Road Rager gets 12 years

davet82

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0423/man-sentenced-to-12-years-for-manslaughter.html


Karl Donohue gets 12 years for killing that drunk driver with a hurley in that road rage incident.

Too strong a sentence maybe?

SunnyDub1

He killed someone, drunk,sober, drugged, it doesn't matter two wrongs don't make a right.

he should of got more then 12 years imo.
He will be out after 9 or less... It's a joke

FatherLen

its harsh when you consider what some of the scumbags get away with.

Minstrel27

davet82 wrote: »

Too strong a sentence maybe?

Not enough

jack presley

SunnyDub1 wrote: »

He killed someone, drunk,sober, drugged, it doesn't matter two wrongs don't make a right.

he should of got more then 12 years imo.
He will be out after 9 or less... It's a joke

Yeah, last 2 years suspended. Take remission into it and he'll be out in no time

Ellis Dee

davet82 wrote: »

Karl Donohue gets 12 years for killing that drunk driver with a hurley in that road rage incident.

Too strong a sentence maybe?

I just read about it. It does seem a bit strong all right, even if the final two years were suspended.:)

Let's see what happens in the Court of Criminal Appeal.:cool:

That English driver paid a very high price for his own detestable behaviour. He was prepared to drive a vehicle after at least ten pints, when he must have been stepping-on-his-dick drunk, and behaved very aggressively towards another motorist who had a small child in his car with him. That showed that his judgement was seriously impaired and he was undeniably a major danger on the road. The outcome of his boorish behaviour could easily have been very different and some one else other than himself or Mr. Donoghue could have been killed. He would have deserved a spell in the hoosegow for his own actions, but did not deserve to die in the tragic way that he did.

Raging_Ninja

FatherLen wrote: »

its harsh when you consider what some of the scumbags get away with.

He was on bail for arson, and had three or four other fairly serious convictions. He is a scumbag.

FatherLen

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

He was on bail for arson, and had three or four other fairly serious convictions. He is a scumbag.

oh right. was not aware of that.

the groutch

SunnyDub1 wrote: »

He killed someone, drunk,sober, drugged, it doesn't matter two wrongs don't make a right.

he should of got more then 12 years imo.
He will be out after 9 or less... It's a joke

if you're a Garda you get away with a fine :mad:

jam_mac_jam

He beat somebody to death in front of his own child so no 12 years is not too strong. Guy is an animal

Gee Bag

I reckon the sentence is just about right taking into account his previous form and the level of provocation from the victim.

Though I wouldn't have been surprised had he got less.

Carter P Fly

He beat a guy to death in front of his kid and has a string of previous serious crime convictions. This is a good example for the death penalty thread.

mikeym

You cant take the law into your own hands!!!!

Mickey Dazzler

That will get knocked down to 8 on appeal and he will be out in 4-5 years. FACT.

Show Time

Two very unlikeable fellows it seems.

A shame one of them did so much harm to the other.

No winners here.

RichT

davet82 wrote: »

Road Rager gets 12 years

He got 12 years for manslaughter, not 12 years for road rage which your sensationalist thread title implies.

ASOT

He should have nocked him down in an un roadworthy car, would have only got a fine.

Gbear

Manslaughter my arse. In this country you have to have a signed and dated statement detailing how you're going to kill someone for it to be murder.

"Woopsie doodle. I accidentally beat you to death - aren't I reckless"

lividduck

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0423/man-sentenced-to-12-years-for-manslaughter.html


Karl Donohue gets 12 years for killing that drunk driver with a hurley in that road rage incident.

Too strong a sentence maybe?

Nowhere near strong enough bearing in mind what he did, what he said to the Gardai afterwards, and his previous record of violence.

JONJO THE MISER

Just watching this on the news now, we will see how far the Leinester rugby jersey he was wearing today will get him Prison, scumbag will get everything that he deserves in there.

Paparazzo

lividduck wrote: »

Nowhere near strong enough bearing in mind what he did, what he said to the Gardai afterwards, and his previous record of violence.

What did he say?

Please Kill Me

Yes, the sentence was too harsh. He was defending himself and his young child. I would have done the same.

My name is URL

Paparazzo wrote: »

What did he say?

He told the Gardai that he hoped the victim died, and that he wouldn't regret it if he did.

Then, when he did die, the accused changed his mind and decided to take it all back.

From what I've read about the case, yer man sounds like a total scrote.

Please Kill Me wrote: »

Yes, the sentence was too harsh. He was defending himself and his young child. I would have done the same.

Well then you'd be in the same position, and your kid would be without a father for 10 years. Not the cleverest of things to do really, is it?

And bear in mind that this guy was on bail for an arson charge at the time of the incident.. I guess he was just doing his best for his kid when he torched somebody elses property too.

Phoenix Park

Yes, if i had to bet on it i'd say he will do about four and a half years, maybe five max.

Uriel.

The best outcome would have been that they killed each other and his kid getting fostered to a more responsible and positive influenced family to be raised

schemingbohemia

Please Kill Me wrote: »

Yes, the sentence was too harsh. He was defending himself and his young child. I would have done the same.

