Life for a life. They have been convicted of trying to dispose of the body which means they either did it or know who did it, are we to believe that their memory is as transient as Berties or isn't it obvious they are/were uncooperative with gardai.

Describing these men as animals is apt, generalising to 'all foreigners are animals' is offensive and xenophobic but is not what was said from what I've read. So the statement was offensive to whom?

Not true, unless you're saying that, had the crime been committed by four Irishmen, it wouldn't have had as much impact.

We need to seperate the two issus of this thread:
1) Should foreigners with criminal records be allowed into Ireland?
2) Should victim impact statements be allowed to comment on political issues, e.g. immigration?

monkeypants

From the second article posted:

He said it lacked an appreciation of the presumption of innocence

I'm not sure what he means by this. Surely if you're a victim and someone has been convicted of a crime, then the whole innocence thing is over and done with.

Laminations

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Not true, unless you're saying that, had the crime been committed by four Irishmen, it wouldn't have had as much impact.

That's like arguing that a piano falling on her head would have the same impact as murder, because the end result is the same i.e. You've lost a loved one. After a crime many things go through your head, the how's and the why's. Why were these men let into the country is a legitimate question just as (if it was 4 Irish animals) why were they let out of prison early. Whether the justice system or the government could have done something to prevent a crime and protect citizens adds to the impact of a crime - I see little reason to exclude so-called 'political' points from victim impact statements unless they are obviously disconnected. For example, adding in that you hate Fine Gael just for the heck of it is very different to questioning policies which have allowed the criminal repeated second chances or allowed them into the country to begin with.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

That's like arguing that a piano falling on her head would have the same impact as murder, because the end result is the same i.e. You've lost a loved one. After a crime many things go through your head, the how's and the why's. Why were these men let into the country is a legitimate question just as (if it was 4 Irish animals) why were they let out of prison early..

Nothing to do with a victim impact statement, however.

Laminations wrote: »

Whether the justice system or the government could have done something to prevent a crime and protect citizens adds to the impact of a crime - I see little reason to exclude so-called 'political' points from victim impact statements unless they are obviously disconnected.
..

Its obviously disconnected.

General Zod

monkeypants wrote: »

From the second article posted:


I'm not sure what he means by this. Surely if you're a victim and someone has been convicted of a crime, then the whole innocence thing is over and done with.

They weren't convicted of murder, so perhaps making reference to them as murderers is what the whole "presumption of innocence" thing is about.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

Of course it should. From what I've read I see no xenophobia, I see criminalophobia. They are not saying 'keep foreigners out', they're saying 'keep criminals out'..........................

Just as a matter of interest, do you have access to the full statement?

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

Nothing to do with a victim impact statement, however.

Its obviously disconnected.

Making the point that this was avoidable is disconnected? Like I said part of the impact is the recurrent thoughts and scenario playing of why the murder happened and how it could've been avoided. There is the saying 'don't beat yourself up about it' for a reason. Please elaborate on why you think it's disconnected, and indeed why you think it's xenophobic

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest, do you have access to the full statement?

No but I've qualified my remarks as such in a previous post. With the information I've seen I can't see the offense or the xenophobia, you have, please explain where

biko

The four are Lithuanians Ricardas Dilys and Ruslanas Mineikas with an address at Goodtide Harbour, Patrick O’Connor of Ard na Dara, Clonard and Polish man Piotr Pasiak of Lower John Street.

Rebecca French’s family said in an emotive victim impact statement that those behind her death were "animals".

It continued: "People with criminal records in their own country should never be allowed to live among us."

If that was the worst of the statement the I hope Judge White doesn't read After Hours.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

Making the point that this was avoidable is disconnected? Like I said part of the impact is the recurrent thoughts and scenario playing of why the murder happened and how it could've been avoided. There is the saying 'don't beat yourself up about it' for a reason. Please elaborate on why you think it's disconnected, and indeed why you think it's xenophobic

I never said it was "xenophobic", because I haven't read the full statement. What I do know is that bringing EU free movement into it will not be seen by a court of law as relevant.

