Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Do women get more lenient sentences?

  • 30-10-2013 5:55pm
    #1
    Site Banned Posts: 31


    Just read this case for two weeks back and I honestly can't imagine a guy getting such a lenient sentence had they been guilty of what the following woman was:
    Woman admits to sexually assaulting 14-year-old girl

    A 27-year old Dublin woman has been given a three year suspended sentence after she pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a fourteen-year-old female relative.

    The court heard that the accused and the girl both claimed they loved one another at the time.

    The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to two counts of sexual assaulting the girl at a house in County Meath on dates between 1st and 31st December 2010.

    Judge Desmond Hogan remarked that the case was an 'unusual but serious case' in which the woman had taken advantage of a young person.

    He said he was unsure whether the defendant has full knowledge and understanding of the consequences of what she did and has some way to go until she realises the full consequences.

    Garda Graham Weeks told Anne Rowland BL, prosecuting, that the victim's father went to gardaí when he found letters written by his daughter.

    He said the letters suggested his 14-year-old daughter was having sexual relations with a cousin of his ex-wife's.

    The victim told gardaí that her mother's cousin started to text her in June 2010 but that they had known one another her all her life and that she knew the accused was a lesbian.

    The girl said in October of that year, she went to McDonalds with her mother's cousin and her sister, and that while they were there she got a text from the accused asking to meet in the toilets.

    The accused kissed her in the cubicle and the teenage girl said she was “in shock”.

    The teenager said she went to stay with her mother in County Meath “before the snow” in December 2010 and was sharing a bed with the defendant.

    The victim said she went to bed earlier and that when the accused joined her later she touched her private parts and put her finger into the victim's vagina.

    The teenage girl said the same thing happened again later that week and that she felt both “happy and sad” when the accused went back to her own house at the end of the week.

    The victim said her mother's cousin sent her “a nice message” and that they then started texting a few times a day and she developed feelings and felt like the accused was her girlfriend.

    She said she was upset and sad when her father found out about the relationship.

    Gda Weeks said the letters written by the girl, on the suggestion of her counsellor, say she told the accused she was in love with her in the summer of 2010.

    The teenager also describes how she and the accused were holding hands and flirting on the bus, and that on another occasion the victim went to the accused's house and they engaged in oral sex.

    The court heard that the teenage girl had a fragile disposition, had run away from home and had taken too much medication at one stage.

    In a victim impact statement, the girl said she felt “cheated and let down” by the accused and had undergone counselling.

    Defence counsel Caroline Biggs SC said the accused has a deep regret and remorse for what she has done to the victim, and that there was no use of threat, force or violence.

    “It was consensual, the complainant said she was not frightened, and there were genuine feelings between them...in so far as a 14-year-old can have feelings,” said Ms Biggs.

    Ms Biggs said that although her client had breached the child's trust, “in a warped and dysfunctional way, she did love that child” and the child loved her.

    A psychologist's report stated the accused had a “chaotic, unstable and traumatic childhood” and had been a victim of sexual abuse herself at a very young age.

    The report added that her mother had been incapable of looking after her children and had drank herself to death.

    Judge Hogan also ordered that the woman be supervised by the Probation Services for a period of two years.

    To be honest, I can't even imagine a barrister daring to suggest that a man who arranged to meet a 14 year old girl in a toilet cubicle, then had oral sex with, and further sexual activities in his own home.. was in fact: in love with the girl. I imagine the very notion of such a defense would be seen to be more likely to anger the court and avoided.

    Does anyone agree or is this sentence on par with what a man would get here if found guilty of a similar crime.


«134

Comments

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    There was a 2 part "documentary" produced by ITV recently and presented by Trevor McDonald. I could only bare the first 10 minutes of it. He kept on going on about how it was a shame that women were in prison. I don't get why this idea is becoming acceptable at all (as portrayed in media). To me it's clear cut case of "Don't do the crime if you can't handle the time." That's for anyone, regardless of gender.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,449 ✭✭✭✭pwurple


    Sexual assault cases are notoriously difficult to predict the sentence on. In this one, the victim was the one saying she was in love with the accused. She pleaded guilty as well, which was bound to lower the sentence. Hard to say in general. To verify you would need to find a set of identical (or very similar) crimes, criminal histories and pleas, and then compare the outcomes by gender.


  • Site Banned Posts: 31 Old Dan Tucker


    I don't get why this idea is becoming acceptable at all (as portrayed in media).

    Well, that kinda nonsense has been around for years and so I think it's just gathering momentum now down to groups like the Women's Justice Taskforce.

