Where's the justice ,child molestor gets a suspended sentance

dod2214

What is wrong with our society that our courts impose such a sentance.Forget the time lapse and focus on the crime .If he had murdered someone would he receive a similar sentance.This tpye of sentancing is indicitaive of how we as a society view child sexual abuse.Its almost like eew have become immune to it.Its a bloddy disgrace and the perpetrator walks free and carries on with his life leaving the wreckage behind.


The Irish Times - Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Suspended sentence for sex assaults on sister (8) carried out 35 years ago

A MAN who indecently assaulted his sister more than 35 years ago when she was aged eight has been given an 18-month suspended sentence at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.
Paul Roche (52), Wellmount Avenue, Finglas, pleaded guilty to four counts of indecent assault of his sister between April 3rd, 1976 and April 2nd, 1978 in Glasnevin.
Reporting restrictions were lifted by prosecution counsel on behalf of the victim in order to have Roche named in the media.
Judge Patrick McCartan said Roche “abused the confidence and trust of being an older brother. The grievous wrongdoing was inflicted on his younger sister, who was extremely vulnerable and of an innocent age. His age at 16 could not be an excuse of interference on a child so young. Having done grievous wrong to his sister, he did what he could to put matters right and admitted it from the outset,” he said.
Evidence was heard that over the two-year period, Roche had entered his sister’s bedroom on different occasions, lain down beside her and indecently assaulted her with his fingers. Once, the victim came home from hospital after a tetanus injection and Roche assaulted her in a similar manner.
Two incidents of indecent assault were recalled when the victim was on her way home from school and went to where her brother worked, to wait for a lift. He assaulted her there. “He would give her money and sweets and threatened her not to tell anyone,” said Tara Burns, prosecuting.
In April 2010 the victim made a statement to gardaí, and when Roche was interviewed he accepted the allegations but could not recall the exact details.
Paul Carroll, defending, said Roche told gardaí “if she said it then I accept it happened”, and apologised for the wrongdoing.
In a victim impact statement, the woman said when the abuse began she “couldn’t sleep and cried all the time. He gave me sweets and money and told me it was to be our secret. When I was going to tell my mother about it, he would clench his fists and glare at me. I found I was unable to trust anyone and I had no confidence. . . I always thought an older brother would look out for a sister.”
She said in her thirties she had a nervous breakdown and was suicidal. “He ruined my childhood, teenage years and adulthood and I did not do anything wrong.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0229/1224312523004.html

charlemont

Ever wonder why they get such useless sentences ?? Because I do and I have my own theory which would probably be deleted here but think about how all of this was covered up for years and it should become clear.

Freddie59

charlemont wrote: »

Ever wonder why they get such useless sentences ?? Because I do and I have my own theory which would probably be deleted here but think about how all of this was covered up for years and it should become clear.

I suspect I know where you're coming from. The same place as me.;)

BTW those poll options are confusing to say the least.

super_furry

Yeah, don't know what I'm being asked to agree or disagree to.

abouttobebanned

I'm gonna get lambasted for this now..:

He was 16 FFS. Yes it was a shocking thing to do...but if he has not harmed anyone else in 35 years isn't it possible that there were fcuked up circumstances in that house and it to imprison him so many years later night be a bit much?

It should have been addressed at the time, or at least within a year or so.

I really hope he grew out of that behaviour though....

Ellis Dee

The offence was committed 35 years ago (which means that in many jurisdictions it would be statute-barred anyway) and the Ireland of 1977 had even more sexual hang-ups than the Ireland of today. In addition, the fact that the defendant was only 16 at the time is certainly a mitigating factor. Nevertheless, what he did was a crime and inexcusable, and he has been punished in the form of a suspended sentence - and, no doubt, the shame that his environment will make him feel - but I suspect the fact that there was nothing to indicate that he had offended again in the past 35 years led the judge to conclude that sending him to prison would probably serve no useful purpose. Apart, of course, from revenge and pleasing the semi-literate gobshites who let the Daily Hatemail do their thinking for them.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Mint Sauce

The whole justice system is a joke. The women who got 4 years there yesterday with two and a half of them suspended over abuse and neglect of her 5 kids is another example. That one made my blood boil.

