Where's the justice?!!

jiltloop

hairyprincess wrote: »

Hmmm, no definitely not baying for blood.

I am annoyed at the justice system that a man who is educated and high profile in the world of academia can get off so lightly.

He admitted that he knew there was an eight foot drop, I really don't think his retaliation was in any way appropriate. A kick in the balls our a punch to the nose would have sufficed.

The article states he has a child, I hope the child doesn't piss on him. They have a tendency to that at the most inopportune moments.

If Mr. Whipple had been ordered to take anger management classes I would be more accepting of his 'punishment'. But he wasn't. Nor did he offer any excuse for his unreasonable behaviour.

Why should he need anger management classes? Are you afraid he's going to throw his child over a wall if it pisses on him? It was obviously an isolated incident and the guy doesn't have a history of problems with anger management. But you feel the need to imply that he's likely to be a danger to his child, maybe you don't feel safe with this guy loose on the streets of Dublin?

Seriously come off it! And I also fail to see your point about him being let off scot free because he's educated. How many times have we seen violent scumbags with a record aslong as their arm try to kick someone to death on the ground and get away with a suspended sentence only to kill someone a few months later?

This kind of thing goes on all the time yet you feel the need to single out one remorseful guy who did something out of character after being provoked, do you really think that this is such a big issue with all the remorseless violent scumbags who are roaming around out there on suspended sentences?

Some people need to get some perspective. There's alot more things out there that warrant your feelings of injustice more than this relatively inconsequential case.

jiltloop

The King of Moo wrote: »

I'm honestly not deliberately misquoting you.
The phrase "the incredulous nature of the OP and other posters who seem to be baying for this guy's blood" is ambiguous. It can mean that you think only the other posters are baying for blood, which I now assume you meant, or that the OP and the the other posters were baying for blood, which is what I think most people, including myself, would have taken it to mean.

That's fair enough. I just can't understand how anyone could get worked up over this case. I can understand people feeling that the judge could have been slightly harsher and I could also understand people who believe it was a fair judgement, but to disagree in the extreme to the leniency of the judgement I really can't understand.

troposphere

Is there an open prison in Dublin? Maybe he could serve his 6 year suspended sentence in an open prison and save on rent like if he had run over and killed a guard.

WallyGUFC

hairyprincess wrote: »

At least Mr. Kennedy had the excuse that he was drunk, I think we're all guilty of stupid actions while under the influence. But what is Mr. Whipple's excuse? A sober, educated man?

I think the scumbag tag clearly belongs to him in this case.

Go away. Being drunk is no excuse for pissing on a fella's shoes. That's scum, pure and simple.

xsiborg

The King of Moo wrote: »

I have. I said earlier that pissing on shoes/other things must be incredibly common in this country.

What I don't hear about often is people suffering serious injuries because of it.

no, you dont, because usually the person being humiliated is too scared to retaliate in any sort of fashion, and the person intimidating them would have thought about this beforehand, hence why they would pick on someone they thought they could get away with humiliating, for nothing other than their own amusement.

The King of Moo wrote: »

Whipple's reaction was excessive, and even if it could be put down to a rush of blood to the head (which I don't buy in this case), I still think a suspended sentence is far too lenient, and I don't often call for harsher sentences, in general.
He knew the drop was at least eight feet, according to the judge, and even eight feet could be lethal.

yes i agree the defendants reaction was excessive, i get that you dont buy it was a rush of blood to the head, but if you read the article-

Mr Kennedy was seen on CCTV approaching people at the bus stop. He approached Whipple and another man and after some interaction, Whipple grabbed him by the groin and the neck and threw him over a railing.

entirely possible in one movement, without having given any thought to the consequences.

