Three years for attempted murder

petethebrick

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2013/0206/breaking51.html

It seems there is a thread every day about lenient sentences but I had to post this.

3 Years for battering an innocent bystander with a golf club.....the guy has 50 previous convictions including 5 for assault

It is time to bring back forced labour and long sentences for these type of thugs. Rehabilitation my hole - it just doesn't work for these guys.

3ndahalfof6

petethebrick wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2013/0206/breaking51.html

It seems there is a thread every day about lenient sentences but I had to post this.

3 Years for battering an innocent bystander with a golf club.....the guy has 50 previous convictions including 5 for assault

It is time to bring back forced labour and long sentences for these type of thugs. Rehabilitation my hole - it just doesn't work for these guys.

So he was playing golf and somebody coughed, then it all kicked off, no chance this will go to trial, the judge (in this case) will be able to understand the frustration leading to the lashing out, that is all.

MrStuffins

Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry?

Praetorian Saighdiuir

Attempted?.......lazy bastard!

catallus

The victim said the sentences were a joke.

SV

MrStuffins wrote: »

Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry?

he meant to kill him and he didn't succeed.
what's not to get?


very lenient sentence.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

petethebrick wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2013/0206/breaking51.html

It seems there is a thread every day about lenient sentences but I had to post this.

3 Years for battering an innocent bystander with a golf club.....the guy has 50 previous convictions including 5 for assault

It is time to bring back forced labour and long sentences for these type of thugs. Rehabilitation my hole - it just doesn't work for these guys.

While I agree with you, what the **** is putting him back on the streets WITHOUT some form of rehabilitation goign to make the place safer???

And how do you know it has even been trie don this guy?

No one ever seems to be able to asnwer that...

im invisible

Stealth Recce wrote: »

Attempted?.......lazy bastard!

thats pretty tasteless...

Madam_X

Simpsons reference SV - Sideshow Bob.

Wonder why it was noted that they had not taken drugs before the attack but no mention of drink... which presumably is what fueled it. Some people go bat-sh1t on drink. I'd hope a person who wants to kill someone because they refused someone else cigarettes wasn't in their right mind. If they were, they need fecking committing.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

While I agree with you, what the **** is putting him back on the streets WITHOUT some form of rehabilitation goign to make the place safer???
And how do you know it has even been tried on this guy?
No one ever seems to be able to asnwer that...

Yeh, think of those horrific assault cases where the assailant had previously served a sentence for another assault. Obviously prison, if it was without rehabilitation, didn't sort them out.

SV

Madam_X wrote: »

Simpsons reference SV - Sideshow Bob.

Woops, thanks for that. Don't look at the show

catallus

Rehabilitation for a guy with over 50 previous convictions? Good luck with that.

repsol

Attempted murder should carry the same sentence as murder. I don't see why the perpetrator should be rewarded, for his incompetence at achieving his intention,with a lighter sentence.

Praetorian Saighdiuir

im invisible wrote: »

thats pretty tasteless...

I agree but it's cool, nobody died like.

ResearchWill

I'm guessing that the plea was to section 3 non fatal offences against the person Act, the max the judge can give for that is 5 years. I would not be surprised if the charge was section 4 and agreement to plea to section 3. If so judges hands tied as max is 5 and must give some account of guilty plea.

After rereading the article it does indeed seem it was section 4, 4 with 1 suspended a bit light.

zenno

The problem lies with the arse-hole judges in this country, it's a pity we couldn't clean the justice system with detergent and wipe most of these warped judges from the country's law register.

I think most of the judges in Ireland are on drugs or something similar to be giving half-arsed sentences like this. There is something wrong up-stairs with a lot of these judges in my opinion.

ResearchWill

zenno wrote: »

The problem lies with the arse-hole judges in this country, it's a pity we couldn't clean the justice system with detergent and wipe most of these warped judges from the country's law register.

I think most of the judges in Ireland are on drugs or something similar to be giving half-arsed sentences like this. There is something wrong up-stairs with a lot of these judges in my opinion.