Interesting user name for someone with the attitude that it's perfectly okay to batter someone about the head when they're not posing any threat to you and to be tell the Garda afterwards that the victim deserved what he got and he hoped he died?

lividduck

Paparazzo wrote: »

What did he say?

He told the Gardai he gave the victim"what he deserved" and that "i hope he fuc**ng dies"
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/road-rage-killer-karl-donohoe-gets-12-year-jail-sentence-3088960.html

Dan Chipowski

As said above, there's no winners here.

The sentence is about right. As for the victim,I've got no sympathy for someone who gets behind the wheel after 10 pints. He left himself open to such an occurrence even if he didn't deserve his fate. If he'd ploughed into a car and killed 3 or 4 people he'd probably have got less jail time.

Larbre34

Youre driving along with kids in the car. You pull away a bit casually from a junction, some punter doesnt care for your driving style and lets you know it. Not only that he keeps it up and tails you eventually cutting you off and forcing you to stop. You face off, you realised he's pissed and gets abusive. Now a number of things could develop from here....

Can you say honestly you'd take his ****e and walk away? Can you be sure your own fear pride and temper might not possibly end you up in serious bother? I can't.

Some of the righteous indignation here makes me want to spit

rubberdiddies

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0423/man-sentenced-to-12-years-for-manslaughter.html


Karl Donohue gets 12 years for killing that drunk driver with a hurley in that road rage incident.

Too strong a sentence maybe?

too lenient.
He had previous convictions.

I wish we had the 3 strikes rule here.
If we did, it's likely he would have been in prison and that man may still be alive.

Gee Bag

Lollers wrote: »

A bit off topic here.

But does anyone else feel there is more road rage/aggressive
driving going on ?. People seem more (understandably) pent up since the country was put into receivership, and are taking this aggression out on the roads.

I think its the opposite, because of the downturn there are less vehicles on the road (especially early in the morning time) and much better roads than there were five-ten years ago. No more five-mile tail backs behind tractors on the drive between Cork-Dublin, Galway-Cork etc.

Motorist

Some dirtbag poster on the other thread that was locked last week was saying the victim had previous convictions. I am not surprised to see that it was Donohoe himself who had convictions including arson and was out on bail. Donohoe is an absolute scumbag who deserves every second of this sentence.

My name is URL

Larbre34 wrote: »

Can you be sure your own fear pride and temper might not possibly end you up in serious bother? I can't.

Some of the righteous indignation here makes me want to spit

You could ask the same thing about any story in which somebody winds up dead. It doesn't mean that people can't have an opinion on it, and the fact is that the guy unlawfully killed another person.

You dress it up as something which it isn't. Stick to the facts. It was determined that neither Donohue or the kid were in any immediate danger after both vehicles had stopped. Donohue got out of his car first and started to beat at the windows of Bates' car. Witnesses say that Bates remained in the car until this point. When he did exit the vehicle, Donohue hit him a few times on the head and ended up on the ground and apparently unconscious. Donohue continued to viciously beat the man while he was laying on the ground.

Did he go to Gardai to report what had happened afterwards? No, he didn't. And when he was finally arrested he told the Gardai that he hoped the guy would die.

It's not righteous indignation to call the guy a complete idiot and a scumbag.. he himself made sure that that's how people would see him.

Lollers

Gee Bag wrote: »

I think its the opposite, because of the downturn there are less vehicles on the road (especially early in the morning time) and much better roads than there were five-ten years ago. No more five-mile tail backs behind tractors on the drive between Cork-Dublin, Galway-Cork etc.

You might be right, I deleted my post cause it was a bit off topic.

King of Kings

initially I though he was a scumbag but when I read the media reports on the trial I don't see what he did that was wrong. he was defending child from a drunken manic who was threatening them with his jeep.

Now he went overboard beating him on the ground in the head but he didn't ask to be in that position.
I don't think he should have faced a charge at all.
To hear the "victims" family on radio was sickening - their relative was the agressor in this act - he was no victim


from independant.ie

Shortly afterwards, Mr Bates overtook Donohoe's Toyota Rav 4 and mounted a central island before cutting in on the Dublin man, who later claimed he feared he was going to be rammed off the road.

grounds for self defence (imo) esp with the kid in the car.

Raging_Ninja

King of Kings wrote: »

grounds for self defence (imo) esp with the kid in the car.

Sure, that might be true the way you want it to be.

Fact is, our scumbag with a penchant for arson got out of the car, got the hurley, and started smashing the drunk's car window for a couple of minutes. Drunk got out, with hands over his head, and got his head caved in.

I believe that people should be allowed to legitimately defend themselves. This is not one of those cases.

Reg'stoy

the groutch wrote: »

if you're a Garda you get away with a fine :mad:

Care to expand or are you just talking through your hole.

lividduck

the groutch wrote: »

if you're a Garda you get away with a fine :mad:

WTF are you on about?