The King of Moo wrote: »

It's a completely disproportionate response to someone pissing on his shoes and people just can't do things like that.

what you dont seem to be grasping here moo is the humiliation factor of such an act. have a look at this-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/13/us-marines-identified-video-court-martial

it is a dehumanising and degrading act, intended to let the victim know as such that they are considered by the perpetrator to be the lowest of the low, that they are "unworthy" as a human being. yet you choose to make light of it.

i think a suspended sentence here was fair (in my own case. in one particular incident, i managed to keep my job because i was seen as an otherwise exemplary employee whereas the perpetrator was known to management and HR as a constant troublemaker, he also got to keep his job and got €16k in compensation for his injuries) as the judge saw that this was a one-off act of violence, and the defendant had shown remorse for his actions, there was no need to castigate him any further and remove him from his role as a contributing member of society, as opposed to his assailant who chose to go out and get drunk and then think it was ok to humiliate a complete stranger in such a fashion.

bottom line moo- the guy thought he could humiliate him and get away with it scott free, he thought wrong and paid dearly for his actions. he'll think twice again before inflicting his particular brand of humor on a complete stranger.

i wonder if mr. whipple had gone to the gardai and made a complaint against mr. kennedy, would his complaint have been taken seriously? i doubt the gardai would have even bothered to check the CCTV, and that is why i say i am glad that mr. whipple was given a suspended sentence and ordered to compensate his assailant to the tune of €10k, i doubt he will repeat his actions in the six years he is on probation, and had he not reacted the way he did, how many more times in that six years would mr. kennedy have thought it was acceptable behaviour to humiliate complete strangers for his own amusement?

John Doe1

Go Trinity!

Gandhi

I can never have much sympathy for someone who takes a beating because he started a fight he couldn't handle. I do have some sympathy in this case because of the guy's injuries.

Whipple did overreact, but I can understand the leniency of the sentence. He made no attempt to weasel out of taking full responsibility. Even at the scene, he seemed remorseful.

If Kennedy had been minding his own business when Whipple came out of nowhere and threw him over a fence, then he would deserve a stiffer sentence, but that is not what happened. Whipple was a normally law-abiding guy with a clean record, who went too far fighting back against someone who attacked him.

Napper Hawkins

Long story short, boys and girls, a scumbag got his and will be out of action for the foreseeable future. **** him and all like him.

Mr. Whipple, for your awesome name and for your services to my country, I salute you.

Strange aswell, for all the negative crap directed at yanks on here....it took an American to do to one of our filth what the rest of us spineless cowards would never have the stones for.

Proper order, shame the prick wasn't killed imo.
Mod note, user banned for this gem

The King of Moo

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

Long story short, boys and girls, a scumbag got his and will be out of action for the foreseeable future. **** him and all like him.

Mr. Whipple, for your awesome name and for your services to my country, I salute you.

Strange aswell, for all the negative crap directed at yanks on here....it took an American to do to one of our filth what the rest of us spineless cowards would never have the stones for.

Proper order, shame the prick wasn't killed imo.

Seriously?? People who piss on other people's shoes and annoy them a bit deserve to die a violent death?

You're making a lot of assumptions about Mr. Kennedy. How do you know he's some kind of hardened scumbag? "F**k him and all like him?"
If we executed all Irish people who got drunk and acted like dicks the place'd get pretty quiet pretty quickly.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

The King of Moo wrote: »

If we executed all Irish people who got drunk and acted like dicks the place'd get pretty quiet pretty quickly.

and all the better for it

Foxhound38

I don't feel good that the drunk got unjured, but as someone regularly accosted by the sea of shuffling drunks and junkies around town, I sort of understand the frustration. Nobody should have to put up with a boozed up idiot pissing on their shoes - and I can bet very few of the high-horse sitters on this thread would have put up with the same treatment without at least a slap being thrown. Granted, the response was a bit over the top, but if he didn't know how high the drop was, he didn't know how high the drop was.

If the gardai would just clear the drunks and the junkies off the main streets, stuff like this wouldn't happen as often. How many times have people seen tourists getting hassled and intimidated by these zombies? What sort of message does that send out about Ireland, that we are so blase about allowing this to happen?

