David Norris - Post-Revelations

HarryPotter41

double post

dvpower

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

You see a comparison between being killed by the state and spending the rest of your life in prison and being in jail to not being in jail.

Yes. A call for leniency.

Android 666

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I am no fan of Gay Mitchell, but he did not seek clemency in the way David Norris did, he asked that a man not be put to death and given a custodial sentence, which in America is life ( and when they say life they mean life ). As many people are against the Death penalty ( including myself, the state punish murder by committing the same crime themselves ) many would not see this as an issue. Also did Gay Mitchell do it on any form of Oireachtas notepaper? There is no comparison between asking somebody not to be put to death and asking a court for a light sentence.

While being against the Death Penalty is an honourable stance and one I hold myself but why is it that you choose to single out this pro-life nutter as his one call for clemency that year.

Why is there no comparison? They are both looking for lighter sentences and in my eyes Paul Hill is the more heinous of the two.

I can only assume he did it in an official capacity because the article starts with:

Fine Gael's Spokesman on Foreign Affairs, Gay Mitchell, has written to the Governor of Florida in the US, asking him to take anti-abortionist Paul Hill off death row.

I can't tell if it was on Oireachtas notepaper because unlike Norris' letters, Mitchell's haven't been leaked. Why is that?

Android 666

double post

Android 666

dvpower wrote: »

Well lets at least get the facts of the case on the table before we go calling for uproar.

You're nitpicking on one word I've said. I'm not looking for an uproar I just want to know why these two cases are being treated so differently.

HarryPotter41

Android 666 wrote: »

While being against the Death Penalty is an honourable stance and one I hold myself but why is it that you choose to single out this pro-life nutter as his one call for clemency that year.

Why is there no comparison? They are both looking for lighter sentences and in my eyes Paul Hill is the more heinous of the two.

I can only assume he did it in an official capacity because the article starts with:



I can't tell if it was on Oireachtas notepaper because unlike Norris' letters, Mitchell's haven't been leaked. Why is that?

Probably wasn't leaked because it was made public AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED. And is the crime more heinous, Paul Hill's victims are dead, the victim of a statutory rape can often have to live with the emotional scars of that crime for a lifetime. Everything can be relative.

dvpower

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

Probably wasn't leaked because it was made public AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED. And is the crime more heinous, Paul Hill's victims are dead, the victim of a statutory rape can often have to live with the emotional scars of that crime for a lifetime. Everything can be relative.

WTF???

If Ezra Nawi had murdered his victim, his crime might have been less heinous?

Android 666

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

Probably wasn't leaked because it was made public AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED. And is the crime more heinous, Paul Hill's victims are dead, the victim of a statutory rape can often have to live with the emotional scars of that crime for a lifetime. Everything can be relative.

Ah, so if they're dead it's not as bad. Right…

HarryPotter41

dvpower wrote: »

WTF???

If Ezra Nawi had murdered his victim, his crime might have been less heinous?

I did say everything is relative. Anything can be taken in anyway you want to read it like everything being discussed in this forum.

Android 666

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I did say everything is relative. You can just ignore the part where I said what Gay Mitchell did was made public at the time he did it.

Well, it got a bit lost after you said that statutory rape is worse than murder…

HarryPotter41

Android 666 wrote: »

Ah, so if they're dead it's not as bad. Right…

Everything is relative. You can just ignore the part where I said what Gay Mitchell did was made public at the time he did it.

HarryPotter41

Android 666 wrote: »

Well, it got a bit lost after you said that statutory rape is worse than murder…

For the victim, murder is the more heinous crime, but the victim of one is dead, the victim of the other could spend the rest of their lives dealing with the horror of what happened to them.

AnonoBoy

Maybe in Hogwart's statutory rape is worse than murder because Dumbledore can bring people back to life or some other made up sh*t.

Android 666

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

For the victim, murder is the more heinous crime, but the victim of one is dead, the victim of the other could spend the rest of their lives dealing with the horror of what happened to them.

Grand, the next time I have sex with a 15 year old I'll make sure to murder them afterwards.

Thanks for the tip.

My name is URL

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

Probably wasn't leaked because it was made public AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED. And is the crime more heinous, Paul Hill's victims are dead, the victim of a statutory rape can often have to live with the emotional scars of that crime for a lifetime. Everything can be relative.

Reminds me of a thread a while back where someone claimed that murder was a less serious crime than abuse. It's as retarded a thought now as it was back then. Of course the cold blooded murder of 2 people is a more serious crime than the one Ezra committed.. if you think otherwise then you seriously need to rethink your definition of relativity. You have no idea whether or not the victim in this case is suffering any emotional scarring.. the court found that it was fully consensual despite its illegality. You're simply assuming the worst in order to bolster your opinion on the matter.

dvpower

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

For the victim, murder is the more heinous crime, but the victim of one is dead, the victim of the other could spend the rest of their lives dealing with the horror of what happened to them.