:mad:

lastlaugh

irish-stew wrote: »

The whole justice system is a joke. The women who got 4 years there yesterday with two and a half of them suspended over abuse and neglect of her 5 kids is another example. That one made my blood boil.

:mad:

What do you think would be an apt sentence for this crime bearing in mind it happened 35yrs ago and yerman was 16 at the time?

mikemac1

It's been decades and it seems he has been a perfect citizen since then, a jail sentence is not going to change anything

What would you do if you were the judge OP?

ResearchWill

irish-stew wrote: »

The whole justice system is a joke. The women who got 4 years there yesterday with two and a half of them suspended over abuse and neglect of her 5 kids is another example. That one made my blood boil.

:mad:

Ya I so agree (not) the Court should have totally ignored the facts, like she was 14 and abducted by the man who then went on to Marry her at 18 then he sexually abused her children for years. Not to mind what he did to her.

Why do people forget that our justice system is a balance between compassion and punishment. Thank god I have not had the life of her children but in a few years if one of those children is on serious charges will there be compassion for that person due to the issues faced when he or she was a child, I suppose not.

In relation to the OP the complaint was 35 years old, the only way a conviction was gotten was the accused admitted it, thereby saving his sister from giving evidence. There was no other offending behaviour in the following 35 years so why should he not get a suspended sentence.

theg81der

Agh yea all you guys who are being soft on this pieceof scum are right people often become sexually attracted to a pre-pubesant child, fiddle with them a bit and go on to be model citizens happens all the time :rolleyes:

Chuck Stone

This child/woman has suffered terribly because of what was done to her - his punishment should reflect the harm he's done to her should it not?

biko

Some posts accusing the individual name in the OP of other crimes removed.
Such allegations should be brought to the Gardai, not posted anonymously on an internet forum.

tmc86

irish-stew wrote: »

The whole justice system is a joke. The women who got 4 years there yesterday with two and a half of them suspended over abuse and neglect of her 5 kids is another example. That one made my blood boil.

:mad:

Hot Irish Stew for everyone!!

LenaClaire

mikemac1 wrote: »

It's been decades and it seems he has been a perfect citizen since then, a jail sentence is not going to change anything

What would you do if you were the judge OP?

Are you suggesting that if someone commits a crime, and avoids prosecution for years they should not be punished? Do you think this for all crimes, or just molesting family members?

CrazyRabbit

I don't know what to make of the sentence, as I don't have the same evidence that the judge did, but...

There is more for judges to consider than just retribution for the victim.

1. Rehabilitation. Has there been an effort to rehabilitate...and any genuine remorse? Would a prison term interfere with that and risk the success of that rehabilitation? Remember...he will eventually end up back in society.

2. Recidivism. Would a stay in prison actually increase the risk of reoffending? Prison = loss of job, therapy, family support (if any) etc and could lead to a loss of whatever restraint the guy did have. A person is most dangerous if you take everything from them and leave them with no hope...no reason to be 'good.

3. Retribution. What sentence would be suitable for the crime committed? What impact did the crime have on the victim? What punishment would be sufficient in the eyes of the victim so that they feel confident in the justice system?

It's complicated, and a judge has to take a lot into consideration. But threads like this only ever focus on retribution...which sometimes isn't the most important thing. I know..horrible for someone who was abused to hear that, but it is the truth.

AeoNGriM

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

I don't know what to make of the sentence, as I don't have the same evidence that the judge did, but...

There is more for judges to consider than just retribution for the victim.

1. Rehabilitation. Has there been an effort to rehabilitate...and any genuine remorse? Would a prison term interfere with that and risk the success of that rehabilitation? Remember...he will eventually end up back in society.

2. Recidivism. Would a stay in prison actually increase the risk of reoffending? Prison = loss of job, therapy, family support (if any) etc and could lead to a loss of whatever restraint the guy did have. A person is most dangerous if you take everything from them and leave them with no hope...no reason to be 'good.