Laminations wrote: »

Like I said part of the impact is the recurrent thoughts and scenario playing of why the murder happened and how it could've been avoided.

.......thats going on court guidelines or your personal reading of it?

Laminations

General Zod wrote: »

They weren't convicted of murder,

Indeed, and im sure this impacts on the victims, no?

so perhaps making reference to them as murderers is what the whole "presumption of innocence" thing is about.

would this reference confuse the judge and influence his sentencing? He is obviously well aware of the presumption of innocence so he can just ignore this bit rather than castigating a family struggling to come to terms with a justice system that has failed them ON TOP of their tragic loss

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

I never said it was "xenophobic", because I haven't read the full statement. What I do know is that bringing EU free movement into it will not be seen by a court of law as relevant.

Even if that policy of free movement allowed the criminals the opportunity to kill your family members? Were people prevented from discussing the helplessness of not being allowed fight back when an intruder came into their homes?

.......thats going on court guidelines or your personal reading of it?

So the court proscribes how you should be impacted? Why bother asking the victims how they've been affected, just let the courts tell us how they should feel.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

Even if that policy of free movement allowed the criminals the opportunity to kill your family members? Were people prevented from discussing the helplessness of not being allowed fight back when an intruder came into their homes?
.

.

You are again engaging in faulty logic (with a little appeal to emotion at the end)

Laminations wrote: »

So the court proscribed how you should be impacted? Why bother asking the victims how they've been affected, just let the courts tell us how they should feel.

You stated

Like I said part of the impact is the recurrent thoughts and scenario playing of why the murder happened and how it could've been avoided.

And I'd asked, as I ask again now - is that going on court guidelines or your personal reading of it?

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

.

And I'd asked, as I ask again now - is that going on court guidelines or your personal reading of it?

Having worked with victims of crime and having a knowledge of human cognition and psychotherapy I know a bit about the mental processes and health of victims, you?

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

Having worked with victims of crime and having a knowledge of human cognition and psychotherapy I know a bit about the mental processes and health of victims, you?

And behold, the appeal to authority.

This isn't about "human cognition and psychotherapy" or "mental processes and health of victims" its about the victims family having gone beyond the parameters allowed for a victim impact statement.

wolfpawnat

I do not see what is offensive about a person saying that people with criminal records in their own country should not be allowed here!?!?!

Seriously, I do not want to have to deal with another countries criminals, we have enough of our own. I am sure the authorities in their countries would feel the same if our criminals committed crimes in their country. Only difference is they have the Liathróidí to throw ours back to us!

That family have to suffer enough at the loss of a loved one without having to have the PC brigade on their back because they might offend someone. They are fúcking offending the rest of us with their BS!!!!

Nodin

wolfpawnat wrote: »

I do not see what is offensive about a person saying that people with criminal records in their own country should not be allowed here!?!?!

..................!!!

Its a victim impact statement to be read to a court, not a chance to discuss whatevers on their mind. Had they made the statement on the court steps after the trial, they'd be perfectly entitled to express their opinion however they wanted.

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

And behold, the appeal to authority.

This isn't about "human cognition and psychotherapy" or "mental processes and health of victims" its about the victims family having gone beyond the parameters allowed for a victim impact statement.

Lol. You asked me what I was basing my opinion on. What are the parameters you mention? List them for me.... Or are you simply appealing to the authority of the judge, a man so learned that he shouldve been able to discount these transgressions and not allowed them influence his sentencing.

How would stating that criminals shouldn't be allowed free movement into Ireland even influence the sentencing for this crime?

General Zod

Laminations wrote: »

Indeed, and im sure this impacts on the victims, no?



would this reference confuse the judge and influence his sentencing? He is obviously well aware of the presumption of innocence so he can just ignore this bit rather than castigating a family struggling to come to terms with a justice system that has failed them ON TOP of their tragic loss

The judge is aware enough that because the family breached the terms of what should be in a Victim Impact Statement, that it was leaving grounds for a possible appeal to his sentence. So, rather than give grounds for an appeal, he's asked the DPP to examine the situation and see if a new VIS needs to be read in front of a new judge.