Of course the family of John Britton, the murdered doctor and his bodygaurd, James Barrett don't count at all.
James Barrett's wife who was also wounded in the attack doesn't count. Sure she can probably shrug the whole unfortunate incident off.



This, by the way, is the type of person that Gay Mitchell went to bat for.

In a statement before his execution, Hill said that he felt no remorse for his actions, and that he expected "a great reward in Heaven". Hill left behind a manuscript manifesto[5] which his backers promised him they would publish.
That manifesto and his address to the jury that convicted him echoed the words of John Brown,[6] who had attempted to incite a violent insurrection to end slavery in the United States.
Hill was not apologetic for the killings, and in his last words he encouraged others who believe abortion is an illegitimate use of lethal force to "do what you have to do to stop it"

denhaagenite

Android 666 wrote: »

Well, it got a bit lost after you said that statutory rape is worse than murder…

Mitchell was requesting that a person not be put to death, as in alot of nation's opinions the death sentence is unnecessary and uncivilised. He was not asking that the man not be punished.

David Norris asked that his friend be pardoned/ not punished or whatever way you would like to describe clemency.

I don't think these two situations are the same, but this is just my opinion

Gay Mitchell's actions are also public- we know about them and can make a decision on whether to vote for him or not based on this. I do believe that while there is some homophobia in Ireland, that it had a part to play in the downfall of David Norris. He has been a figure in public life for a very long time, as have other gay people ie Colm O Gorman, and this clearly has not hindered his political progress, or the progress of lots of other gay people. There is still alot of work to be done to legally protect the social status of gay people but it would have to be done regardless and I think that Ireland has done reasonably well so far.

Lord TSC

The problem is that even when its teenagers involved, people tend to go nuts and overreact about everything.

That's not to say that what happens/happened isn't bad and illegal. But you look at topics on here sometimes that are about these topics and people seem to believe that murderers like the guy in Norway are on the same level. Its one of those topics that its nearly impossible to have a decent and logical debate on since alot of people see it as a taboo subject which must be reacted at as if it was THE WORST CRIME IN HISTORY!

dvpower

denhaagenite wrote: »

David Norris asked that his friend be pardoned/ not punished or whatever way you would like to describe clemency.

This isn't true.

HarryPotter41

dvpower wrote: »

Of course the family of John Britton, the murdered doctor and his bodygaurd, James Barrett don't count at all.
James Barrett's wife who was also wounded in the attack doesn't count. Sure she can probably shrug the whole unfortunate incident off.



This, by the way, is the type of person that Gay Mitchell went to bat for.

Just for the record I do consider murder a much more heinous crime than abuse of any form, I purely said from the victims point of view. I am more than aware that the victim of a murder leaves a family behind, friends behind who have to live with the pain. That is why my reference was purely and solely to the victim of the crime, not their dependants.

Mitchell at least let it be known what have was doing at the time, I am no fan of his and never will be, but he didn't look for Paul Hill not to do jail time, he merely asked he not be put to death.

carlos D

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

The problem is that even when its teenagers involved, people tend to go nuts and overreact about everything.

That's not to say that what happens/happened isn't bad and illegal. But you look at topics on here sometimes that are about these topics and people seem to believe that murderers like the guy in Norway are on the same level. Its one of those topics that its nearly impossible to have a decent and logical debate on since alot of people see it as a taboo subject which must be reacted at as if it was THE WORST CRIME IN HISTORY!

The most disgusting thing is that people like Norris try to rationalise it....straight or gay, these are the actions of dirty old men. Simple as.

starbelgrade

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

The problem is that even when its teenagers involved, people tend to go nuts and overreact about everything.

That's not to say that what happens/happened isn't bad and illegal. But you look at topics on here sometimes that are about these topics and people seem to believe that murderers like the guy in Norway are on the same level. Its one of those topics that its nearly impossible to have a decent and logical debate on since alot of people see it as a taboo subject which must be reacted at as if it was THE WORST CRIME IN HISTORY!

It's not the worst crime in history, but on the scale of bad crimes, raping a child would be fairly high up on most people's lists.. and for good reason.

dvpower

The Mitchell case got a mention in The Examiner today.

A CLEMENCY plea by Gay Mitchell for an anti-abortion fanatic who murdered two people was defended by the Fine Gael presidential candidate last night.
Then the party’s spokesman on foreign affairs, Mr Mitchell made the appeal in 2003 in a bid to prevent double killer Paul Hill being given a lethal injection on Florida’s death row.

Former presbyterian minister Hill was convicted of the murder of a doctor and his bodyguard outside an abortion clinic in the US state in 1994.

Mr Mitchell pleaded at the time that Hill had committed a senseless crime, but that executing him would only perpetuate the cycle of taking life.

