Tragic yet worrying scenes in waterford last night

Mountainsandh

They might not have known where he lived, but known him. They're all probably on probation for one thing or another, so of course they'd run.

Brown Bomber

TonyStark wrote: »

I think there were victims here..as well. In fairness the Garza was within his rights to defend his family!

So local lads who didn't know where the local Garda lives....if they were innocent why run? Surely a misunderstanding could have been cleared upl :-)

Im sorry, but defend his family from what? The sound of glass breaking?

lighterman

Mountainsandh wrote: »

They might not have known where he lived, but known him. They're all probably on probation for one thing or another, so of course they'd run.

Ya because every teenager is on probation.:rolleyes:

Shady Tady

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What evidence do you have of anyone smashing bottles AT his family door? Do you really think an appropriate punishment for causing a disturbance in public is a extra judicial death at the hands of the local travis bickle?

I never realised the level of prejudice in ireland. There is so little we know of this tragedy other than one side of the story and hysterical reporting but people are dancing on the grave of an irish student based on sterotypes they have of a vermin underclass. Shameful. Enda Kenny even compared this kid to the IRA.

What would you have done? You with 20/20 hindsight? Get into the real world and stop pontificating!

littleblackDRS

After reading through the whole thread, I really can't understand why anyone would give a toss about this. Darwinism, pure and simple.

Mountainsandh

Lighterman I know some of the people involved, don't know personal legal situations in details though, but have a pretty good general idea of who might be in trouble. That info is in the local papers regularly, anonymous when they're under age, nominal after 18. Dungarvan is a small town. But yes, it's an opinion not fact.

Brown Bomber

Shady Tady wrote: »

What would you have done? You with 20/20 hindsight? Get into the real world and stop pontificating!

Could you please just answer the question? What evidence do you have of anyone smashing bottles at his family door? What evidence do you have that this garda felt so threatened that he had to confront these guys as a matter of self defense?

TonyStark

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Im sorry, but defend his family from what? The sound of glass breaking?

I think people are entitled to live in peace. For all they knew the bottles could have gone through a window and injured a small child.

I think being struck by a bottle is evidence enough for me the gents were up to no good. Drunk and disorderly is still a crime.

Mountainsandh

littleblackDRS wrote: »

After reading through the whole thread, I really can't understand why anyone would give a toss about this. Darwinism, pure and simple.

It's just shocking to see human beings rejoicing in another human being's death. Maybe it shouldn't be. Maybe every time a boy racer smashes themselves to death we should all rejoice openly. But to me right now, from my point of view, it is shocking.

Brown Bomber

mrsbyrne wrote: »

You seem to be espousing the idea that damaging cars and throwing bottles is a teenagers entitlement and if the idiot garda had just taken his medicine and cowered inside his front door until they had finished indulging themselves, then he wouldn't have had his head split open and the potential Michaelangelo would be still alive. Hmmm.
So its the gardas own fault that he has a massive headache and he's actually responsible for the death of this lad?

There is no question, based on the available facts that if the guard had stayed in his home the HE WOULD NOT have been assaulted and this boy would still be alive. Its a chain of events that has his decision to confront those causing a nuisance to him as an integral part of the chain.

Nino Brown

Brown Bomber wrote: »

There is no question, based on the available facts that if the guard had stayed in his home the HE WOULD NOT have been assaulted and this boy would still be alive. Its a chain of events that has his decision to confront those causing a nuisance to him as an integral part of the chain.

No you're right, they should have been allowed to continue to damage cars, and vandalize the area, because if you chase them they might hurt themselves. Excellent logic!
Might as well just disband the Gardai, we wouldn't want to inconvenience any criminals.

Zambia

Brown Bomber wrote: »

There is no question, based on the available facts that if the guard had stayed in his home the HE WOULD NOT have been assaulted and this boy would still be alive. Its a chain of events that has his decision to confront those causing a nuisance to him as an integral part of the chain.

