Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

realdanbreen

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

2 and half years sounds about right. Was ludicrous to be suggesting he should get 25 years or anything like it.

I agree. Despicible and all that his crime was I think this guy is now pretty much a broken man who realises the wrong he done.

lawred2

elefant wrote: »

I'm reading the judge said it was difficult not to feel sympathy for him, and took his character statements in consideration.

That is scandalous. Absolutely sickening to hear from a judge.

disgusting...

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Guessing 4 years.

Adam Johnson got 6, but he contested the more serious charges. Humphries pleaded guilty.

Hmmmmmm, bit lower than I predicted...seems pretty lenient.

Outlaw Pete

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Jesus Pete, big jump from 2.5 years to 25 there!!

Just referencing a sentence that was called for. Indeed some were suggesting that was too good for him.

the lawman wrote: »

That human being needs to be locked up for the rest of his life and kept away from society.

Somewhere between 5 and 12 is probably right in this case. But 2.5 years is ridiculously light!!

It's really not.

As I said throughout this thread, people were speaking about this man as if he had raped a very young child or something when in actually fact he hadn't even raped the girl at the centre of this case. Not even in a statutorial sense. The discourse by some was wholly disproportionate to the crimes committed, evidenced by calls for him to be jailed for 25 years to life.

2.5 years sounds right and more importantly is consistent with general sentencing for such crimes.

ArielAtom

How anyone can agree that 2.5 yrs is sufficient, whether he's a broken man or not is beyond me. 5-12 is what fits the crime. If it was my daughter I would not be happy.

ArielAtom

ArielAtom wrote: »

How anyone can agree that 2.5 yrs is sufficient, whether he's a broken man or not is beyond me. 5-12 is what fits the crime. If it was my daughter I would not be happy.

Sure Tom is the victim here - ffs this country’s a joke with its sentencing

Huexotzingo

Is it 2 1/2 years or 4 1/2 years? The independent article is confusing?

elefant

Huexotzingo wrote: »

Is it 2 1/2 years or 4 1/2 years? The independent article is confusing?

2 1/2 years.

The second 2 year sentence will run concurrently.

razorblunt

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I think its time character references were outlawed from courts.

It puts everyone in a difficult position. Friends/former friends who are asked to provide one are put in a no win situation and a moral quandary. In this case, Walsh provided one without having full knowledge of the facts. It probably happens in many other cases too.

Judges who accept them are just as bad as well as defence lawyers. Victims are hurt by them, as they mitigate the crime.

Time to put an end to the practice once and for all. I would say their influence over judges' sentencing decisions is minimal and not worth all the furore.

When the judge said "careful consideration" was given to them, was that actually the case, or is it an attempt to throw the spotlight on Walsh and Donal Og?

ChikiChiki

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Just referencing a sentence that was called for. Indeed some were suggesting that was too good for him.






It's really not.

As I said throughout this thread, people were speaking about this man as if he had raped a very young child or something when in actually fact he hadn't even raped the girl at the centre of this case. Not even in a statutorial sense. The discourse by some was wholly disproportionate to the crimes committed, evidenced by calls for him to be jailed for 25 years to life.

2.5 years sounds right and more importantly is consistent with general sentencing for such crimes.

Bringing her to his apartment to conduct sexual activity when she was 16? Think thats statutorial enough.

RayM

Incredibly lenient sentence, considering the fact that he spent longer than two and a half years grooming and abusing his victim.

elefant

Did anyone else see the Irish Times article on TH today?

I'm actually speechless reading it. On the day a man was convicted of child sex offences? How has this made it past an editor?

https://twitter.com/IrishTimes/status/922800365417857024

edit: seems they removed the tweet, but it's still on their website for now (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/tom-humphries-acclaimed-sports-writer-with-controversial-views-1.3267087)

BoatMad

Seems appropriate , given his plea and contriteness. Thankfully we gave up rule by vigilante hanging mobs some time ago.

Working class heroes

Should have planted some garlic on him...

vicwatson

Who was the judge in this case?

washman3

Further proof that we live in a Banana Republic.
2 and a half years for ruining a young girls life.
He was 3 times her age FFS.

BoatMad

washman3 wrote: »

Further proof that we live in a Banana Republic.
2 and a half years for ruining a young girls life.
He was 3 times her age FFS.

It should be reminded that by and large the criminal justice system punishes the breaking of law not the effect on victims.

Hard to see how more years makes the girls life less " ruinous "

tupenny

elefant wrote: »

Did anyone else see the Irish Times article on TH today?

I'm actually speechless reading it. On the day a man was convicted of child sex offences? How has this made it past an editor?

https://twitter.com/IrishTimes/status/922800365417857024

Unbelievable

ChikiChiki

elefant wrote: »

Did anyone else see the Irish Times article on TH today?

I'm actually speechless reading it. On the day a man was convicted of child sex offences? How has this made it past an editor?

https://twitter.com/IrishTimes/status/922800365417857024

Apart from the final paragraphs it reads like an obituary in a journalistic sense. Hopefully true but I wouldn't be surprised to see him back again. How was this even published?

vicwatson

Concurrent sentencing - a load of tosh

BoatMad

tupenny wrote: »

Aaaand its gone

So much for journalistic integrity

BoatMad

vicwatson wrote: »

Concurrent sentencing - a load of tosh

Hang em , I say and deport those caught stealing a loaf of bread to boot

elefant

BoatMad wrote: »

So much for journalistic integrity

Still on their website for the moment:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/tom-humphries-acclaimed-sports-writer-with-controversial-views-1.3267087

Ashbourne hoop

A really lenient sentence but unfortunately not surprising. He knew from the get go that what he was doing was wrong and he used his position as a volunteer to groom this girl (and allegedly others) over a sustained period of time. If the info hadn't been accidentally been found by his daughter (jaysus how must she feel !!) then the abuse may well have continued. Sickened by this tbh.

eigrod

Appalling leniency.

Lots on Twitter mentioning FF connections with Humphries. Anyone know who those connections are with ?

Shurimgreat

Its pretty sad that the character references were taken on board when sentencing.

"Oh well he was a monster, but at least he volunteered for the GAA/athletics/charity, etc etc"

His motivations to coach youth teams in the first place could in light of what he did be questioned.

Time to end the practice of character references asap. They undermine sentencing for some of the most heinous of crimes.

BoatMad

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Its pretty sad that the character references were taken on board when sentencing.

"Oh well he was a monster, but at least he volunteered for the GAA/athletics/charity, etc etc"

His motivations to coach youth teams in the first place could in light of what he did be questioned.

Time to end the practice of character references asap. They undermine sentencing for some of the most heinous of crimes.

I find this argument hard to understand, surely the defence should be entitled to demonstrate their client is multi -faceted , ie that like most people he is made up of good and bad things.

And he's not a monster , he's a human being that committed a serious crime, like many human beings unfortunately.

valoren

elefant wrote: »

Still on their website for the moment:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/tom-humphries-acclaimed-sports-writer-with-controversial-views-1.3267087

I can't believe that.

washman3

eigrod wrote: »

Appalling leniency.

Lots on Twitter mentioning FF connections with Humphries. Anyone know who those connections are with ?

Powerful people surround themselves with powerful people.!!
That's the way this Banana Republic works.:mad:

BoatMad

valoren wrote: »

I can't believe that.

Is there anything in the article materially incorrect ?