Frank Black

Larbre34 wrote: »

Youre driving along with kids in the car. You pull away a bit casually from a junction, some punter doesnt care for your driving style and lets you know it. Not only that he keeps it up and tails you eventually cutting you off and forcing you to stop. You face off, you realised he's pissed and gets abusive. Now a number of things could develop from here....

Can you say honestly you'd take his ****e and walk away? Can you be sure your own fear pride and temper might not possibly end you up in serious bother? I can't.

Some of the righteous indignation here makes me want to spit

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't beat the other driver to death with a hurley in front of my kids, yeah.

King of Kings

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

Sure, that might be true the way you want it to be.

Fact is, our scumbag with a penchant for arson got out of the car, got the hurley, and started smashing the drunk's car window for a couple of minutes. Drunk got out, with hands over his head, and got his head caved in.

I believe that people should be allowed to legitimately defend themselves. This is not one of those cases.

The way I want it to be?
I'd rather nobody died. But it's the way I see it after reading the court case in the papers.


penchant for arson (nice turn of pharse btw) shouldn't prevent him defending his family with vigour.

gerryo777

At the same court an old farmer who's in a home and has parkinson's disease gets life for killing his brother in a dispute over where their mother was to be buried.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0423/farmer-gets-life-sentence-for-murdering-brother.html



We have a funny system here, there's no doubt.

lividduck

King of Kings wrote: »

The way I want it to be?
I'd rather nobody died. But it's the way I see it after reading the court case in the papers.


penchant for arson (nice turn of pharse btw) shouldn't prevent him defending his family with vigour.

At no point was his family threatened by the victim, he was defending nobody, he is just a prick with a history of criminality.
Your posts say a lot about you!

deandean

Far too long a sentence.

It'll be reduced to 5 or 6 years on appeal when consideration is given to the actions of the (unfortunate) deceased.

I reckon yer man will spend 4 or 5 yrs in jail for this.

I.M.O. of course.

lividduck

deandean wrote: »

Far too long a sentence.

It'll be reduced to 5 or 6 years on appeal when consideration is given to the actions of the (unfortunate) deceased.

I reckon yer man will spend 4 or 5 yrs in jail for this.

I.M.O. of course.

Not a chance, convicted aronist on bail beats a man to death and tells the Gardai he hoped the man died, if he appeals they will probable (properly) increase his sentence.

King of Kings

lividduck wrote: »

At no point was his family threatened by the victim, he was defending nobody, he is just a prick with a history of criminality.
Your posts say a lot about you!

They sure do say a lot about me.

I believe you should be able to defend your family without sanction.

Raging_Ninja

King of Kings wrote: »

They sure do say a lot about me.

I believe you should be able to defend your family without sanction.

He wasn't defending his family.

At an earlier point words had been exchanged, and then they parted and continued driving.

Drunk does an idiot thing and cuts off scumbag.

Scumbag gets out of the car, gets the hurley from the boot and starts attacking the car.

Drunk gets out of car after a couple of minutes hands submissively over his head and gets his head beaten in.

Self defense does not come into this.

My name is URL

King of Kings wrote: »

They sure do say a lot about me.

I believe you should be able to defend your family without sanction.

He wasn't defending his family though. He never even suggested that it's why he reacted in such a way. If he honestly believed that he was only defending his family, then why didn't he surrender himself to Gardai after the incident, and why did he tell them that he hoped the guy would die? (even though he no longer posed a threat at that stage).

You're welcome to your opinions on how far people should be allowed to go in order to protect themselves, but how can you possibly apply that in Donohue's instance, knowing what you do about his history and the details of the case?

greendom

Larbre34 wrote: »

Youre driving along with kids in the car. You pull away a bit casually from a junction, some punter doesnt care for your driving style and lets you know it. Not only that he keeps it up and tails you eventually cutting you off and forcing you to stop. You face off, you realised he's pissed and gets abusive. Now a number of things could develop from here....

Can you say honestly you'd take his ****e and walk away? Can you be sure your own fear pride and temper might not possibly end you up in serious bother? I can't.

Some of the righteous indignation here makes me want to spit

I think most of the righteous indignation on this thread is contained in this post

gurramok

lividduck wrote: »

Not a chance, convicted aronist on bail beats a man to death and tells the Gardai he hoped the man died, if he appeals they will probable (properly) increase his sentence.

Do you have a link to where had had previous? Its not in the RTE or Irish Times, think it was over a domestic.

By the way, the woman who rammed the elderly man to death in Mulhuddart got 6 years, perhaps a car is less of a lethal weapon than a hurley!

somefeen

Just don't bother getting outta the car in situations like this is my motto. If some one forces you to stop, lock the doors and just sit there until they **** off. If they start bating the car, drive over them in self defence......

BattleCorp

Another way of looking at things.

Maybe the guy with the hurley saved more innocent lives by killing the drunk driver there and then. Possibly, had the drunk driver not been in this altercation, maybe he would have killed innocent people due to his drunken driving.

A hero medal for the guy with the hurley maybe?