No that is pure hippy hairy horse****.

Anyone garda or not has the right to walk out their front door and tell anyone throwing stuff at their house to stop.

Nino Brown

Mountainsandh wrote: »

It's just shocking to see human beings rejoicing in another human being's death. Maybe it shouldn't be. Maybe every time a boy racer smashes themselves to death we should all rejoice openly. But to me right now, from my point of view, it is shocking.

I do, every time a boy racer or a drunk driver kills themselves and manages to not to kill an innocent civilian in the process, it does make me happy, because that's one less moron who could kill my family on the roads.

Brown Bomber

TonyStark wrote: »

I think people are entitled to live in peace. For all they knew the bottles could have gone through a window and injured a small child.

I think being struck by a bottle is evidence enough for me the gents were up to no good. Drunk and disorderly is still a crime.

Absolutely on all accounts. Support punishing people appropriate to their crime but dont rejoice in their deaths, its perverse.

Its what we dont know which would establish how brazen a crime the assault with the bottle was. They didnt break into his home and attack him, he confronted them. Much is being made of the right to self defense for the guard but we dont know if he was the aggressor after he chased them down, do we? Maybe these chaps were acting in self defense? We cant judge the facts based on stereotypes

TonyStark

Brown Bomber wrote: »

There is no question, based on the available facts that if the guard had stayed in his home the HE WOULD NOT have been assaulted and this boy would still be alive. Its a chain of events that has his decision to confront those causing a nuisance to him as an integral part of the chain.

The Garda was doing his duty IMHO. Freewill brought the boy to 'cause nuisance'. Free will was his undoing. He didn't have to run.

Owryan

Brown Bomber wrote: »

There is no question, based on the available facts that if the guard had stayed in his home the HE WOULD NOT have been assaulted and this boy would still be alive. Its a chain of events that has his decision to confront those causing a nuisance to him as an integral part of the chain.

A chain of events that began with them acting the maggot. The garda was doing his job when assaulted. The chap who died, died of his own making.

My sympathies lie with the garda, his family and the deceased's family in that order.

As someone who lives in an area with severe anti social behaviour I have no sympathy for the chap himself. His actions led to his death callous as it may sound.

Brown Bomber

TonyStark wrote: »

The Garda was doing his duty IMHO. Freewill brought the boy to 'cause nuisance'. Free will was his undoing. He didn't have to run.

so what was his plan then? What i read yesterday is that he chased after them on foot and reached them circa 500m from his estate. This implies they had already left when the confrontation occurred and therefore pose no threat.

Media reports state that he wanted to ,"talk to them" which doesnt sound very realistic to me at all.

mrsbyrne

Brown Bomber wrote: »

There is no question, based on the available facts that if the guard had stayed in his home the HE WOULD NOT have been assaulted and this boy would still be alive. Its a chain of events that has his decision to confront those causing a nuisance to him as an integral part of the chain.

You are joking! What place in the chain of events does the dead mans desicion to throw bottles and damage cars have?
You do realise that you are saying that this gang of young people were entitled to go on their merry way damaging property and frightening people? Does that really not sound obscene to you?if my daughter is attacked by a man should she not fight back just in case he gets angry and decides to kill her?or worse still, according to you, he gets nervous and runs away in front of a car and gets killed? Are you crazy or just a windup?

Owryan

Brown Bomber wrote: »

so what was his plan then? What i read yesterday is that he chased after them on foot and reached them circa 500m from his estate. This implies they had already left when the confrontation occurred and therefore pose no threat.

So if a "suspect" leaves the scene then they are free from arrest or pursuit?

Nino Brown

Brown Bomber wrote: »

so what was his plan then? What i read yesterday is that he chased after them on foot and reached them circa 500m from his estate. This implies they had already left when the confrontation occurred and therefore pose no threat.

Media reports state that he wanted to ,"talk to them" which doesnt sound very realistic to me at all.