3. Retribution. What sentence would be suitable for the crime committed? What impact did the crime have on the victim? What punishment would be sufficient in the eyes of the victim so that they feel confident in the justice system?

It's complicated, and a judge has to take a lot into consideration. But threads like this only ever focus on retribution...which sometimes isn't the most important thing. I know..horrible for someone who was abused to hear that, but it is the truth.

There's retribution and there's justice. This piece of human filth ruined someone elses life, and got away with it.

What message does that send to victims of similar abuse? Or the perpetrators?

theg81der

AeoNGriM wrote: »

There's retribution and there's justice. This piece of human filth ruined someone elses life, and got away with it.

What message does that send to victims of similar abuse? Or the perpetrators?

The same message that we continue to see sent all the time to victims of sexual abuse and violents - there is no justice in Irish court only leniency towards perpetrators. The Irish court system only seems interested in small debts and punishing those who can`t afford to pay them, if I was sceptical I`d say all they care about is their own pay packet (little fella has to pay to keep them in their well payed jobs) but surely judges and barristers wouldn`t do that ..... their the pinacle of morality in our society, right up their with the politicians and banking elite.

Badgermonkey

super_furry wrote: »

Yeah, don't know what I'm being asked to agree or disagree to.

Actually, you're being asked to agree or didagree.

Is that agreeing in the past tense?

RachaelVO

abouttobebanned wrote: »

I'm gonna get lambasted for this now..:

He was 16 FFS. Yes it was a shocking thing to do...but if he has not harmed anyone else in 35 years isn't it possible that there were fcuked up circumstances in that house and it to imprison him so many years later night be a bit much?

It should have been addressed at the time, or at least within a year or so.

I really hope he grew out of that behaviour though....

I agree that he was on 16 at the time, but there is a HUGE chance that his sister is not his only victim. These things are usually like icebergs, only a little bit shows on the surface, the majority is hidden under the water.

I would also imagine as he was very young, that there is a chance he was replicating behaviour that he seen or was inflicted on him!

HOWEVER an 18 month suspended sentence? That is the most ludicrous thing I have ever heard. There is no justice to that sentence AT ALL.

What a judiciary we have... summit to be proud of!:mad::mad:

WindSock

super_furry wrote: »

Yeah, don't know what I'm being asked to agree or disagree to.

Or if I agree or didagree.

Nothingbetter2d

suspended sentences should be NOT applicable for ALL capital crimes such as rape, child molestation, murder, terrorism, and kidnap

if you do the crime you should do the time... all of it

Kalimah

Have to say I think the sentence was fair. He was 16 and probably curious. The Ireland of the time had damn all sex ed and sex was seen in a very negative way. Even the human body was viewed as something to be ashamed of. The guy's name has been all over the paper so his life is ruined. Personally I don't think cases like that should be brought if they are that far in the past. The woman concerned.should have brought it up 20 years of she had an issue

Chuck Stone

Kalimah wrote: »

Have to say I think the sentence was fair. He was 16 and probably curious.

That's not curiosity - that's abusing a child.

Normal curiosity for a 16-yr-old is trying to get with girls your own age, looking at boobs in mags, fantasising while thrashing the lad off yourself etc.

up for anything

The Irish Times - Wednesday, February 29, 2012

In April 2010 the victim made a statement to gardaí, and when Roche was interviewed he accepted the allegations but could not recall the exact details.
Paul Carroll, defending, said Roche told gardaí “if she said it then I accept it happened”, and apologised for the wrongdoing.

I 'like' the way he distanced himself from his behaviour while taking 'responsibility'. It makes it seem like perhaps she is mistaken but sure he's a gentleman so he won't contradict her.

abouttobebanned wrote: »

It should have been addressed at the time, or at least within a year or so.

You obviously don't even have a intellectual idea of how child abuse affects victims.