Ms.M

I don't believe in capital punishment even for murder, so not going to agree with it for a pissing and acting like an obnoxious cnut offence.
Would have been glad if he taught the kid a lesson with a few digs, but if he knew it was "at least an 8 foot drop" then he knew he might kill him. In a fit of blind rage, I'd know not to attack someone in this manner because it would be me that would end up injured. I don't accept the "in the fit of blind rage" excuse.

Let us all take a moment to emotionally prepare for the possibility that someone, someday might piss on our shoes.
Let us practise our jab/kick to the balls combo.
Let us not throw offender over a wall.

Fratton Fred

Fenian Army wrote: »

Its because he is a trinners lecturer, if he was some ordinary joe soap from tallaght he'd be behind bars.

If he was some ordinary Joe Soap this wouldn't even be in the papers.

A six year suspended sentence isn't lenient, if the guy crosses the line he is banged up straight away. Based on his otherwise good character this seems appropriate.

Was the guy's family with him when this happened? did Mr Kennedy start hassling him infront of his family and intimidating them? if someone did that to me I hate to think what i would do to be honest.

I'd like to think I would stop short of throwing him over a wall, but in the heat of the moment.....

suicide_circus

Guy should get a ****ing medal, too many lawless untermenscen roaming the streets thinking they are impervious, this one got more than he bargained for. I doubt he'll be peeing on any more shoes, except of course his own

Ms.M

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'd like to think I would stop short of throwing him over a wall, but in the heat of the moment.....

Read my post. You have to mentally prepare yourself for these eventualities.
Hommmmmmmmmmmmm.

Foxhound38

Ms.M wrote: »

Read my post. You have to mentally prepare yourself for these eventualities.
Hommmmmmmmmmmmm.

In fairness, normally you should expect to be able to wait for a bus in peace without an inebriated f**ckbend hassling or pissing on you. On the other hand, it is Dublin this happened in...

xsiborg

Ms.M wrote: »

Let us all take a moment to emotionally prepare for the possibility that someone, someday might piss on our shoes.
Let us practise our jab/kick to the balls combo.
Let us not throw offender over a wall.

Ms.M wrote: »

Read my post. You have to mentally prepare yourself for these eventualities.
Hommmmmmmmmmmmm.

thanked purely for making me LOL this morning when going through this thread, cheers Ms. M

senordingdong

DB10 wrote: »

He has to wear a tracksuit to be a scumbag according to some on here.

If it was the other way round and the big shot American Trinity lecturer got those life threatening injuries, I wonder would the drunk man have got a suspended sentence.

It would depend.
Mr lecturer was able to bring to the table the fact that he was a lecturer of the upper crust, and had a wife and child and no previous record.

What could Mr Kennedy bring the table? Spouse? Children? No previous offences? Plethora of offences? Drug addiciton? Troubled upbringing?

A judge gives more credence to these things than he does the actual offence comitted.

finty

Foxhound38 wrote: »

In fairness, normally you should expect to be able to wait for a bus in peace without an inebriated f**ckbend hassling or pissing on you. On the other hand, it is Dublin this happened in...

and Abbey st too.

You cant stand on Abbey st for more than 5secs without some pissed/stoned local giving you hassle.

BornToKill

With the suspended sentence will he be able to get a vise for the US?

finty

BornToKill wrote: »

With the suspended sentence will he be able to get a vise for the US?

Em.....he's american! I dont think americans need a visa to go home

Dyr

I always thought that in Irish Law the severity of what you're charged with for assault is dependant on the effect it has on the victim rather than your intentions

griffdaddy

If this happened next to the Irish Life building on Abbey Street, I'm not surprised at all. There's a massive drop behind a relatively low wall and it was only a matter of time before someone fell or got pushed down there. There's always people pissed and junked up swaying around while sitting on it. Seems like a ridiculously dangerous thing to have in the middle of town

treacyjane

may be something in his shoes

Doc Ruby

The King of Moo wrote: »

It was not an instinctive response. You don't throw someone over a wall in one single movement. It's a calculated act.