The Judge is doing everything in the interest of due process of law, and what he is doing is actually for the best interest of the law, and also the family.

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

I never said it was "xenophobic", because I haven't read the full statement.

Don't make me laugh. You thanked the following post

Millicent wrote: »

There was reference to xenophobic statements which is not kosher.

So good = This has greatly upset our family and those men are very bad men.

Bad = This has greatly upset our family and it's just like Lithuanians to do something like this.

So how is this example comparable with what we know was said? It only feeds into your obsession with shouting 'bigot', 'xenophobe', 'racist'.

Now while I leave myself open for correction upon reading the full statement, nothing I've seen so far suggests xenophobia although you'd really love it to.
And the impact of a crime has much more to it than just the loss of the person.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

Lol. You asked me what I was basing my opinion on.

No, I asked if it was your personal opinion or based on the guidelines laid down for victim impact statements, as is fairly clear from the post. I didn't add in that you could use it to try and slipin an appeal to authority. A bit more careful reading and less "Lol" would help you greatly.

As regards whats permitted in the statement - only information pertaining to the family and victim, no attacks on the perpetrator or information outside the case.

Laminations

General Zod wrote: »

The judge is aware enough that because the family breached the terms of what should be in a Victim Impact Statement, that it was leaving grounds for a possible appeal to his sentence. So, rather than give grounds for an appeal, he's asked the DPP to examine the situation and see if a new VIS needs to be read in front of a new judge.

The Judge is doing everything in the interest of due process of law, and what he is doing is actually for the best interest of the law, and also the family.

There is a nice way if saying that. I want to know why he called a legitimate translation of the victims feelings 'offensive' and 'xenophobic'. It's totally unaympathetic to the victims.

Can you post a link to the accepted scope of a victim impact statement?

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

No, I asked if it was your personal opinion or based on the guidelines laid down for victim impact statements, as is fairly clear from the post. I didn't add in that you could use it to try and slipin an appeal to authority. A bit more careful reading and less "Lol" would help you greatly.

And I've asked you to point to the part of the guidelines that limits victims to talking about direct impacts and procludes them from wondering why a crime happened and how this questioning is a torture to them

thebullkf

wolfpawnat wrote: »

I do not see what is offensive about a person saying that people with criminal records in their own country should not be allowed here!?!?!

Seriously, I do not want to have to deal with another countries criminals, we have enough of our own. I am sure the authorities in their countries would feel the same if our criminals committed crimes in their country. Only difference is they have the Liathróidí to throw ours back to us!

That family have to suffer enough at the loss of a loved one without having to have the PC brigade on their back because they might offend someone. They are fúcking offending the rest of us with their BS!!!!

so people who've committed a crime,served their sentence ..shouldn't be allowed leave/enter ireland??

you can't block foreigners,and allow irish (ex) criminals alone....jesus,people need to get offf their high horse.
the justice system is there to punish crininals,and rehabilitate where possible.. so padraig nally should never be allowed leave ireland....people jailed (even for a day,due to no TV licence,protest etc) should not be allowed visit other countries??
because thats whats being implied....

the VIS was prejudicial,simple as. Judge made the right call-now his sentencing won't seem reactionary.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

There is a nice way if saying that. I want to know why he called a legitimate translation of the victims feelings

Its not supposed to be a "translation of the victims feelings". You seem unable to grasp the concept of whats involved here.

curlzy

Predalien wrote: »

Justice Barry White seems to have a negative opinion of victim impact statements in general, I can't remember the case but I do recall he once described a victim impact statement in a murder case as 'disingenuous'. That's very harsh on any family of a murder victim.

I remember that case, linky:http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0706/mahonm.html anyway IMO he was completely correct in calling it disingenuous, her family/mother were complete scum who failed her over and over and over and then went on the "poor us" route in the VIS. They didn't give a **** about her when she was alive.