    The BBC had the folowing article a few years back which mentioned them also.

    The following is along the same lines:



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    pwurple wrote: »
    Sexual assault cases are notoriously difficult to predict the sentence on. In this one, the victim was the one saying she was in love with the accused. She pleaded guilty as well, which was bound to lower the sentence. Hard to say in general. To verify you would need to find a set of identical (or very similar) crimes, criminal histories and pleas, and then compare the outcomes by gender.

    There is an element of grooming in the article referenced in the OP. It is also a matter of statutory rape of a 14 year old. The victims sense of affection should have no bearing on this case, just as it wouldn't if with a man. The problem I feel with a lot of these issues where a woman is accused/convicted is that the woman herself also tends to be presented as a victim, or someone who was emotionally affected and unable to properly comprehend what they were doing as a result of it.

    When you look at the relevant facts of the case, the gender of the perpetrator should not come into it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    Did the lady in question even get added the sex offenders list?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭howamidifferent


    Looks similar to the english teacher and his 14 year old "girlfriend" yet big disparity in sentencing , albeit in a different juristiction. :confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    This is an old chestnut that gets dragged out every now and then and at this stage I'm surprised that it still needs to be.

    If anyone is bothered to do a search here, evidence of criminal cases in the UK has repeatedly been cited in these threads (it is not unreasonable to presume a simelar situation in Ireland, despite the lack of corresponding evidence). Broadly speaking it points to the following:
    • Women are far more likely than men to be given warnings than arrested for the same category of crime.
    • Where arrested, men are far more likely to have proceedings against than for indictable offences than women for the same category of crime.
    • Men are far more likely to receive custodial sentences than women for the same category of crime.
    While the data did not go into specific cases and was instead broken down into categories (violent, theft, sexual, etc) the above was the case across the board. Sentence lengths were not covered.

    Now one my argue that the individual crimes may differ, thus explaining this difference, but it's difficult to reconcile that when you start to see examples such sexual assault one here that are almost identical to cases involving male perpetrators, yet receive vastly differing sentences.

    You don't really have to ask too many lawyers before hearing back that the difference it treatment based on gender is very real indeed.

    And finally there is the law itself which still favours women. While this particular one may finally have been reformed, the law surrounding the Roscommon incest case illustrate this bias - there a woman legally could receive a sentence of no more than seven years, while a man could get life, for the same crime according to the judge. Indeed, women cannot even legally commit rape in Ireland, you literally need a penis for that charge to be levelled. Instead, women may only be prosecuted for the lesser charge sexual assault.

    So, women probably do get get more lenient sentences than men overall. For many crimes, they definitely do. And overall, women are far less likely to get any sentence of any kind, for the same crimes, as men.

    And the move twoards the abolition of custodial sentences for women is simply a cynical exploitation of one inequality to create an even greater inequality.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    And the move twoards the abolition of custodial sentences for women is simply a cynical exploitation of one inequality to create an even greater inequality.

    Are you joking or serious, I can't tell. Are there groups actually advocating this?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Are you joking or serious, I can't tell. Are there groups actually advocating this?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13666066
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0522/103603-prison/

    Scary thing is this is not being called for by independent fringe groups, but by 'mainstream' government sponsored ones.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Are you joking or serious, I can't tell. Are there groups actually advocating this?

    Also see post number 4 on this thread.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    As if there are no vulnerable men and fathers in prison??? Not to mention, prison conditions are far worse in male prisons than in women's. Just compare Mount Joy to Dochas, could you imagine the outrage if women were made slop out as men are in Mountjoy? Also, Dochas is not even called a prison, it's referred to as the Dochas Centre.


  • Registered Users Posts: 364 ✭✭Frogeye


    Are you joking or serious, I can't tell. Are there groups actually advocating this?


    Ivana Bacik is: extract from her site:

    "Research has shown that at present, women in our prisons have an average of two to three children each. Although as I noted earlier, 100 are in prison on any given day, the numbers for committal in any year are striking. A total of 960 women were committed to prison in 2006. This represents 2,000 to 3,000 children who were left motherless in 2006. Even if this was for a brief time, Baroness Corston has observed it can lead to the women losing their homes and the placing of their children into care. There is an enormous cost to those children, their mothers and to society when one considers the cost of the alternative care, the emotional and social cost and so forth.
    As I noted, prison places that are built are filled. If 170 places for women are built on this proposed site, they will be filled and increasing numbers of women will go to prison for minor offences that should require punishment in the community. Instead, we should see a development of community service orders. Ireland should go down the road British penal policy is taking on foot of the Corston report and should consider alternatives for this vulnerable group of offenders."


    http://www.ivanabacik.com/legislation/prison-building-programme-motion-on-thornton-hall


    So are the Irish penal reform trust:

    "Above all, IPRT remains committed to working towards major policy change in relation to imprisonment of women in Ireland, with a central focus on the provision of alternatives to detention."


    http://www.iprt.ie/women-offenders

    but to be fair, it does talk about general reform of sentencing for all prisoners elsewhere on the site.