Have you ever visited a court and actually listened to a trial or sentence.

catallus

zenno wrote: »

The problem lies with the arse-hole judges in this country, it's a pity we couldn't clean the justice system with detergent and wipe most of these warped judges from the country's law register.

I think most of the judges in Ireland are on drugs or something similar to be giving half-arsed sentences like this. There is something wrong up-stairs with a lot of these judges in my opinion.

I think they get some sort of bonus or some promises of progression in their careers if they can show that they uphold the rights of the criminals. They meet once or twice a year to compare notes, as far as I know.

zenno

ResearchWill wrote: »

Have you ever visited a court and actually listened to a trial or sentence.

Many a time for a news report. what's your point ?.

ResearchWill

zenno wrote: »

Many a time for a news report. what's your point ?.

Really and you think most judges are drugged off their heads, that's my point. Which paper do you report for.

catallus

What does having attended court have to do with having a valid opinion? I'd prefer an outsider's perspective rather than that of one of the brainwashed. We can all read court reports and even newspaper reports.

NoQuarter

Thread title is completely misleading though. There was no charge of attempted murder. If it was a section 3 charge, as researchwill said, the max is 5 years. If you want longer sentences for that, blame the Dail and not the judges.

zenno

ResearchWill wrote: »

Really and you think most judges are drugged off their heads, that's my point. Which paper do you report for.

They drink a lot in-between work in my opinion. It might be affecting their judgement in most cases.

catallus

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/act/pub/0026/sec0004.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2013/0206/breaking51.html

Judge Moran noted that Cotter had 49 previous convictions including five for assault causing harm while O’Brien had 84 previous convictions and he was still at a loss as to why they had attacked Mr Roca and his friends.

Speaking afterwards, Mr Roca said that he was not happy with the sentences imposed on the two men and said he believed they were far too lenient for the violent assault which has impacted hugely on his life.

"I am not happy with these sentences. I have no sense of taste as a result of this attack - if you owned a restaurant, would you employ a chef who cannot taste what he cooks - this is what I have to live with for the rest of my life," said Mr Roca.

The victim had to have screws surgically implanted in his skull, just to hold it together.

ResearchWill

catallus wrote: »

What does having attended court have to do with having a valid opinion? I'd prefer an outsider's perspective rather than that of one of the brainwashed. We can all read court reports and even newspaper reports.

Court judgements fine, but recently I read a newspaper report of a civil case I happened to be in court for, the news paper report was factually 100% incorrect. I have sat in court for criminal trials and read the articles in the paper and while many are an accurate reflection of what happened a 3 or 4 paragraph report cannot give as much info as a whole trial would have.

Most criminal trials are open to the public, so why not go down and see justice being administered in public, its funny you may discover you agree totally with the media or you may discover you agree with the judge, but at least you would have facts.

I like this quote,

"“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

Michael Crichton"

Also remember we never hear the news headline "Bad Man gets correct sentence" because that wont sell papers.

NoQuarter

Theres no such offence as "assault causing serious harm". Its either "assault causing harm" ie section 3 or else "causing serious harm" which is section 4 and there is no requirement for any assult in that case.

So the newspaper is unclear as to which it is because the journo hasnt a clue!

hmmm

Poor victims life is now ruined as he can't work as a chef. He gets to carry a life sentence.

zenno

He received some 21 staples and he had screws inserted to keep his skull together, said Det Garda Fuller, adding that the most serious consequence of the assault was that he had lost his sense of taste

Seems to me that this could easily be called attempted murder.

These scumbags use the oldest words in the book...He came from a broken family and blah blah blah the poor soul...scumbags like this don't have a soul or anything like it, 15 years no parole that's the sentence, but hang on, we need to build a prison to send him to as we are all full up. Next case.

catallus

It's not about agreeing with the media; in most cases as far as I can see the media take a pretty neutral view of sentencing in this country; it's rare enough for them to scream bloody murder about lenient sentences (unless the sentence is so egregiously lenient that it is guaranteed to cause upset)

ResearchWill

zenno wrote: »

Seems to me that this could easily be called attempted murder.