Are you serious, you think a criminal should be allowed to leave after a crime, because they no longer pose a threat?
BTW you have a strange definition of not posing a threat, because they hospitalized the man after he caught up with them.

mrsbyrne

Owryan wrote: »

A chain of events that began with them acting the maggot. The garda was doing his job when assaulted. The chap who died, died of his own making.

My sympathies lie with the garda, his family and the deceased's family in that order.

As someone who lives in an area with severe anti social behaviour I have no sympathy for the chap himself. His actions led to his death callous as it may sound.

No. Enough nonsense. Acting the maggot is making too much noise in a residential area at night. Throwing bottles and damaging cars is criminal behaviour. Stop making excuses.

TonyStark

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Absolutely on all accounts. Support punishing people appropriate to their crime but dont rejoice in their deaths, its perverse.

Its what we dont know which would establish how brazen a crime the assault with the bottle was. They didnt break into his home and attack him, he confronted them. Much is being made of the right to self defense for the guard but we dont know if he was the aggressor after he chased them down, do we? Maybe these chaps were acting in self defense? We cant judge the facts based on stereotypes

Self-defense: Group of drunken men attack single unarmed man with a bottles, smashing one over his head as they felt they were in immediate mortal danger.

allthedoyles

All 3 have been released without charge

Mountainsandh

Nino Brown wrote: »

I do, every time a boy racer or a drunk driver kills themselves and manages to not to kill an innocent civilian in the process, it does make me happy, because that's one less moron who could kill my family on the roads.

It's weird, nearly like science fiction. I'd imagine maybe in 50 or a hundred years, this might be a completely acceptable and normal stance, right now though, it's shocking and heartless imo. Things are changing though, your point of view is becoming more common, and as I said, I get glimpses of it myself. When you know the victim it does change a few parameters though.

lighterman

mrsbyrne wrote: »

No. Enough nonsense. Acting the maggot is making too much noise in a residential area at night. Throwing bottles and damaging cars is criminal behaviour. Stop making excuses.

Just for clarification throwing bottles is not a criminal offence.

Owryan

mrsbyrne wrote: »

No. Enough nonsense. Acting the maggot is making too much noise in a residential area at night. Throwing bottles and damaging cars is criminal behaviour. Stop making excuses.

Oh i'm not making excuses for him. We don't know he was throwing bottles, only in the company of those that were. The fact that he ran doesn't mean he was guilty.

Little CuChulainn

lighterman wrote: »

Just for clarification throwing bottles is not a criminal offence.

Actually it can constitute a number of different offences from something minor like public order or littering to the more major offences like criminal damage to endangerment.

Brown Bomber

TonyStark wrote: »

Self-defense: Group of drunken men attack single unarmed man with a bottles, smashing one over his head as they felt they were in immediate mortal danger.

You are not dealing in the facts. This is entirely speculation at this point. On what basis are you claiming the guard was the one attacked? Was the guard drunk? How do we know?

Nino Brown

Mountainsandh wrote: »

It's weird, nearly like science fiction. I'd imagine maybe in 50 or a hundred years, this might be a completely acceptable and normal stance, right now though, it's shocking and heartless imo. Things are changing though, your point of view is becoming more common, and as I said, I get glimpses of it myself. When you know the victim it does change a few parameters though.

If somebody dies doing something the chose to do, I don't think they're victims of anything. Boy racers and drink drivers know the risks, and make their choices, it's the people they kill that don't get a choice, they're the victims.

mrsbyrne

lighterman wrote: »

Just for clarification throwing bottles is not a criminal offence.

Is it not lighter man. So you have no objections then if I come down tonight and throw some at you, your house, your car, and your family?

Brown Bomber

Nino Brown wrote: »

Are you serious, you think a criminal should be allowed to leave after a crime, because they no longer pose a threat?
BTW you have a strange definition of not posing a threat, because they hospitalized the man after he caught up with them.