    I don't think prison is the place for most prisoners male or female but both should be treated equally and sentenced equally.

    Frogeye


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Frogeye wrote: »
    Research has shown that at present, women in our prisons have an average of two to three children each.
    Ahh... a return to the old practice of pleading the belly.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    "Research has shown that at present, women in our prisons have an average of two to three children each. Although as I noted earlier, 100 are in prison on any given day, the numbers for committal in any year are striking. A total of 960 women were committed to prison in 2006. This represents 2,000 to 3,000 children who were left motherless in 2006. Even if this was for a brief time, Baroness Corston has observed it can lead to the women losing their homes and the placing of their children into care. There is an enormous cost to those children, their mothers and to society when one considers the cost of the alternative care, the emotional and social cost and so forth.
    As I noted, prison places that are built are filled. If 170 places for women are built on this proposed site, they will be filled and increasing numbers of women will go to prison for minor offences that should require punishment in the community. Instead, we should see a development of community service orders. Ireland should go down the road British penal policy is taking on foot of the Corston report and should consider alternatives for this vulnerable group of offenders."

    I don't understand how Ivana Bacik can be so gender-biased here. I'm actually somewhat of a supporter of hers, and agree on a good number of issues. However, the sexism she's showing here is disgusting. I've decided to help her out and made a few modifications to her quote which I've highlighted. I think lowering the number of custodial sentences is a good thing, and my amended quote will lower it even more than hers. Win win.

    "Research has shown that at present, people in our prisons have an average of two to three children each. Although as I noted earlier, x are in prison on any given day, the numbers for committal in any year are striking. A total of y people were committed to prison in 2006. This represents y*z children who were left parentless in 2006. Even if this was for a brief time, Baroness Corston has observed it can lead to the people losing their homes and the placing of their children into care. There is an enormous cost to those children, their parents and to society when one considers the cost of the alternative care, the emotional and social cost and so forth.
    As I noted, prison places that are built are filled. If 170 places for people are built on this proposed site, they will be filled and increasing numbers of people will go to prison for minor offences that should require punishment in the community. Instead, we should see a development of community service orders. Ireland should go further down the road British penal policy is taking on foot of the Corston report and should consider alternatives for this vulnerable group of offenders."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    I don't understand how Ivana Bacik can be so gender-biased here. I'm actually somewhat of a supporter of hers, and agree on a good number of issues. However, the sexism she's showing here is disgusting. I've decided to help her out and made a few modifications to her quote which I've highlighted. I think lowering the number of custodial sentences is a good thing, and my amended quote will lower it even more than hers. Win win.
    Why don't you go and ask her to adopt your gender neutral language and see what happens?

    Never ceases to amaze me the naivete of some where it comes to those they support; Bacik is one of the most openly consistent misandrists in Irish politics today. Time you wake up, smell the coffee and decide if you want to continue supporting such people.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Why don't you go and ask her to adopt your gender neutral language and see what happens?

    Never ceases to amaze me the naivete of some where it comes to those they support; Bacik is one of the most openly consistent misandrists in Irish politics today. Time you wake up, smell the coffee and decide if you want to continue supporting such people.

    There's pretty much no politician that I'd support on every single issue, Ivana Bacik included obviously. If I'm a supporter of someone, it's because they're involved in causes I believe in. Bacik has had a big role in campaigns in favour of abortion, same-sex marriage and removing the blasphemy offence from the constitution. All of which I am a big supporter of.

    You seem to suggest that it is actually possible to support a public figure on every issue, that naivety would never cease to amaze me.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Now one my argue that the individual crimes may differ, thus explaining this difference, but it's difficult to reconcile that when you start to see examples such sexual assault one here that are almost identical to cases involving male perpetrators, yet receive vastly differing sentences.

    It's only difficult to reconcile if you have - and it would seem that you have - a tendency to paranoia about the subject.