I'd disagree. The kind of massive adrenaline surge that can happen in these situations can give a person near superhuman strength, but the downside is they lose control almost completely.

Anyway the question is I'd say, is the man likely to be a threat to society in future or a productive and useful member? A suspended sentence in these circumstances is warranted. If he steps out of line again, he'll be sent to prison.

ejmaztec

I think that if the guy had nothing to do with Trinity and wasn't American, this case would have passed by with barely a whipple.

senordingdong

Don't forget that there are two people involved in this and both were out of line.

Whipple was reported to say 'He pised on my shoes and I'm ****ing sick of it'.
I too am sick of this type of anti social behaviour and how rampant it is.

Kennedys injuries should not absolve him of his behaviour and if Whipple was prosecuted, why they **** wasn't Kennedy prosecuted for drunk/disorderly, urinating public, provocation, harrassment or exposing himself etc...

Phil the Greek

Hopefully Mr. Kennedy will only be pissing on his own shoes from here on in.

Mr. Whipple deserves a citizenship award for his heroic defence of his dignity.

Irish Guitarist

I don't have any sympathy to what happens to someone that goes around urinating on people.

I bet if this was a news story about someone urinating on a homeless man most people here would be saying the perpetrator deserves a beating.

Jester252

What a piss/push among pal

UglyBolloxFace

He's not a lecturer at TCD and has never been, according to his LinkedIn profile.

He studied at TCD, but is currently working at the Centre of English Studies as an EFL (English as a foreign language) teacher.

And by the way, why hasn't he been deported? If this were an Irish lad in the US, he would be locked up for decades and then deported.

endacl

Think I may know John, though it's been a few years. there can't be too many Whipples around this town...

I remember him as a very placid guy, very easy to be around. Fair play to him, say I....

The shoe-pisser, on they other hand, we could probably do without.;)

Capt'n Midnight

What type of shoes were they ?

Were they suede?

Were they blue ?

BraziliaNZ

I remember getting a few digs one night around there, I'm assuming the drop was that drop into the kind of moat thing around the Irish Life Centre? I'm glad I wasn't trun in there ffs!

Warper

Sinfonia wrote: »

Some dick starts hassling him, then takes his wang out and starts pissing on his shoes; he sends him over a wall with an unexpectedly long drop on the other side. Afterwards, he pleads guilty and apologises. Sounds like the instigator was the 'scumbag' to me.

Wha?? Are u for real? The guy should have been locked up for years. Nearly killing someone is a serious offense or at least i thought it was. The way this country is going it is more to do with your background and wealth than the actual offense. The guy is a scumbag and wow, he apologised and pleaded guilty, what else was he gonna do. Interesting that when some onlooker asked him why he threw him over the railing, the scumbag just shrugged.

Show Time

I would not be to happy either if some drunken fool pissed on my shoes.

senordingdong

Warper wrote: »

Wha?? Are u for real? The guy should have been locked up for years. Nearly killing someone is a serious offense or at least i thought it was. The way this country is going it is more to do with your background and wealth than the actual offense. The guy is a scumbag and wow, he apologised and pleaded guilty, what else was he gonna do. Interesting that when some onlooker asked him why he threw him over the railing, the scumbag just shrugged.

Prison is no longer a place you go for penal servitude, it is a place to lock up people who are a risk to society.
A once off, provoked outburst by a respectable man does not warrant 'locking up'

stupidusername

It's interesting how this is so divisive.

senordingdong

stupidusername wrote: »

It's interesting how this is so divisive.

It is, it would have been better to see them both prosecuted for their offences, but how and ever.

Warper

senordingdong wrote: »

Prison is not a place you go for penal servitude, it is a place to lock up people who are a risk to society.
A once off, provoked outburst by a respectable man does not warrant 'locking up'

You obviously dont know prison. How is a person that doesnt pay fines etc. be considered a danger to society? This guy willingly threw a guy over railings which obviously was going to cause serious harm. A respectable man, where did you get that from, lecturer from Trinity was it? A once-off life-threatening outburst should be jail. What would have happened if the guy was killed, would you still agree with a suspended sentence. The guy is permanently disabled due to this scumbag's actions. Justice in this country is a joke.