Kalimah wrote: »

Have to say I think the sentence was fair. He was 16 and probably curious. The Ireland of the time had damn all sex ed and sex was seen in a very negative way. Even the human body was viewed as something to be ashamed of. The guy's name has been all over the paper so his life is ruined. Personally I don't think cases like that should be brought if they are that far in the past. The woman concerned.should have brought it up 20 years of she had an issue

Fair sentence alright! He was probably curious so he stuck his fingers into his 8 year old sister's vagina, not once but a good few times in order to satisfy his sexual curiosity. That makes it alright and his victim should really have brought it up 20 years ago if she had an issue!

Your post made me cry - tears of sadness, frustration and bewilderment that everything that has come out out about child abuse in the last 20 years has not taught you a damn thing! :mad:

Kalimah

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Kalimah wrote: »

Have to say I think the sentence was fair. He was 16 and probably curious.

That's not curiosity - that's abusing a child.

Normal curiosity for a 16-yr-old is trying to get with girls your own age, looking at boobs in mags, fantasising while thrashing the lad off yourself etc.

He probably did that too! 16 year olds then were vastly different to now. The girl should have told her mother and the boy should have been given a good slap and we all move on. That's the way it would have been done in my house!

up for anything

Kalimah wrote: »

He probably did that too! 16 year olds then were vastly different to now. The girl should have told her mother and the boy should have been given a good slap and we all move on. That's the way it would have been done in my house!

16 year olds were not vastly different back then to 16 year olds now. There were enough shotgun weddings to prove it. I'm not saying any more because you are obviously so old and stuck in your mindset that it's not worth it. :rolleyes:

Kalimah

up for anything wrote: »

The Irish Times - Wednesday, February 29, 2012

In April 2010 the victim made a statement to gardaí, and when Roche was interviewed he accepted the allegations but could not recall the exact details.
Paul Carroll, defending, said Roche told gardaí “if she said it then I accept it happened”, and apologised for the wrongdoing.

I 'like' the way he distanced himself from his behaviour while taking 'responsibility'. It makes it seem like perhaps she is mistaken but sure he's a gentleman so he won't contradict her.

abouttobebanned wrote: »

It should have been addressed at the time, or at least within a year or so.

You obviously don't even have a intellectual idea of how child abuse affects victims.

Kalimah wrote: »

Have to say I think the sentence was fair. He was 16 and probably curious. The Ireland of the time had damn all sex ed and sex was seen in a very negative way. Even the human body was viewed as something to be ashamed of. The guy's name has been all over the paper so his life is ruined. Personally I don't think cases like that should be brought if they are that far in the past. The woman concerned.should have brought it up 20 years of she had an issue

Fair sentence alright! He was probably curious so he stuck his fingers into his 8 year old sister's vagina, not once but a good few times in order to satisfy his sexual curiosity. That makes it alright and his victim should really have brought it up 20 years ago if she had an issue!

Your post made me cry - tears of sadness, frustration and bewilderment that everything that has come out out about child abuse in the last 20 years has not taught you a damn thing! :mad:

I have zero time for people who hold onto these things for decades and then decide to bring it up. The woman must be in her 40s now.

AeoNGriM

Kalimah wrote: »

I have zero time for people who hold onto these things for decades and then decide to bring it up. The woman must be in her 40s now.

Zero time? Really? You have zero time for a child abuse victim whose life has been ruined?

I'm literally speechless, but then again it's easy to be flippant and dismissive when it's not your relation whose childhood was destroyed.

theg81der

Kalimah wrote: »

I have zero time for people who hold onto these things for decades and then decide to bring it up. The woman must be in her 40s now.

Don`t want to get in trouble so em.... your "post" needs help, your "post" has a problem and your "post" is sick in the head or maybe its just a paedo so is sympathetic to their plight.Guy in question clearly admits what he did doesn`t make a feck of differents when the VICTIM is able to confront the extremely traumatic attacks perpetrated against her whenever - I don`t care if she was 80.

hattoncracker

Kalimah wrote: »

up for anything wrote: »

The Irish Times - Wednesday, February 29, 2012

In April 2010 the victim made a statement to gardaí, and when Roche was interviewed he accepted the allegations but could not recall the exact details.
Paul Carroll, defending, said Roche told gardaí “if she said it then I accept it happened”, and apologised for the wrongdoing.