    I recall we debated the issue of differing arrest/charge/conviction rates for men and women before, and it was as plain as a pikestaff that there were all sorts of factors at play in differing arrest and sentencing outcomes between men and women in the UK. But you hadn't the least bit of interest in those factors because they didn't suit your prejudices.

    Anyway, in the instant case I have no idea what circumstances influenced the views of the judge, but if I were doing the sentencing I suspect the guilty party would have been doing time.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Here's another take on women and prison - and men.

    It's a view from Vicky Pryce, the former wife of UK politican Chris Huhne who was jailed for perverting the course of justice because she took penalty points that should have gone to him.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24516626

    Just a different angle. ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    Here's another take on women and prison - and men.

    It's a view from Vicky Pryce, the former wife of UK politican Chris Huhne who was jailed for perverting the course of justice because she took penalty points that should have gone to him.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24516626

    Just a different angle. ;)

    What angle is this? She did pervert the course of justice so she got jailed. I am sure if you looked at male prisoners there would be plenty of them that did crimes "for" their wives/girlfriends/children however whatever their motivation they broke the law and deserve to go to jail.

    Why should we only look at the motivation when women commit crimes but not men? The different angle is just as sexist when you are only willing to apply it to one gender.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    There's pretty much no politician that I'd support on every single issue, Ivana Bacik included obviously. If I'm a supporter of someone, it's because they're involved in causes I believe in. Bacik has had a big role in campaigns in favour of abortion, same-sex marriage and removing the blasphemy offence from the constitution. All of which I am a big supporter of.
    So you'd vote for Golden Dawn or Front National, if they supported issues in common with you?
    You seem to suggest that it is actually possible to support a public figure on every issue, that naivety would never cease to amaze me.
    No, I'm suggesting that if a public figure holds a position that is so objectionable, so disgusting, that it would outweigh any justification for lending them support. Making the trains run on time doesn't make up for this.

    Personally, the level of misandrist bigotry that Bacik expounds falls into that category. Maybe it's not that important to you.
    It's only difficult to reconcile if you have - and it would seem that you have - a tendency to paranoia about the subject.
    Other than a long ad hominem diatribe, citing another discussion in another thread, where you choose to make baseless accusations, do you have anything constructive to add?
    Just a different angle. ;)
    The misandrist angle. So no, nothing constructive to add.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Maguined wrote: »
    Why should we only look at the motivation when women commit crimes but not men? The different angle is just as sexist when you are only willing to apply it to one gender.
    Indeed. One could equally argue that with many crimes, the criminals commit them so as to be able to financially support their wives - is it their wives fault then that these crimes are committed then?

    No, such arguments are simply self-serving attempts to avoid personal responsibility for one's actions. Unfortunately, they're all too often only applied in cases where women are the accused, seeking to exploit the old prejudices that women are not fulling in control of themselves and thus cannot be held responsible.

    Fortunately, but ever so slowly, society is rejecting such cynical ploys, as they did with Ms Pryce.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Indeed. One could equally argue that with many crimes, the criminals commit them so as to be able to financially support their wives - is it their wives fault then that these crimes are committed then?

    No, such arguments are simply self-serving attempts to avoid personal responsibility for one's actions. Unfortunately, they're all too often only applied in cases where women are the accused, seeking to exploit the old prejudices that women are not fulling in control of themselves and thus cannot be held responsible.

    Fortunately, but ever so slowly, society is rejecting such cynical ploys, as they did with Ms Pryce.

    Unfortunately, not for this guy http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/hypnotist-told-woman-she-was-his-sex-slave-29621673.html


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    TBH, that particular case really hinges on whether hypnotism is powerful enough to make someone do something against their will or if even hypnotised people ultimately cannot be made to do anything that they are opposed to.

    As I don't know the answer to this, I'm not sure if it's a valid example.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    TBH, that particular case really hinges on whether hypnotism is powerful enough to make someone do something against their will or if even hypnotised people ultimately cannot be made to do anything that they are opposed to.

    As I don't know the answer to this, I'm not sure if it's a valid example.

    That's the point, Hypnosis is quackery and not a proven science. It's unbelievable that he was prosecuted on the basis of an unproven science. What the woman is saying is that this man took control of my mind and made me do things that I didn't want to do and he was prosecuted on that basis.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    Sorry I don't want to get involved in the political activism in this thread or forum, but according to a chart linked over on US politics, Ireland has the lowest incarceration rate in the world.

    I have the general impression their sentencing is pretty low to begin with. Today AH has a thread about a man who kidnapped and chained a 16 year old boy to a radiator and tortured him. The man received a six year sentence. Do you think a woman wold have gotten less of a sentence?