Liam Byrne

The victim impact statement doesn't say anything that I wouldn't say myself, to be quite honest.

Whether it was the appropriate platform to voice it is another story, and whether it reveals an underlying "American History X" style prejudice.

AFAIK, you can't get into America or Australia if you have a criminal record - why doesn't the same apply here ?

And the word "animals" is appropriate (although insulting to animals) and would apply to anyone of any nationality including Irish who did the same thing.

elainers

Laminations wrote: »

Lol. You asked me what I was basing my opinion on. What are the parameters you mention? List them for me.... Or are you simply appealing to the authority of the judge, a man so learned that he shouldve been able to discount these transgressions and not allowed them influence his sentencing.

How would stating that criminals shouldn't be allowed free movement into Ireland even influence the sentencing for this crime?

I don't think the judge is saying that this will influence his sentencing. He's saying that the defence may use the fact that it could have impacted on his sentencing in order to get an appeal for the accused in the case and get their sentences quashed. I wouldn't say he is coming out against the family in this, but at whoever in the prosecution's team who allowed them to include something which would potentially leave a loophole for those convicted to appeal on. If you think about it, then they would be let off on two technicalities!

And to be honest, I think it would be right to curtail what the family say in their victim impact statement if it may have an effect on appeals or potentially be used to quash a conviction – not doing this does not benefit the family which is surely the main point of a victim impact statement.

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

Its a victim impact statement to be read to a court, not a chance to discuss whatevers on their mind.

Ah yes, trivialise their point, sure what they said is comparable to them talking about how much they love the x-factor. You belittle them with your purposeful ignorance

General Zod

Laminations wrote: »

There is a nice way if saying that. I want to know why he called a legitimate translation of the victims feelings 'offensive' and 'xenophobic'. It's totally unaympathetic to the victims.

Can you post a link to the accepted scope of a victim impact statement?

I can't find one at the moment, but I'm fairly sure that calling them murderers while there is still a murder investigation ongoing is a little out of the rules.

Can't find the actual scope, but here's a good article about them http://www.articlesbase.com/journalism-articles/victim-impact-statement-ireland-3566073.html

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

Its not supposed to be a "translation of the victims feelings". You seem unable to grasp the concept of whats involved here.

What is it supposed to be? You seem to fail to grasp the fragility of victims and the appropriateness of a judge branding them offensive xenophobes. You agree with the judge and what he said. I might agree with his goal but not his methods.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

Ah yes, trivialise their point, sure what they said is comparable to them talking about how much they love the x-factor. You belittle them with your purposeful ignorance

And yet more disengenous appeals to emotion. The parameters of the statement are very limited. They strayed outside them on three counts - a personal attack on the perpetrators, inference of guilt, and information unrelated (movement in the EU).

For somebody who earlier claimed to know a lot about victims, you don't seem to well advised as to whats permitted and what isn't.

Laminations

Nodin wrote: »

And yet more disengenous appeals to emotion. The parameters of the statement are very limited. They strayed outside them on three counts - a personal attack on the perpetrators, inference of guilt, and information unrelated (movement in the EU).

For somebody who earlier claimed to know a lot about victims, you don't seem to well advised as to whats permitted and what isn't.

Like I said, from what I've read of their statement I can't see any justification of calling them offensive xenophobes. The judges language is unsympathetic. He could've phrased his objections better or flagged these points and delivered sentence- I can't see a judge in appeal reducing a sentence that was obviously uninfluenced by a VIS which the judge criticised.

How is the statement xenophobic?

The_Minister

OutlawPete wrote: »

In fairness, that judge just wants love.

Right now, I'd say he is on a large heart shaped bed, with a few female court clerks naked, hanging on every single word he utters, with his deep authoritative, seductive voice.