I 'like' the way he distanced himself from his behaviour while taking 'responsibility'. It makes it seem like perhaps she is mistaken but sure he's a gentleman so he won't contradict her.

abouttobebanned wrote: »

It should have been addressed at the time, or at least within a year or so.

You obviously don't even have a intellectual idea of how child abuse affects victims.

Kalimah wrote: »

Have to say I think the sentence was fair. He was 16 and probably curious. The Ireland of the time had damn all sex ed and sex was seen in a very negative way. Even the human body was viewed as something to be ashamed of. The guy's name has been all over the paper so his life is ruined. Personally I don't think cases like that should be brought if they are that far in the past. The woman concerned.should have brought it up 20 years of she had an issue

Fair sentence alright! He was probably curious so he stuck his fingers into his 8 year old sister's vagina, not once but a good few times in order to satisfy his sexual curiosity. That makes it alright and his victim should really have brought it up 20 years ago if she had an issue!

Your post made me cry - tears of sadness, frustration and bewilderment that everything that has come out out about child abuse in the last 20 years has not taught you a damn thing! :mad:

I have zero time for people who hold onto these things for decades and then decide to bring it up. The woman must be in her 40s now.

That 16 year old boy was calculating enough to threaten her if she told. That's what child molestors do.. it would've taken a long time for her to admit it even happened. more than likely, the lady in question started having children of their own and didn't want her brother to have any access to them. That she told her family, and that's how it all came out.

Kalimah

We'll I'll tell you where I'm coming from to those who don't like what I say. Person I know blackmailed a male relative for donkeys years over a lot less than that guy did. It wasn't for money. If he looked crooked at her she threatened to tell his wife. She played the victim off and on over the years as it suited her. Supposedly her life was "ruined" but she had a life most people would have loved. Loads of money, kids, position in society etc etc. She was no more a victim than the cat. Anyway the guy called her bluff and now she has no power over him. She wouldn't go to the guards either. All she wanted was a bit of power and attention. Of course if anyone has been seriously abused has my full sympathy.

Kalimah

Kalimah wrote: »

He probably did that too! 16 year olds then were vastly different to now. The girl should have told her mother and the boy should have been given a good slap and we all move on. That's the way it would have been done in my house!

but she didnt lived with it it destroyed her and whatever you say its not normal to sexually abuse someone at 16 , the perpertartor was disturbed to do it and i dont think a slap would of helped then nor now.

AeoNGriM

Kalimah wrote: »

We'll I'll tell you where I'm coming from to those who don't like what I say. Person I know blackmailed a male relative for donkeys years over a lot less than that guy did. It wasn't for money. If he looked crooked at her she threatened to tell his wife. She played the victim off and on over the years as it suited her. Supposedly her life was "ruined" but she had a life most people would have loved. Loads of money, kids, position in society etc etc. She was no more a victim than the cat. Anyway the guy called her bluff and now she has no power over him. She wouldn't go to the guards either. All she wanted was a bit of power and attention. Of course if anyone has been seriously abused has my full sympathy.

Go back and re-read the OP. You're looking for the part where the scumbag admitted his guilt.

hattoncracker

Kalimah wrote: »

We'll I'll tell you where I'm coming from to those who don't like what I say. Person I know blackmailed a male relative for donkeys years over a lot less than that guy did. It wasn't for money. If he looked crooked at her she threatened to tell his wife. She played the victim off and on over the years as it suited her. Supposedly her life was "ruined" but she had a life most people would have loved. Loads of money, kids, position in society etc etc. She was no more a victim than the cat. Anyway the guy called her bluff and now she has no power over him. She wouldn't go to the guards either. All she wanted was a bit of power and attention. Of course if anyone has been seriously abused has my full sympathy.

I understand, false allegations are despicable, it makes it harder again for real victims to be believed. but he admitted to it, he should be punished. What he did to her constitutes serious abuse. And I sincerely doubt that she is the only one.