    There are a number of sex offenders and rapists who have gotten off with very low sentences and it seems hard to argue that they are punished more severely.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭Absoluvely


    There are a number of sex offenders and rapists who have gotten off with very low sentences and it seems hard to argue that they are punished more severely.

    Ah here!

    You can't argue that male rapists and female rapists are punished equally. Female rapists aren't even guilty of rape!


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    So you'd vote for Golden Dawn or Front National, if they supported issues in common with you?

    No, I'm suggesting that if a public figure holds a position that is so objectionable, so disgusting, that it would outweigh any justification for lending them support. Making the trains run on time doesn't make up for this.

    Personally, the level of misandrist bigotry that Bacik expounds falls into that category. Maybe it's not that important to you.

    I don't consider most of what Bacik says to be misandrist as such, more just blatantly one-sided feminism. I've been involved in a number of events with her during her time in Trinity, and I haven't got the impression that she hates men.

    Comparing supporting Ivana Bacik to Golden Dawn or Front National is beyond moronic.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Maguined wrote: »
    What angle is this? She did pervert the course of justice so she got jailed. I am sure if you looked at male prisoners there would be plenty of them that did crimes "for" their wives/girlfriends/children however whatever their motivation they broke the law and deserve to go to jail.

    She wasn't talking about herself; she was talking about the other women she met in prison. Of herself, she said "I did something, I paid the price of it and that is it."

    It's good to see someone with a degree of self-perception who can see when something is her own fault and take responsibility, and not have a chip on her shoulder about the world - while still having empathy for other prisoners she met to whom life had been a lot less kind than it was to her.

    In my view, we could all learn from that.

    Maguined wrote: »
    Why should we only look at the motivation when women commit crimes but not men? The different angle is just as sexist when you are only willing to apply it to one gender.

    Who says we should? I don't. I just don't see the value in men whinging about how tough they have life compared to women. It's all a bit beta, to be honest.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Comparing supporting Ivana Bacik to Golden Dawn or Front National is beyond moronic.

    You're wasting your time engaging with someone who posts a sentence with the word "So" at one end and a question mark at the other. That is an immutable law of the internet, regardless of gender. :P

    Actually, come to think of it, making a direct comparison between Golden Dawn and FN suggests a need for some more reading of the part of the poster. Not, mind you, that I'd be voting for FN 'n'all'n'anyways.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Mod note - Ulysses1874 attack the post not the poster


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    I don't consider most of what Bacik says to be misandrist as such, more just blatantly one-sided feminism. I've been involved in a number of events with her during her time in Trinity, and I haven't got the impression that she hates men.
    She always gave me the impression, as far back as her time in Trinity, that she didn't really like men all that much, whatever about hating them.

    But I suppose it comes down to how you see things. I've no doubt that if a politician were to support laws promoting ridiculously unfair rights for men, that would often impact negatively the rights of women you'd be screaming misogyny. But oddly, being a blatantly one-sided feminist is fine. Is being blatantly racist fine too as long as you agree with some of their policies?

    It probably says more about your own attitudes than Baciks.
    Comparing supporting Ivana Bacik to Golden Dawn or Front National is beyond moronic.
    Dismissing such a comparison out of hand without bothering to rebut it logically would be more moronic methinks. All it is, is an easy way to avoid facing up to them and see if they have any merit.

    Bottom line is that some of the policies that she supports are reprehensible. To argue that one gender should effectively become almost immune from custodial sentences would be no different to arguing that one race should effectively become almost immune from custodial sentences. The only difference is that, ironically, neither the Golden Dawn or Front National have gone that far.

    And to support any politician that actively promotes such policies, just because you agree with 'some' of the milder ones, is frankly morally bankrupt.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Well I think we can agree that we're viewing the situation quite differently and have obviously differing views on Bacik based on the experiences we've had with her. I don't really think there's any point in engaging any further if you're going to continue sensationalising to the extent you have been.

    For what it's worth, Bacik has done plenty of speaking about reducing the number of people in prison in general, not just female. She also is keen to have prison conditions for males in Mountjoy improved, this single story we've been discussing doesn't represent her complete view on the matter.

    http://www.ivanabacik.com/archives/484

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/ivana-bacik-radical-reform-of-our-penal-system-will-lead-to-a-safer-society-for-us-all-29159935.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    She wasn't talking about herself; she was talking about the other women she met in prison. Of herself, she said "I did something, I paid the price of it and that is it."