Then Florida governor Jeb Bush ignored the plea and Hill — who said he was a martyr for his anti-abortion cause — was put to death by injection.

Mr Mitchell’s spokesperson denied comparisons could be drawn between the intervention and the controversy which David Norris became involved in.

"Mr Mitchell did it because he is an implacable opponent of the death penalty.

"It is different [to the Norris situation] in that he was seeking that the death penalty be replaced by a term in prison. He wasn’t seeking mitigation," the spokesperson said.

Mr Mitchell has also intervened on behalf of other prisoners facing the death penalty, the spokesperson said.

It probably deserves its own thread.

HarryPotter41

dvpower wrote: »

This isn't true.

True, he only sought a non custodial sentence which is not a pardon/non punishment.

Android 666

denhaagenite wrote: »

Mitchell was requesting that a person not be put to death, as in alot of nation's opinions the death sentence is unnecessary and uncivilised. He was not asking that the man not be punished.

David Norris asked that his friend be pardoned/ not punished or whatever way you would like to describe clemency.

I don't think these two situations are the same, but this is just my opinion

Norris was asking for a non custodial sentence, he wasn't asking for the man to be let off.

The death penalty is a punishment over there where it is not here and abortion is legal over in Florida where it is not over here. Different countries, different laws. If you ask me, neither Norris or Mitchell were right to interfere in the jurisdiction of an other country.

Both were looking for leniency in these sentences.

denhaagenite wrote: »

Gay Mitchell's actions are also public- we know about them and can make a decision on whether to vote for him or not based on this.

Yes we can decide if we want to vote for Mitchell if we want to or not. We now can't with Norris and yet both are guilty of the same thing.

HarryPotter41

carlos D wrote: »

The most disgusting thing is that people like Norris try to rationalise it....straight or gay, these are the actions of dirty old men. Simple as.

The strange thing is that a brief peruse in the LGBT forum on here would show that the gay community seem much more abhored by what David Norris has done than people on this forum. Then again, they are not trying to look cool by supporting the gay guy, they are being rational.

Lord TSC

starbelgrade wrote: »

It's not the worst crime in history, but on the scale of bad crimes, raping a child would be fairly high up on most people's lists.. and for good reason.

Agreed. But then if I said to someone "Oh, he raped a child", would the image popping into their head be the same as what actually happened?

Imo, he didn't "rape a child" in the way those three words say out of context (Which is how a lot of people are taking them and papers are marketing them as). He had consensual sex with a teenager who was a year under the legal age. That's bad, don't get me wrong. But some would have you believe that the guy grabbed a child (which a teenager of 15 is NOT), dragged him down an alley and forced him to have sex. There's a difference there but some people seem to think there's none; that what the guy did was on even a worse level that a guy who murders dozens of people.

Also, and again I say I think what Norris did is enough to cost him my vote, Norris went to bat for someone he loved. We can look down on him for that (and probably rightfully) but I can understand why Norris did what he did. You don't want to think the worst of the person you love, and you want to help them. I lived next to a pedo whose wife stuck by him for years. She knew full well what a monster he was but still stayed with him. People in love do stupid and illogical things but I don't think that makes THEM a monster as well. Foolish. Naive. Yeah. But not monsters as people would have you believe Norris is himself.

Biggins

Android 666 wrote: »

Norris was asking for a non custodial sentence, he wasn't asking for the man to be let off.

The death penalty is a punishment over there where it is not here and abortion is legal over in Florida where it is not over here. Different countries, different laws. If you ask me, neither Norris or Mitchell were right to interfere in the jurisdiction of an other country.

Both were looking for leniency in these sentences.

Yes we can decide if we want to vote for Mitchell if we want to or not. We now can't with Norris and yet both are guilty of the same thing.

Sadly thats the state of play when it comes to politics in Ireland.
Its a very dirty game by old parties, set in their old ways.
...And of course there won't be one fifth the stick about Gay Mitchel's actions either - one is left to draw ones's own conclusions about that too.

7sr2z3fely84g5

Either way it was statutory rape,the same would apply to any hetro males caught having sex with their underage gf's despite small age difference,that's in the eyes of the law.

looksee

I was going to vote for Norris, now I am not. In both those decisions his sexual orientation was irrelevant. I was going to vote for him because he has personality and charisma, I am not going to vote for him because he made a serious error of judgment.

The essential point here is that our President represents us in a formal way, has to deal with people in a correct and dignified manner, I think he could have done that.

However the President needs to have impeccable judgment of how to deal with any situation, and David Norris has shown that he does not understand the difference between his personal life and his public life. It would be much more difficult to understand the subtleties of diplomatic life, and he has already damaged his essential neutral stance on one country by commenting on their internal laws.

We must hope for a President with the dignity and instinctive courtesy of Mary McAleese, someone who can put aside their ego in order to be the formal and professional reperesentative of the country.