These scumbags use the oldest words in the book...He came from a broken family and blah blah blah the poor soul...scumbags like this don't have a soul or anything like it, 15 years no parole that's the sentence, but hang on, we need to build a prison to send him to as we are all full up. Next case.

There in lies the problem, if we want to double sentences then we need to double the space and staff and budget, up from €350 million to €700 million, if we want to increase the sentences by a multiple of 5 then its €350 million X 5, which BTW €1.75 billion, the total Justice budget is 2.5 billion.

ResearchWill

catallus wrote: »

It's not about agreeing with the media; in most cases as far as I can see the media take a pretty neutral view of sentencing in this country; it's rare enough for them to scream bloody murder about lenient sentences (unless the sentence is so egregiously lenient that it is guaranteed to cause upset)

But the problem here is sloppy reporting. We are not 100% sure is it section 3 or 4. I assume 4. We do not know what the previous are for, go to any district court and you will see people getting 5 convictions from a drunken night out, how many are Road Traffic, I have seen people get 3 separate convictions for not having a driving licence. We are told that there are previous assault convictions but is that section 2, 3 or 4. Squaring up to a person is section 2. With out all that info we don't really know if the sentence is fair.

Judge Moran is a very fair person, he really does take on board the victim but he must sentence with all the facts, if the victim is as it seems unhappy the DPP will seek his views on a possible appeal.

zenno

ResearchWill wrote: »

There in lies the problem, if we want to double sentences then we need to double the space and staff and budget, up from €350 million to €700 million, if we want to increase the sentences by a multiple of 5 then its €350 million X 5.

Unless it's garlic and apples. Plenty of space to imprison a person for this crime huh. Sentences for serious crime in this backward country's law system have always been easy going and it really makes you wonder what is really going on behind the scenes.

Judges and barristers as close friends enticed from a major criminals bank vault, or this guy has almost a hundred previous convictions ah sure theres no point in locking him up as he will never be corrected, sure we'll just give him a light sentence till the angry people forget all about it, it will pass, as the poor law abiding citizen is locked up for non payment of a tv licence. A new justice system should be put in place as soon as possible before it explodes into a nightmare where the victims of crime will be the criminals. The justice system in Ireland is insane, simple as that, we all know it.

ResearchWill

zenno wrote: »

Unless it's garlic and apples. Plenty of space to imprison a person for this crime huh. Sentences for serious crime in this backward country's law system have always been easy going and it really makes you wonder what is really going on behind the scenes.

Judges and barristers as close friends enticed from a major criminals bank vault, or this guy has almost a hundred previous convictions ah sure theres no point in locking him up as he will never be corrected, sure we'll just give him a light sentence till the angry people forget all about it, it will pass.

I will place a bet on the garlic case the max he will serve is 2 years, in fact I will almost put money on 1 year, for a million plus fraud.

It often escapes people's minds that judges, solicitors and barristers live in the real world as well. Do you really think they want scary people walking the same streets where they like every member of society are also at risk. A judge must take into account everything much of which is never reported, hence why I say go to the courts, where a person gets all the info and can speak with authority.

What does the bold text mean, it must be because its late but I'm lost.

zenno

ResearchWill wrote: »

I will place a bet on the garlic case the max he will serve is 2 years, in fact I will almost put money on 1 year, for a million plus fraud.

It often escapes people's minds that judges, solicitors and barristers live in the real world as well. Do you really think they want scary people walking the same streets where they like every member of society are also at risk. A judge must take into account everything much of which is never reported, hence why I say go to the courts, where a person gets all the info and can speak with authority.

What does the bold text mean, it must be because its late but I'm lost.

It's called corruption within the justice system. Stop going to court as the real information is within the freedom of information documents if you know where to look and have plenty of time.

catallus

ResearchWill wrote: »

I will place a bet on the garlic case the max he will serve is 2 years, in fact I will almost put money on 1 year, for a million plus fraud.