    It's good to see someone with a degree of self-perception who can see when something is her own fault and take responsibility, and not have a chip on her shoulder about the world - while still having empathy for other prisoners she met to whom life had been a lot less kind than it was to her.

    In my view, we could all learn from that.

    Who says we should? I don't. I just don't see the value in men whinging about how tough they have life compared to women. It's all a bit beta, to be honest.

    I am finding it hard to understand exactly what point you are trying to make at this stage. The thread is about women getting more lenient sentencing and you posted a link to an article which basically said women go to jail for reasons to do with the men in their lives. The article says that when a woman commits a crime it is because she is vunerable and that when she is in prison her vunerability is not being dealt with and it costs the government so much money keeping women incarcerated so it asks wether a better alternative should be pursued ie vunerable women who commit crimes shouldnt do jail time.

    The entire article only cares about how women who commit crimes might be vunerable so therefore shouldn't go to jail, the same reasoning could be applied to vunerable men who commit crimes but it isn't.

    You say we shouldn't take such a gendered approach to sentencing but you are the one who posted the article as a "different angle" even though you are now disagreeing with it.

    So what point are you trying to make on this thread since you are disagreeing with your own points?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    Well I think we can agree that we're viewing the situation quite differently and have obviously differing views on Bacik based on the experiences we've had with her. I don't really think there's any point in engaging any further if you're going to continue sensationalising to the extent you have been.

    For what it's worth, Bacik has done plenty of speaking about reducing the number of people in prison in general, not just female. She also is keen to have prison conditions for males in Mountjoy improved, this single story we've been discussing doesn't represent her complete view on the matter.

    http://www.ivanabacik.com/archives/484

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/ivana-bacik-radical-reform-of-our-penal-system-will-lead-to-a-safer-society-for-us-all-29159935.html

    So her complete view is that there should be no womens prisons as women should not go to jail as they only commit crimes out of vunerability and necessity but men should get nicer conditions in prison. It's still an extremely sexist argument to make.

    Is this not the same as an extremist Muslim saying all women should have to wear a full burqa but it's okay they don't have to be black you can have them in as many pretty colours as women want. Sure it's nice and all having variety but the core argument is still sexist, men don't have to wear a burqa while the women do.

    Arguing that men should have nicer prisons and smaller sentences is completely pointless if your next point is that women shouldn't go to prison at all. It is still a purely sexist point of view.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Well I think we can agree that we're viewing the situation quite differently and have obviously differing views on Bacik based on the experiences we've had with her.
    TBH, I judge her as a politician principally on the basis of the policies that she supports. In this regard she has repeatedly supported extreme geocentric policies, often to the detriment of men. Anecdotal experience of her is irrelevant, in this regard, because of how extreme some of these policies are.

    We don't have to agree with everything that a politician supports to vote for them. However, if they support policies that are extreme and offensive, then it becomes impossible to justify voting for them; the good no longer outweighs the bad.

    This is the case with Bacik, unfortunately.
    I don't really think there's any point in engaging any further if you're going to continue sensationalising to the extent you have been.
    I suppose it's easier than arguing against points that have been made against you, because you've gone out of your way to avoid doing that.
    For what it's worth, Bacik has done plenty of speaking about reducing the number of people in prison in general, not just female. She also is keen to have prison conditions for males in Mountjoy improved, this single story we've been discussing doesn't represent her complete view on the matter.
    Please don't try to distract from the core sexism of her policy; that women would be immune from prison, even if men got 'nicer' prison. I do hope that you realize that this pure, unadulterated sexism of the worst kind? Hiding behind 'better conditions' doesn't change the fact that what she proposes is chauvinism on a par with anything you'll see in Saudi Arabia - or is the fact that it's in reverse, what makes it acceptable?

    Actually, I have to ask, do you share her sexist views on custodial sentences for women?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Just read this case for two weeks back and I honestly can't imagine a guy getting such a lenient sentence had they been guilty of what the following woman was:



    To be honest, I can't even imagine a barrister daring to suggest that a man who arranged to meet a 14 year old girl in a toilet cubicle, then had oral sex with, and further sexual activities in his own home.. was in fact: in love with the girl. I imagine the very notion of such a defense would be seen to be more likely to anger the court and avoided.

    Does anyone agree or is this sentence on par with what a man would get here if found guilty of a similar crime.