Kalimah

My point exactly about false allegations. Absolutely everyone would say no smoke without fire.
The man in this case admitted to serious abuse. He was sentenced and that's the end of it legally. My issue is with how long it took to bring the case. If the man had pleaded not guilty it's going to be damn hard to prove his innocence because of the passage of time. It could happen to anyone.
I really can't fathom why anyone would wait so long to come forward. Case I was talking about earlier happened even earlier than the 70s!

RachaelVO

Kalimah wrote: »

My point exactly about false allegations. Absolutely everyone would say no smoke without fire.
The man in this case admitted to serious abuse. He was sentenced and that's the end of it legally. My issue is with how long it took to bring the case. If the man had pleaded not guilty it's going to be damn hard to prove his innocence because of the passage of time. It could happen to anyone.
I really can't fathom why anyone would wait so long to come forward. Case I was talking about earlier happened even earlier than the 70s!

WTF, do you have any idea of the psychological impact this has on a person. You can be walking along, thinking life is all tickety boo and it can hit you, I actually seen it happen to someone, she went a white as a ghost and started sweating and shaking... it was 20 years after the abuse, it was a buried memory until something triggered it in her head... so seriously you are talking sh1te and pure unadulterated offensive sh1te at that.

I agree that false allegations have very serious ramifications, but so does abuse!

Chinafoot

Kalimah wrote: »

I really can't fathom why anyone would wait so long to come forward.

There could be any number of reasons! My money would be on the fact that this was her brother. These things can rip families apart and often the parents either don't believe the abuse victim or don't want to believe them. Huge pressure can be put on the victim to keep quiet and not ruin the family name..."think of the shame, they'll all be talking about us after mass", etc etc.

Then of course there's the psychological and emotional aspect of it. You have no idea of the strength required to go through with not only reporting someone for abuse but also following through on an actual court case.

Your view is far, far too simplistic and the fact that you seem to be basing it all on that one case you mentioned just shows that you know nothing about the subject at all.

Ronin247

Kalimah wrote: »

My point exactly about false allegations. Absolutely everyone would say no smoke without fire.
The man in this case admitted to serious abuse. He was sentenced and that's the end of it legally. My issue is with how long it took to bring the case. If the man had pleaded not guilty it's going to be damn hard to prove his innocence because of the passage of time. It could happen to anyone.
I really can't fathom why anyone would wait so long to come forward. Case I was talking about earlier happened even earlier than the 70s!

Kalimah, you have no idea of the effects of child abuse on the victim.TBH you sound like someone who is trying to defend something in their own past.Many,many victims can never find the strength to deal with what happened to them,many commit suicide or end up on drink or drugs to try and numb the memories.You are from the school of blame the victim, and attitudes like that cause people to not want to come forward.
Just added this clip so you can see that even years later the pain never leaves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

strobe

charlemont wrote: »

Ever wonder why they get such useless sentences ?? Because I do and I have my own theory which would probably be deleted here but think about how all of this was covered up for years and it should become clear.

Freddie59 wrote: »

I suspect I know where you're coming from. The same place as me.;)

Little help lads?

Kalimah

Ronin247 wrote: »

Kalimah wrote: »

My point exactly about false allegations. Absolutely everyone would say no smoke without fire.
The man in this case admitted to serious abuse. He was sentenced and that's the end of it legally. My issue is with how long it took to bring the case. If the man had pleaded not guilty it's going to be damn hard to prove his innocence because of the passage of time. It could happen to anyone.
I really can't fathom why anyone would wait so long to come forward. Case I was talking about earlier happened even earlier than the 70s!

Kalimah, you have no idea of the effects of child abuse on the victim.TBH you sound like someone who is trying to defend something in their own past.Many,many victims can never find the strength to deal with what happened to them,many commit suicide or end up on drink or drugs to try and numb the memories.You are from the school of blame the victim, and attitudes like that cause people to not want to come forward.
Just added this clip so you can see that even years later the pain never leaves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

Actually I'm not defending anything in my own past at all. I'm a girl. No one has ever laid a hand on me either in that way. I just understand why victims come forward so many years later. Very little chance of justice after so long. I suppose it's a lack of understanding on my part added to the false allegations I knew of that had coloured my attitude.

