Are Judges Beyond Criticism?

jonsnow

Deleted User wrote: »

Just to be clear there is a significant body of academic research that shows that when people get their facts about cases from the media they generally believe sentencing to be too lenient whereas when they hear the facts as presented to the judge they generally agree with the sentences handed down by the judiciary.

For the most part the whole thing about backlashes against lenient judges is a media created monster and, if they did their job properly, wouldn't actually reflect the reality on the ground.

Wheelnut's own wildly inaccurate ideas about sentencing in murder cases is a good example of the gap between fact and perception in this area.

I have often sat all day listening to a complicated case with many variables and when the judge has passed sentence I have felt that he got it spot on. I know the local courts reporters and they have heard everything that I have heard but they only have a couple of sentences to get the case across and it is very difficult to capture any nuances with those constraints. When I do see the paper the next day I often think that if this is all I had to go I would think the Judge was too lenient as well. I know the courts reporters well and they are excellent journalists. This is just an unfortunate fact of life. I really dread the day when there are no full time court reporters at all but only tabloid hacks sent down for the occasional big trial.

Valentine1

I'm just going to leave this here.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/court-rules-lyons-sentence-too-lenient-1.1599363

Bepolite

Valentine1 wrote: »

I'm just going to leave this here.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/court-rules-lyons-sentence-too-lenient-1.1599363

Will that go back to the CCC for sentencing?

Valentine1

Bepolite wrote: »

Will that go back to the CCC for sentencing?

No, further date in the CCA possibly next week.

jim_jim

jonsnow wrote: »

I have often sat all day listening to a complicated case with many variables and when the judge has passed sentence I have felt that he got it spot on. I know the local courts reporters and they have heard everything that I have heard but they only have a couple of sentences to get the case across and it is very difficult to capture any nuances with those constraints. When I do see the paper the next day I often think that if this is all I had to go I would think the Judge was too lenient as well. I know the courts reporters well and they are excellent journalists. This is just an unfortunate fact of life. I really dread the day when there are no full time court reporters at all but only tabloid hacks sent down for the occasional big trial.

im familiar with two judges in the general area where I live

one is a thoughtful man, softly spoken but with an incredibly forensic mind , I have watched him deliberate over many cases and have always been impressed with him

the other is a reactionary , pompous blowhard who defendants should not waste money hiring solicitors on as he never listens to the facts anyway

their are many different judges out there , some are great , some are terrible , most are somewhere in between

Wheelnut

Now that the heat has cooled a little, I'll risk another post.

Deleted User wrote: »

Wheelnut's own wildly inaccurate ideas about sentencing in murder cases is a good example of the gap between fact and perception in this area.

The annoying thing for me about that "murder" post of mine is that I actually do know what murder is. I really made a hash of it by describing all killing as murder. (My excuse is a lapse of concentration) As soon as I started reading the first responses to that post I really had an "oh sh!t, what have I done?" moment. :eek:

234

Wheelnut wrote: »

Now that the heat has cooled a little, I'll risk another post.



The annoying thing for me about that "murder" post of mine is that I actually do know what murder is. I really made a hash of it by describing all killing as murder. (My excuse is a lapse of concentration) As soon as I started reading the first responses to that post I really had an "oh sh!t, what have I done?" moment. :eek:

Don't this as an attack, it isn't.

It's not that you misunderstood what murder is, you didn't understand how the sentencing works.

There are obviously other offences that involve the death of the victim (manslaughter, dangerous driving causing death, and I think there are one or two more? Criminal people here will tell you.)

The point is that once you are convicted of murder in Ireland you automatically get a life sentence. There is no discretion on the part of the judge.

The actual length of the incarceration is determined by the parole service (Criminal lawyers: is this the correct agency?) which is part of the executive. They determine when you get out. Judges are not involved in this decision. Once they impose the life sentence it leaves their hands.