Key word being AFTER. Whatever real or imagined threat the guard supposedly felt under didnt exist when they were 500m from his home and moving away from it.

Owryan

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You are not dealing in the facts. This is entirely speculation at this point. On what basis are you claiming the guard was the one attacked? Was the guard drunk? How do we know?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/youth-died-after-fall-as-he-fled-bottle-attack-on-garda-30281401.html
from the linked article :"gang assaulted a garda superintendent with a bottle"
with the result that
"he was struck over the head with a bottle and suffered a serious wound, which needed seven stitches at Waterford Regional Hospital".

That suggests the garda was assaulted, no idea why you are asking if he was drunk.

Nino Brown

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Key word being AFTER. Whatever real or imagined threat the guard supposedly felt under didnt exist when they were 500m from his home and moving away from it.

Who says he felt threatened?, it's his job to catch these people.

Mountainsandh

Nino Brown wrote: »

If somebody dies doing something the chose to do, I don't think they're victims of anything. Boy racers and drink drivers know the risks, and make their choices, it's the people they kill that don't get a choice, they're the victims.

I should have said the deceased.
I didn't mean victim as in victim with implied prejudice.

mrsbyrne

Nino Brown wrote: »

If somebody dies doing something the chose to do, I don't think they're victims of anything. Boy racers and drink drivers know the risks, and make their choices, it's the people they kill that don't get a choice, they're the victims.

Every time I hear of another young life lost on the road I feel sad, but relieved if an "innocent" motorist or pedestrian hasn't also been killed or injured as a result of one persons drink/drug driving or speeding.
It must compound the grief of the family and friends of a dead driver to think that their child caused others to suffer and die because of irresponsible driving.

Brown Bomber

Owryan wrote: »

So if a "suspect" leaves the scene then they are free from arrest or pursuit?

You think a group of 4 lads causing a row as they were on their way to wherever they were going on a thursday night, on foot and in a rural setting would be hard to track down after this guard had used the direct line to the police?

Owryan

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You think a group of 4 lads causing a row as they were on their way to wherever they were going on a thursday night, on foot and in a rural setting would be hard to track down after this guard had used the direct line to the police?

He is a garda, perfectly entitled to chase them down, after ringing the police although why he would ring the UK i dont know:D

Brown Bomber

Owryan wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/youth-died-after-fall-as-he-fled-bottle-attack-on-garda-30281401.html
from the linked article :"gang assaulted a garda superintendent with a bottle"
with the result that
"he was struck over the head with a bottle and suffered a serious wound, which needed seven stitches at Waterford Regional Hospital".

That suggests the garda was assaulted, no idea why you are asking if he was drunk.

Yes it does, but it gives no clue as to who was the aggressor.

Shady Tady

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Key word being AFTER. Whatever real or imagined threat the guard supposedly felt under didnt exist when they were 500m from his home and moving away from it.

I genuinely hope it comes to your door and I say that reluctantly, then you will get a dose of reality and come into the real world, there are people especially the elderly all over the country imprisoned in their own home because of thugs like these, I can tell you the sound of breaking glass to these people is pretty frighting and it's a credit to the garda that he was prepared to stand up to them, it's people with attitudes like you that create a system that tolerates them!

littleblackDRS

Nino Brown wrote: »

If somebody dies doing something the chose to do, I don't think they're victims of anything. Boy racers and drink drivers know the risks, and make their choices, it's the people they kill that don't get a choice, they're the victims.

I completely agree. I personally have lost friends in drink driving/boy racer scenarios, and yeah it's sad, young life lost and all that, but I still have no sympathy for them. I'm clearly not happy they're dead, but they did put themselves in the situation.

Brown Bomber

Owryan wrote: »

He is a garda, perfectly entitled to chase them down, after ringing the police although why he would ring the UK i dont know:D

Entitled to yes, but what was he hoping to achieve? Was he going to arrest them for littering? and then ask them to wait patiently until back up came?