It often escapes people's minds that judges, solicitors and barristers live in the real world as well. Do you really think they want scary people walking the same streets where they like every member of society are also at risk. A judge must take into account everything much of which is never reported, hence why I say go to the courts, where a person gets all the info and can speak with authority.

What does the bold text mean, it must be because its late but I'm lost.

No,No,No.

They do not.

With all respect to Judges and Barristers they do not; they live in a world where the absolute scum of the Earth are paraded before them; they are only human; I can understand a Judge letting off offenders because they see the worst of the worst of the worst. "Ok, you didn't cut her eyes out, like the last guy I sentenced, so I'll suspend the last 9 years of your sentence for the rape of your daughter"

But it doesn't make it right.

im invisible

ResearchWill wrote: »

...Gell-Mann Amnesia

hmmm.. I recognise that name, something to do with quarks....

Google wrote:

(I call it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)
-Michael Crichton

Michael Crichton Speech Part 1: "Why Speculate?"

In preparing for his book, 'State of Fear', Michael Crichton delivered several speeches related to the themes of the book....

you learn something new every day

ResearchWill

catallus wrote: »

No,No,No.

They do not.

With all respect to Judges and Barristers they do not; they live in a world where the absolute scum of the Earth are paraded before them; they are only human; I can understand a Judge letting off offenders because they see the worst of the worst of the worst. "Ok, you didn't cut her eyes out, like the last guy I sentenced, so I'll suspend the last 9 years of your sentence for the rape of your daughter"

But it doesn't make it right.

But he did not leave him off he gave 3 years. Without the full information how do we know that's fair. BTW I do live in the real world, like everyone else, just because I work as a barrister does not mean I automaticity think every criminal should get a slap on the wrist.

ResearchWill

zenno wrote: »

It's called corruption within the justice system. Stop going to court as the real information is within the freedom of information documents if you know where to look and have plenty of time.

That old chestnut, ya if I can't understand it it must be because someone is taking bribes. If you have proof put up or shut up.

I don't think FOI would give access to a criminals court file, so don't see much good in that.

catallus

ResearchWill wrote: »

But he did not leave him off he gave 3 years. Without the full information how do we know that's fair. BTW I do live in the real world, like everyone else, just because I work as a barrister does not mean I automaticity think every criminal should get a slap on the wrist.

Just the one's you work for

That was a joke, ResearchWill

ScumLord

petethebrick wrote: »

Rehabilitation my hole - it just doesn't work for these guys.

We don't really have rehabilitation is this country so we wouldn't know if it works or not.

yohan the great

Why the **** is attempted murder more lenient than murder

zenno

ResearchWill wrote: »

That old chestnut, ya if I can't understand it it must be because someone is taking bribes. If you have proof put up or shut up.

I don't think FOI would give access to a criminals court file, so don't see much good in that.

Who said anything about the criminals court files ? Judges and barristers should come to mind. Sure RTE will soon be on the ball with that one as well as TV3 in the near future.

ResearchWill

catallus wrote: »

Just the one's you work for

That was a joke, ResearchWill

Well only if they give me the combination of their safe!!!!!!!!!!

Madam_X

catallus wrote: »

No,No,No.

They do not.

With all respect to Judges and Barristers they do not; they live in a world where the absolute scum of the Earth are paraded before them; they are only human; I can understand a Judge letting off offenders because they see the worst of the worst of the worst. "Ok, you didn't cut her eyes out, like the last guy I sentenced, so I'll suspend the last 9 years of your sentence for the rape of your daughter"

But it doesn't make it right.

On what basis do they sentence though? Surely it's not just arbitrary. It's bound to be based on existing legislation and all sorts of technicalities the layperson would not be privy to. I think sentencing is a joke in this country too, but I assume there's more to it than the judge just picking random numbers.

ResearchWill

zenno wrote: »

Who said anything about the criminals court files ? Judges and barristers should come to mind. Sure RTE will soon be on the ball with that one as well as TV3 in the near future.