    Another case in point http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/former-garda-is-jailed-for-defiling-boy-in-graveyard-29740067.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    Some Irish research:
    HOMICIDE IN IRELAND
    1972 1991

    Dr. Enda Dooley
    Director of Prison Medical Services
    Department of Justice

    http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Dooley,%20Homicide%20in%20Ireland%201972-1991.pdf/Files/Dooley,%20Homicide%20in%20Ireland%201972-1991.pdf
    Summary

    This study has reviewed all homicides occurring in the Republic of Ireland during the period 1972 to 1991 (inclusive). To date there has been no similar study examining the criminological aspects or Irish homicide with emphas is on any changes that have occurred over this period. Unlike other crime the number of homicides committed annually has shown no sustained increase. The rate of homicide in Ireland appears to be among the lowest in Europe.

    Homicides predominantly involve the killing of a male by another, somewhat younger, man. Most homicides occur at night and a high proportion involve intoxication in one or both parties. Most often the motive is some form of anger or rage and the incident occurs with out planning or premeditation, In the small number or homicides involving female perpetrato rs the victim is significantly more likely to be a spouse or family member. The vast majority of homicides are detected by the police and a conviction occurs in approximately two-thirds of all cases. The exception to this high detection rate are those cases considered due to subversive or terrorist motivation where planning and the availability of a support system contribute to low detection and conviction.

    Female perpetrators are significantly less likely to be convicted, and if convicted they receive significantly shorter sentences than their male counterparts. There has been a significant increase in the length of discretionary sentences applied. Infanticide appears to be relatively rare. "Psychiatric" homicides show a significant temporal shirt from "normal" homicides in that they occur more often during the day-time period. In addition they show more pre-meditation and less involvement of alcohol. Victims are more likely to be young and also more likely to be family members.

    Unlike the case in other jurisdictions there appears 10 have been little legal or public debate in relation to the classification of homicide, the appropriateness or necessity for a mandatory life sentence for murder convictions, the need for legal provisions in relation to homicide committed under possible psychiatric disability to be updated to reflect developments in psychiatric practice, etc. It is hoped that the information contained in this study will provide a factual basis to assist those who might engage in such a debate.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    Here are the details from the 1972-1991 report
    Female perpetrators were significantly more likely not to be charged or to have a Nolle Prosequi entered.

    In those cases involving a female perpetrator (42) no charge or prosecution occurred in 14 (33.3%) compared to 36 (6.6%) of the 545 cases involving male perpetrators (Chi-squared = 35.75; p < 0.0001).

    In a further 10 (23.8%) cases a conviction resulted in a suspended sentence compared to 51 (9.4%) in cases involving male perpetrators (Chi-squared=8.75; p< 0.003).
    In the 205 cases which resulted in a Manslaughter conviction (Table 18) 193 cases resulted in an effective or suspended prison sentence. These cases involved 182 males and 11 females. It was noticeable that the 11 females convicted received an average sentence of 41.7 months whereas the 182 males received an average sentence of 63.9 months.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Actually, I have to ask, do you share her sexist views on custodial sentences for women?

    I'd favour a reduction in the prevalence of prison sentence for minor offences, obviously a gender-neutral reduction though. I support no form of gender discrimination.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,449 ✭✭✭✭pwurple


    iptba wrote: »
    Here are the details from the 1972-1991 report

    Thanks ipta. Nice to see some real numbers.

    Pity the sample size is small. 11 man-slaughters and 42 murders over twenty years.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    I'd favour a reduction in the prevalence of prison sentence for minor offences, obviously a gender-neutral reduction though. I support no form of gender discrimination.
    Then how can you lend support to someone who clearly does favour gender discrimination?

    If they supported race segregation, for example, would you still lend them support? If so, why? Or if not, is this different because gender discrimination, at least when directed against men, is more acceptable than race discrimination?

    I'm curious, because there is an inconsistency in the logic of many people who appear to lend support people like Bacik. They get very upset if you suggest that they'd turn a blind eye to views such as racism, anti-Semitism or homophobia, for a politician with whom they otherwise hold common ground, yet have no problem turning a blind eye to sexism to this end.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Then how can you lend support to someone who clearly does favour gender discrimination?

    If they supported race segregation, for example, would you still lend them support? If so, why? Or if not, is this different because gender discrimination, at least when directed against men, is more acceptable than race discrimination?

    I don't think there's any significant difference, they're both equally unacceptable.
    I'm curious, because there is an inconsistency in the logic of many people who appear to lend support people like Bacik. They get very upset if you suggest that they'd turn a blind eye to views such as racism, anti-Semitism or homophobia, for a politician with whom they otherwise hold common ground, yet have no problem turning a blind eye to sexism to this end.