Warper

Show Time wrote: »

I would not be to happy either if some drunken fool pissed on my shoes.

So it would be perfectly acceptable to leave the guy needing treatment for the rest of his life? That's really fair. I would love to see the reaction if the tables were turned and some Trinity lecturer got thrown over some railings by some riff-raff

Ms.M

senordingdong wrote: »

Prison is no longer a place you go for penal servitude, it is a place to lock up people who are a risk to society.
A once off, provoked outburst by a respectable man does not warrant 'locking up'

You're going to be in trouble ....
Prison isn't just for servitude. This does not relate to this case. let me make it clear, but a lot of people who've had family members or friends killed feel let down by the system. A lenient sentence can actually rub salt into the wounds of a bereaved family. It's the least you can do, when you take another human being's life however "accidentally" to do the time and not try get lawyers to get you a ridiculously short spell in prison.

I don't think anyone has an excuse to knowingly risk someone's life unless their own life is threatened. This case could easily have been a lot more tragic.

senordingdong

Warper wrote: »

You obviously dont know prison. How is a person that doesnt pay fines etc. be considered a danger to society? This guy willingly threw a guy over railings which obviously was going to cause serious harm. A respectable man, where did you get that from, lecturer from Trinity was it? A once-off life-threatening outburst should be jail. What would have happened if the guy was killed, would you still agree with a suspended sentence. The guy is permanently disabled due to this scumbag's actions. Justice in this country is a joke.

Justice in this country is a joke, that's why prison works the way it does.
The reason people who don't pay fines go to jail because it seems that the most deplorable crime a person can commit in this country, is witholding money from the state. And if you actually read up on it, you would see that these people that are sent to prison for non payment of fines, are more often than not, turned away at the gate because the prisons are full.

And with the overcrowded prisons matter in mind, the judges are very selective about who they do and do not send to prison. i.e. the upstanding man that had a once off outburst will not go to prison. If he becomes a repeat offender or a risk to the public, or there is a huge media frenzy around his case, then he will certainly go to prison.

senordingdong

Ms.M wrote: »

. A lenient sentence can actually rub salt into the wounds of a bereaved family.

It absolutely does, I'm not in the least bit disagreeing with you or anyone else, I am just trying to explain how the justice system seems to work here.

suicide_circus

Warper wrote: »

...... The scumbag is permanently disabled due to the scumbag's own actions. .....

FYP.

Ms.M

suicide_circus wrote: »

FYP.

You really should remove the originally quoted by Warper part.

suicide_circus

Ms.M wrote: »

You really should remove the originally quoted by Warper part.

derp?

endacl

Ms.M wrote: »

You really should remove the originally quoted by Warper part.

That would make a nonsense of the FYP bit...:rolleyes:

Gandhi

stupidusername wrote: »

It's interesting how this is so divisive.

Interesting but not surprising. There is really no good guy in this story.

Whipple was minding his own business when Kennedy started on him, including pissing on his shoes. How people are claiming that Kennedy being drunk is an excuse for this just boggles my mind.

Whipple certainly overreacted, but did seem genuinely remorseful for that. He had no way of knowing that Kennedy was not going to start throwing punches or pull a knife at any second. It is highly relevant that he had a clean record. If he was turfing lads over fences 24/7 I'd have a lot less sympathy for him.

I'd call this one based on playground rules: who started it? I'd say Whipple is definitely the less bad.

Sinfonia

The King of Moo wrote: »

Pissing on someone's shoes = throwing someone over a wall you know has a drop of at least eight feet behind it, apparently.

Welcome to After Hours, folks.

Have a read: Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997

Kennedy is guilty of - at least - assault and harassment.
Whipple should have been acquitted as per Section 18.