He's on a mission to bring soul to our justice system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baZiXz1nFWY

curlzy

Nodin wrote: »

And yet more disengenous appeals to emotion. The parameters of the statement are very limited. They strayed outside them on three counts - a personal attack on the perpetrators, inference of guilt, and information unrelated (movement in the EU).

Will you ever cop on Nodin, there's nothing disengenuous in what he's saying. So he has feelings eh? What's disengenuous about having feelings and wanting other people to utilize theirs? What's wrong with compassion, sympathy etc??? You're going too far with your PC stuff.

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

How is the statement xenophobic?

For the second time, I never said it was. It is, however, inappropriate.

Curlzy wrote:

So he has feelings eh? What's disengenuous about having feelings and wanting other people to utilize theirs? What's wrong with compassion, sympathy etc???

We're discussing matters of fact. Certain things are allowed in a statement and certain things not. In this case, certain things specifically prohibted were mentioned. Whether they should be or not is a seperate argument.

Curlzy wrote:

You're going too far with your PC stuff.

What "PC stuff" do you refer to....? A quote would be helpful.

Laminations

Grand. So the judge was wrong in labelling it xenophobic? And offensive?

Out of interest do you think foreign nationals convicted of serious/violent crime ion their home country or any where else should be allowed free movement into Ireland?

Nodin

Laminations wrote: »

Grand. So the judge was wrong in labelling it xenophobic? And offensive?

As I haven't read it in full, I can't say. It was, as I said, certainly inappropriate, based on the small exerpts that have become public.

Laminations wrote: »

Out of interest do you think foreign nationals convicted of serious/violent crime ion their home country or any where else should be allowed free movement into Ireland?

Not that its anything to do with this thread, but no, I don't.

Son Of A Vidic

What's that I hear? oh it the sound of hooves announcing the arrival of the self-righteous brigade? Take this case in it's context, this woman suffered a savage death, the treatment of her remains was nothing less than animalistic in it's nature. Shock fcuking horror! Some emotional family members use colorful/emotive language in a victim impact statement. Shock horror! That relatives drift off course a bit during this statement. This is the least that should be expected considering the nature of the crime involved. I have no faith in judicial sentencing in this country, life is treated too cheaply and a lot sentences handed down reflect this.

Millicent

Laminations wrote: »

Don't make me laugh. You thanked the following post

My post which was to explain the parameters of what a victim impact statement was allowed to contain. I never said anywhere that there were xenophobic statements in the actual statement so I'll await your apology for the unwarranted criticism.

Millicent

medicman2009 wrote: »

What's that I hear? oh it the sound of hooves announcing the arrival of the self-righteous brigade? Take this case in it's context, this woman suffered a savage death, the treatment of her remains was nothing less than animalistic in it's nature. Shock fcuking horror! Some emotional family members use colorful/emotive language in a victim impact statement. Shock horror! That relatives drift off course a bit during this statement. This is the least that should be expected considering the nature of the crime involved. I have no faith in judicial sentencing in this country, life is treated too cheaply and a lot sentences handed down reflect this.

The only self-righteous brigade here are those to refuse to acknowledge that the judge was engaging in the best legal practice by deferring sentence to prevent the criminals' defence team having a legal argument to challenge their sentencing.

Predalien

curlzy wrote: »

I remember that case, linky:http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0706/mahonm.html anyway IMO he was completely correct in calling it disingenuous, her family/mother were complete scum who failed her over and over and over and then went on the "poor us" route in the VIS. They didn't give a **** about her when she was alive.

I'd agree that they failed her, but it wasn't the judge's role to comment on their sincerity, they'd lost their daughter for god's sake.

Son Of A Vidic

Millicent wrote: »

The only self-righteous brigade here are those to refuse to acknowledge that the judge was engaging in the best legal practice by deferring sentence to prevent the criminals' defence team having a legal argument to challenge their sentencing.

I agree totally with you, if that indeed was the intent of the judge to prevent a defence counsel challenge,then well and good. I just hope he doesn't allow understandably human emotions contained in the statement, to impinge his potential sentencing.