    As I said previously, I support her views on certain issues. I don't offer a blanket support to anyone.

    I'll happily criticise Bacik's stance on certain issues, while applauding her on others. Same goes for pretty much everyone else.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    I'll happily criticise Bacik's stance on certain issues, while applauding her on others. Same goes for pretty much everyone else.
    Then, by that logic, you should be able to applaud Golden Dawn on some of their stances, such as the community and charity work they've been known to do.

    If so, I disagree with you as there are some positions that can ultimately damn any politician, but respect at least that you're consistent.

    If not, then I'm afraid you're guilty of a cognitive bias, that leads you to such an inconsistent position.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,646 ✭✭✭✭Sauve


    Mod

    Back on topic please



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,907 ✭✭✭LostinBlanch


    There is a thread on Reddit about this with links to articles like this showing that women get more lenient sentences.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,584 ✭✭✭ahnowbrowncow


    Just saw this on the rte news website, a female prisoner was released after serving just 3 days of a six month sentence.

    The judge asked was this because of capacity issues but the governor of the women’s prison, Mary O'Connor, said she didn't think more prison places was the solution, and she felt that "a lot of women in prison should not be there.

    FFS :rolleyes:

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/1120/488017-dochas/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    To an extent I agree with the sentiment. I believe that there are a lot of women in jail that don’t really need to be there. The role of Prison imo should be two-fold, to protect the public and to rehabilitate offenders. There is an argument that Prison should be used as a deterrent or punishment but people need to realise that it costs the state a small fortune to incarcerate an individual and in a lot of cases the person is more a danger to society when they leave prison than before they entered it.

    So while I agree that we should be looking at alternatives to prison especially for non-violent offenders, I am shocked that this is been driven as a female only issue. I can’t understand how in an issue such as this campaigner’s can blatantly adopt a one sided sexist position. The arguments they are making should self-evidently apply to both sexes and not to just one. Women do not have exclusivity on vulnerability. Men are also products of abusive environments, have dependency on substances and through circumstance have ended up in a place where they really shouldn’t be.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Playboy wrote: »
    To an extent I agree with the sentiment. I believe that there are a lot of women in jail that don’t really need to be there. The role of Prison imo should be two-fold, to protect the public and to rehabilitate offenders. There is an argument that Prison should be used as a deterrent or punishment but people need to realise that it costs the state a small fortune to incarcerate an individual and in a lot of cases the person is more a danger to society when they leave prison than before they entered it.

    So while I agree that we should be looking at alternatives to prison especially for non-violent offenders, I am shocked that this is been driven as a female only issue. I can’t understand how in an issue such as this campaigner’s can blatantly adopt a one sided sexist position. The arguments they are making should self-evidently apply to both sexes and not to just one. Women do not have exclusivity on vulnerability. Men are also products of abusive environments, have dependency on substances and through circumstance have ended up in a place where they really shouldn’t be.

    Exactly, by recognising that women have a special place in the family home, could employers then not use the same methodology when deciding whether or not to hire a female employee on the basis that she won't be able to work late because the kids need to be collected from the crèche, she may get pregnant and be out of work for a year while I still have to keep her position open or because when young children are sick she won't be able to come into work that day, and as we all know the duty of care of young children primarily rests with the mother.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Playboy wrote: »
    So while I agree that we should be looking at alternatives to prison especially for non-violent offenders, I am shocked that this is been driven as a female only issue.
    You shouldn't be, after all, you've inadvertently betrayed the same bias in your post; why did you say "I believe that there are a lot of women in jail that don’t really need to be there" rather than "people"? Subconscious slip of the tongue?

    What it comes down to is that women are still viewed as the primary carers, as weaker and less accountable for their actions, and thus neither responsible for them nor is it desirable to hold them to account for them.

    Or as Jack Nicholson's character succinctly put it:



    Now, naturally this is a sexist, chauvinistic viewpoint. How has feminism worked to overturn it, you ask? It hasn't.

    The suffragettes were willing to do this, to act against the interests of women for the sake of equality, and demand that the protection that came with such prejudices be reversed and women be held as accountable as men, but second+ wave feminism hasn't done anything of the sort.

    If anything it's reinforced these prejudices through it's constant portrayal of women as victims; even when they're perpetrators of violent crime.

    And given that feminism essentially has the whole gender rights racket sown up, and that the influence of their lobby far exceeds that of any other 'rights' lobby, why should you be shocked that such views are perpetuated.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,646 ✭✭✭✭Sauve


    Discussion on this issue coming up on Newstalk shortly.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement