Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

Theboinkmaster

BoatMad wrote: »

Personally I'd jail smokers for 20 years , but fortunately I'm not a judge

But you agree with jailing a sexual predator for just 2.5 years and don't see whats wrong with that

CeilingFly

lawred2 wrote: »

Why do you think contact started at 14? Why do you think contact started at all?

I don't know, you don't know. In the trial they said that the messages only became sexual after she turned 16.

Possibly it could be construed as grooming for later sexual perversion, but in my opinion there is a big difference bewteen this and someone abusing a 8, 9, 10 year old child like some on the catholic church did or many paedophiles do - and it woudl be unlikely that the indo would villify them as much becasue they didn't work for a competitor

BoatMad

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

But she wasn't and doesn't so your point is irrelevant. He knew exactly what age she was and what jurisdiction he was in.

I merely pointed out that such crimes are not viewed universally the same. All these issues have mitigating circumstances. , it's why we have a justice system and not a worn tree at the crossroads.

holyhead

CeilingFly wrote: »

Shurimgreat wrote: »

She was 14 when the grooming started. Fourteen.

Incorrect. She was 14 when the contact started. It only became sexual after she turned 16.

Creepy, but would have been a lot more difficult to prosecute.

I'm on no way shape r form defenc#ding him, but you need to balance the hyperbole out there especially by the sensationalist indo group who have their own agenda.

What I'm saying is the judge has given the correct sentence for the crime.

Now, if she was 12, a sentence of 20 years would have been more appropriate.

Could it be argued that the contact started with inappropriate intentions on his part? Was the 2 years leading up to 16 part of his grooming, Many paedophiles have ingratiated themselves with their eventual victims first in order to achieve their hideous end goal.

BoatMad

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

But you agree with jailing a sexual predator for just 2.5 years and don't see whats wrong with that

No, my personal views on a large selection of crimes are different to the judiciary, but I accept that the current system is largely acceptable and rigorous and hence I defer my opinion to that of a learned judge.

What I do think is that mob rule and vengeance justice should play no part in the criminal system. Unfortunately from time to time it does , the B6 for example were largely jailed on the back of public opinion opinion

twill

BoatMad wrote: »

Please dont bend my words

I pointed out the differences in other jurisdictions. The world view is not the same everywhere.

Humphries pleaded guilty to a serious crime and he is being punished for it. That should be sufficient for people in a democracy with Judicial separation of powers.

Mob rule or vengeance has no part to play in a judicial system.

I didn't. I said he groomed a child; you responded that grooming is called courting when applied to adults. He groomed a child and nearly destroyed her life; what about that is not understandable?

Birneybau

BoatMad wrote: »

Birneybau wrote: »

The way it is, very lenient sentence, he'll take his own life in prison.

Awful thing to say I know.

Why would he do that, I don't think any case was presented that questioned his mental health

He's already tried twice. You're a new one on me, haven't seen the name before and defending him vigorously. Any connection?

BoatMad

any paedophiles have ingratiated themselves with their eventual victims first in order to achieve their hideous end goal.

Are you an expert on this topic , perhaps you could reference me your published works on this topic

Personally I know very little about the topic in any detail and I'm very suspicious of salicous media reporting on the topic.

Are Am Eye

BoatMad wrote: »

Simply because it makes mistakes , does not mean it can be discounted when it suits you or the moral righteous bridage

No one asked for it to be discounted. You stated Judges were perfect. The Judge heard the case. Who can question that. That was what you said. I've just blown that stupid point out of the water. And you have no answer.

" clear wishes of the community " , firstly the legal system is actually designed to ignore that

No it's not. See if you can provide a source.

, because they" clear wishes " of the community is also called mob rule.

Every time a group of people decide something you cannot dismiss it with the cliche 'mob rule'. Is a referendum decision mob rule. A general election mob rule. The citizens assembly are a mob.
When human beings came to live together in a group they made rules so that the strong could not dominate and abuse the weak. These rules were there to help and glue society together. From Hamurabi's code to the Common Law to the Napoleon Code. Law serves Man. Otherwise it has no purpose and we would throw it out.

The judiciary is there to rule on the transgressions of the law and to decide in that context what the appropriate punishment should be.

You really haven't a clue. Judges themselves wouldn't tell you that. They might refer you to sentencing guidelines which are long and complex and deal with punishment, deterrent and rehabilitation.

Personally I'd jail smokers for 20 years , but fortunately I'm not a judge

You probably would jail smokers for twenty years because you lack logic and critical thinking.

BoatMad

twill wrote: »

I didn't. I said he groomed a child; you responded that grooming is called courting when applied to adults. He groomed a child and nearly destroyed her life; what about that is not understandable?

Yes and it's a crime , he pleaded guilty and he has received a punishment handed out in a court of law. The court of public opinion ( aka mob rule ) is not relevant

Shurimgreat

CeilingFly wrote: »

I don't know, you don't know. In the trial they said that the messages only became sexual after she turned 16.

Possibly it could be construed as grooming for later sexual perversion, but in my opinion there is a big difference bewteen this and someone abusing a 8, 9, 10 year old child like some on the catholic church did or many paedophiles do - and it woudl be unlikely that the indo would villify them as much becasue they didn't work for a competitor

Nonsense. You didn't even follow the case. He started sending messages of a sexual nature when she was 14. She told him to stop it after being upset. He stopped the sexual messages for a year then resumed. The grooming clearly started when she was 14.

twill

BoatMad wrote: »

Yes and it's a crime , he pleaded guilty and he has received a punishment handed out in a court of law. The court of public opinion ( aka mob rule ) is not relevant

You said that it wouldn't have been a crime had it been committed in the north.

The question here is whether Humphries got a lighter sentence because of who he was and his position in the community, et cetera. Would your local scumbag abuser have been treated the same. I've seen more people in this thread say he should be treated kindly because he's sorry than those saying he should get 20 years or whatever, so let's set aside the straw man of the baying mob.

CeilingFly

holyhead wrote: »

Could it be argued that the contact started with inappropriate intentions on his part? Was the 2 years leading up to 16 part of his grooming, Many paedophiles have ingratiated themselves with their eventual victims first in order to achieve their hideous end goal.

Possibly/probably - hence his headline sentence of 4 years out of a maximum sentence of 5 and remitted to 2.5 due to guilty plea. Probably would have been less if he pleaded guilty at an earlier stage.

On the sexual exploitation - that only took place when she was 16, so no where near the level of those who abuse young children.

What i'm saying is the sentencing was right, but the sensationalist indo and too many suckers who believe the sh1te that the indo writes, think the sentence was too lenient.

I say the judge called it right.

jay1988

This creep starts grooming a girl at 14, turns it sexual at 16 and some people here are saying its not heinous etc.

It's f*cking disgusting and so is the sentence he received.

I wonder how some of you who think this sentence is acceptable would feel had this girl been your daughter, niece, sister etc. and this fat hairy old man came along and ruined her life?

CeilingFly

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Nonsense. You didn't even follow the case. He started sending messages of a sexual nature when she was 14. She told him to stop it after being upset. He stopped the sexual messages for a year then resumed. The grooming clearly started when she was 14.

you watch too much csi / beive too much wriiten by hsterical rags - as I said in another thread that you refuse to accept facts and prefer to believe the utter crap from sensationalist rags.

try not believing all the rubbish in hysterical rags - you'll think with a much clearer train of thought.

Bey0nd

I don't get how it's possible to exchange 16,000 texts in the space of 3 months.

That's one text every 8/9 minutes, and that's assuming no sleep. If you assumed 7 hours sleep a day, then that becomes 10 texts an hour, or one text every 6 minutes (roughly).

BoatMad

Are Am Eye wrote: »

No one asked for it to be discounted. You stated Judges were perfect. The Judge heard the case. Who can question that. That was what you said. I've just blown that stupid point out of the water. And you have no answer.


No it's not. See if you can provide a source.

Every time a group of people decide something you cannot dismiss it with the cliche 'mob rule'. Is a referendum decision mob rule. A general election mob rule. The citizens assembly are a mob.
When human beings came to live together in a group they made rules so that the strong could not dominate and abuse the weak. These rules were there to help and glue society together. From Hamurabi's code to the Common Law to the Napoleon Code. Law serves Man. Otherwise it has no purpose and we would throw it out.

You really haven't a clue. Judges themselves wouldn't tell you that. They might refer you to sentencing guidelines which are long and complex and deal with punishment, deterrent and rehabilitation.

You probably would jail smokers for twenty years because you lack logic and critical thinking.

The whole point of the criminal justice system as opposed to the civil system is to determine whether laws have been broken and to what level of severity those laws have been broken.