Well when you get your great story ill believe ya, till then I call bull. Also I am not aware of the courts service keeping files on barristers, I would assume the only judges files are their HR files. Pretty boring.

catallus

For the victim, that's just what it is; arbitrary. And a barbaric, ignorant arbitrariness, at that.

ResearchWill

Madam_X wrote: »

On what basis do they sentence though? Surely it's not just arbitrary. It's bound to be based on existing legislation and all sorts of technicalities the layperson would not be privy to. I think sentencing is a joke in this country too, but I assume there's more to it than the judge just picking random numbers.

There is a lot more to it than random numbers. They start with the legislation, say a section 3 carries 5 years, then according to the CCA they must give a discount for guilty plea, (vast majority of cases are pleas) usual time off for a guilty plea is about 25%, then they look at previous (they only really look at relevant previous, i.e. theft previous for theft) if no previous they may give further discount again about 25%. Then they will look at what does this person do that helps society if anything good then they may not jail the person. They look at any behaviour from offence to sentence, if person has stayed out of trouble that will be taken into account. In certain cases they can hear from the victim or the family and they take that into account.

After all that they must follow the CCA, while this is a serious assault the range of sentence for such would be from no time (in certain circumstances) to a max I would think of 9 to 10 years. My own view is this sentence would be in or around the mean (I have nothing to back that up except seeing sentences).

Madam_X

Yeh so it's more the existing system that is at fault. Of course the victims are not going to be able to see things objectively though. However, if a judge paid no attention to the existing statutes (crap and all as they are - and not that I'd be complaining if a hefty and just sentence was handed out) then there would be sufficient grounds to appeal the sentence and have it overturned.

zenno

Madam_X wrote: »

On what basis do they sentence though? Surely it's not just arbitrary. It's bound to be based on existing legislation and all sorts of technicalities the layperson would not be privy to. I think sentencing is a joke in this country too, but I assume there's more to it than the judge just picking random numbers.

There is...There is no more room left in the prison building systems. This is the time when you will see fairly few serious criminals of serious crimes get more than the odd few years, sure they will be let out one third way through their sentence anyway for so-called good behaviour as is whats happening now or moved to an open prison by the justice system hoping they will abscond and walk over the border to release the pressure from the Irish system.

We just can't afford them anymore so we hope they will breakout and run away to save taxpayer monies from being wasted on a non compliant criminal in the workings of conditioning and conversion to non criminal behaviour. In all fairness, how can judges sentence anymore people to incarceration when there is just no room. The hundredth monkey.

catallus

Madam_X wrote: »

Yeh so it's more the existing system that is at fault. Of course the victims are not going to be able to see things objectively though. However, if a judge paid no attention to the existing statutes (crap and all as they are - and not that I'd be complaining if a hefty and just sentence was handed out) then there would be sufficient grounds to appeal the sentence and have it overturned.

I would say they are the only ones who can see things objectively.

ResearchWill

Madam_X wrote: »

Yeh so it's more the existing system that is at fault. Of course the victims are not going to be able to see things objectively though. However, if a judge paid no attention to the existing statutes (crap and all as they are) then there would be sufficient grounds to appeal the sentence and have it overturned.

Both the guilty party and the DPP can appeal sentence, the DPP does it all the time.

I would not say the system is at fault (you will say of course he will say that he is in it) hence why I ask people to visit their local court house and watch a trail and sentence. You will in my opinion get a fright, you will see people who deserve time get it and people who deserve a chance getting that.

I have seen 16 17 18 year olds entering the system, building up rakes of previous over a few short years and getting loads of chances, the funny thing is that most of them by 25 are on the straight and narrow, (usually a Girl and a child) but sadly some don't get off the merry go round and will end up doing time. I prefer the system we have it does not throw people on the scrap heap straight away.

You would be very surprised at the people you know who have previous, and also what for, not all people who come before the criminal courts can easily be called scum.

Madam_X

catallus wrote: »

I would say they are the only ones who can see things objectively.

Well what I mean is: they're unlikely to be considering the existing legislation/statutes behind such a lenient sentence. And understandably so.

The legislation itself needs drastic reform IMO.