Kalimah

Ronin247 wrote: »

Kalimah wrote: »

My point exactly about false allegations. Absolutely everyone would say no smoke without fire.
The man in this case admitted to serious abuse. He was sentenced and that's the end of it legally. My issue is with how long it took to bring the case. If the man had pleaded not guilty it's going to be damn hard to prove his innocence because of the passage of time. It could happen to anyone.
I really can't fathom why anyone would wait so long to come forward. Case I was talking about earlier happened even earlier than the 70s!

Kalimah, you have no idea of the effects of child abuse on the victim.TBH you sound like someone who is trying to defend something in their own past.Many,many victims can never find the strength to deal with what happened to them,many commit suicide or end up on drink or drugs to try and numb the memories.You are from the school of blame the victim, and attitudes like that cause people to not want to come forward.
Just added this clip so you can see that even years later the pain never leaves.
BY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jHqndf9Kx4

Actually I'm not defending anything in my own past at all. I'm a girl. No one has ever laid a hand on me either in that way. I just understand why victims come forward so many years later. Very little chance of justice after so long. I suppose it's a lack of understanding on my part added to the false allegations I knew of that had coloured my attitude.

Jesus Wept

Kalimah wrote: »

He probably did that too! 16 year olds then were vastly different to now. The girl should have told her mother and the boy should have been given a good slap and we all move on. That's the way it would have been done in my house!

Your house must have been pretty fucked up.

steddyeddy

Kalimah wrote: »

I have zero time for people who hold onto these things for decades and then decide to bring it up. The woman must be in her 40s now.

Sexual abuse has long lasting effects on the victim thats common knowledge.

ResearchWill

steddyeddy wrote: »

Sexual abuse has long lasting effects on the victim thats common knowledge.

There is a view that the long lasting effect is as much caused by those trying to help children. http://www.amazon.com/Trauma-Myth-Sexual-Children-Aftermath/dp/046501688X

RachaelVO

ResearchWill wrote: »

There is a view that the long lasting effect is as much caused by those trying to help children. http://www.amazon.com/Trauma-Myth-Sexual-Children-Aftermath/dp/046501688X

Susan Clancy has been slated by professionals and victims alike over this book. In this book she interview 200 adults and has warned not to confuse confusion with trauma!

She's a very smart lady, but I think she is being controversial for the sake of it, maybe looking for tenure in harvard, or looking to make a name outside harvard research... I don't know, but I think she is WAY off the mark here!

lividduck

The thread is supposed to be about the sentence and if it was appropriate, which all things considered it was.

Sunnyisland

about be banned wrote: »

I'm gonna get lambasted for this now..:

He was 16 FFS. Yes it was a shocking thing to do...but if he has not harmed anyone else in 35 years isn't it possible that there were fcuked up circumstances in that house and it to imprison him so many years later night be a bit much?

It should have been addressed at the time, or at least within a year or so.

I really hope he grew out of that behaviour though....

For the victims it can take years before they have the courage or strenght to even talk about what happened,and more importantly who where you supposed to tell or talk to 35 years ago,We don't know how much that sexual assault has damaged the victims life or what effect it had on her relationships with men there after,and how does anybody know if that was the only victim,and as most sexual abuse happens from peoples own families there must be an awful lot of ****ed up houses in Ireland.

Sunnyisland

[QUOTE=Kalimah;77387040 Personally I don't think cases like that should be brought if they are that far in the past. The woman concerned.should have brought it up 20 years of she had an issue[/QUOTE]



Sure we can all just go on and forget about it and pretend it didn't happen,:( Did we not do that enough times in this country re sexual abuse already.

Sunnyisland

How does anyone know whether he re offended or did sexual abuse someone else,Wonder was any of his other close siblings or relatives interviewed by detectives and if so would they be afraid to come forward and admit it,Going by some posters here it doesn't matter,it was to long ago,he was only 16,Sure everything is grand now.

Sunnyisland

Would anyone here let Paul Roche (52), Wellmount Avenue, Finglas, babysit for them now ? .Seems that it was so long ago ?