Owryan

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Entitled to yes, but what was he hoping to achieve? Was he going to arrest them for littering? and then ask them to wait patiently until back up came?

How about detain them in connection with whatever criminal act he believed they carried out? I would assume this was a worthwhile endeavour.

With all due respect you seem to have a major issue with a garda doing his job, insinuating he was drunk for example or that he initiated the incident.

Brown Bomber

Shady Tady wrote: »

I genuinely hope it comes to your door and I say that reluctantly, then you will get a dose of reality and come into the real world, there are people especially the elderly all over the country imprisoned in their own home because of thugs like these, I can tell you the sound of breaking glass to these people is pretty frighting and it's a credit to the garda that he was prepared to stand up to them, it's people with attitudes like you that create a system that tolerates them!

People like me? :P: yeah, maybe i should be more like you and spit on the graves of the dead, who arent even cold yet because they they make noise that frightens some old people.

How does it feel to be judge, jury and executioner?

mrsbyrne

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Entitled to yes, but what was he hoping to achieve? Was he going to arrest them for littering? and then ask them to wait patiently until back up came?

I agreed with shady tady brown bomber. Its blatantly obvious that you've never been a victim of this type of intimidation, and that you have no sympathy for all the elderly or vulnerable people who have been victims of the type of cretins who your are fighting tooth and nail here to defend.
Your probably too young but maybe in the not too distant future you will find yourself apprehensively approaching your home or car near to which a bunch of stoned/drunk unstable group are loitering.
I hope you can keep you liberal standpoint then.

RecordStraight

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Entitled to yes, but what was he hoping to achieve? Was he going to arrest them for littering? and then ask them to wait patiently until back up came?

You ignore the fact that these guys were vandalising cars on the street. You ignore the fact that they were throwing bottles around the street or at houses. You ignore the fact that ANY citizen is within their rights to detain someone they suspect of criminal behaviour (e.g criminal damage). You ignore the fact that the Garda is the guy who received an injury to THE BACK of his head.

You ignore every single piece of evidence and every fact that would lead a REASONABLE person to conclude that four thugs were confronted about their CRIMINAL behaviour, they attacked the courageous man who stood up to them, and one of them killed himself trying to flee justice.

Why do you work so hard to view things in such a bizarre and distorted way? Do you think you are better than normal people, with your constant 'holier than thou' and 'leftier than thou' bullsh!t on every thread? Do you think we should have to tolerate criminals trashing our cars, our homes and our towns?

You are either a troll or a complete weirdo. I genuinely hope that some scumbags trash your car or your home, and you can come on here and tell us you forgive them and how you are in fact the person to blame for having the cheek to have a home or a car.

Unbelievable.

Shady Tady

Brown Bomber wrote: »

People like me? :P: yeah, maybe i should be more like you and spit on the graves of the dead, who arent even cold yet because they they make noise that frightens some old people.

How does it feel to be judge, jury and executioner?

Nice language, says a lot about you!

lighterman

mrsbyrne wrote: »

Is it not lighter man. So you have no objections then if I come down tonight and throw some at you, your house, your car, and your family?

Of course I would but if you don't damage my house or car or family it is not criminal.

If you damaged my house or car it is criminal damage but the crime is not throwing the bottle.

if my family were injured it is assault but no one would be charged with throwing the bottle.

again for clarification throwing a bottle is not a criminal offence.

just stating the law

lighterman

Nino Brown wrote: »

Who says he felt threatened?, it's his job to catch these people.

Its not his job when off duty.He calls it in to the local station and they deal with it

lighterman

Shady Tady wrote: »

Nice language, says a lot about you!

ive seen worse

RecordStraight

Shady Tady wrote: »

Nice language, says a lot about you!

His respect for innocent elderly people really comes across there, doesn't it? Sure f*ck them if they are scared of young criminals trashing their cars.