This is why the victim is not the appellant , and until recently had little or no involvement in the case

This judicial system was introduced specifically to remove the influence of the " community " in specific cases , which showed itself in arbitrary judgements ( aka hanging ) or to stop rulers and monarchs making arbitrarily life or death judgements.

That is not to say that the criminal justice system is ignorant of the morality of its citizens , but that role is largely a function of the legislature whose role it is to set laws and the scale of punishments when those laws are broken. The purpose of judges is to dispassionately rule on those laws

It is not the role of judges to consider "the community " in specific cases no matter now many torch bearing idiots are screaming at the courthouse door.

That's the whole basis of a dispassionate justice system , anything else and you descend quite literally into mob rule

And don't start me on democracy, very few countries , if any, are ruled purely by democratic decision and there are good reasons why that is so

And yes law of course serves man ,but all men, but not just the ones you don't happen to like at this particular point in time. ( note " men " as generic )

Are Am Eye

BoatMad wrote: »

This judicial system was introduced specifically to remove the influence of the " community " in specific cases

Such a mountain of ignorance and cr@p.

We'll take it slowly and start with your quote above.
Where did you get this idea from. Reference your source.

BoatMad

jay1988 wrote: »

This creep starts grooming a girl at 14, turns it sexual at 16 and some people here are saying its not heinous etc.

It's f*cking disgusting and so is the sentence he received.

I wonder how some of you who think this sentence is acceptable would feel had this girl been your daughter, niece, sister etc. and this fat hairy old man came along and ruined her life?

I have daughters. The whole point of the justice system is to keep people like me from acting on my viewpoint , personally if it was mine , I meet him in a corridor with a shotgun

But thats the whole point of a justice system to protect the law from people like me !!!!

lawred2

CeilingFly wrote: »

you watch too much csi / beive too much wriiten by hsterical rags - as I said in another thread that you refuse to accept facts and prefer to believe the utter crap from sensationalist rags.

try not believing all the rubbish in hysterical rags - you'll think with a much clearer train of thought.

facts?

The fact is is that grooming commenced at 14.

That's the fact.

Why you've resorted to patronising another poster is anyone's guess...

RobertKK

The problem with the justice system is it doesn't see the damage it does to public perception of justice and the justice system when most people believe justice has not been served.

Donald Trump

BoatMad wrote: »

I have daughters. The whole point of the justice system is to keep people like me from acting on my viewpoint , personally if it was mine , I meet him in a corridor with a shotgun

But thats the whole point of a justice system to protect the law from people like me !!!!

Good man there Charles Bronson
The whole point of a justice system is also to protect people like you from yourselves.

BoatMad

Are Am Eye wrote: »

Such a mountain of ignorance and cr@p.

We'll take it slowly and start with your quote above.
Where did you get this idea from. Reference your source.

Go back to the manga carter etc. Try and research the history of the development of criminal justice systems that in western and other societies.

The primary development was to curb the arbitrarily power of rulers and monarchs , where heretofore such decisions were often on a whim

Hence the progression to a system where such decisions are removed from rulers and hence the doctrine of the separation of powers.

Again the primary purpose was to seperate those ruling on punishment from those that created such laws in the first place.

The place for the " communities " involvement is the creation of laws , it has no place in the judgement of those laws especially the amount and nature of punishment. The legislature can draw up more restrictive Laws and increase the severity of such laws, but it remains the function of the judiciary to describe them on a case by case basis how such punishments are handed out.

yourdeadwright

If heard a lot on this but haven't read it myself,
Its it true this started when he was a GAA mentor to the victim but that has never been mentioned in the papers , again I haven't read it but someone was saying the GAA are trying to keep that it happened on there watch (although hardly there fault )  out of the media ,
 Not sure if that's true or not ?

lawred2

lol @ manga carter

Dibble

lawred2 wrote: »

lol @ manga carter

Nathan Carter's Japanese cousin.

Donald Trump

lawred2 wrote: »

lol @ manga carter

I think that that very important historical document gave the Japanese peasants rights to draw comics or some such shite

BoatMad

Donald Trump wrote: »

Good man there Charles Bronson
The whole point of a justice system is also to protect people like you from yourselves.

No , since I don't intend to shoot my self

A significant factor in the development of the crinimal legal system was to remove "passions " from the application of punishment , the unfortunate tendency for the " community " to burn witches and hang so called " black rapists " , while funnily enough turning a blind eye to all sorts of other transgressions.

The Less we involve the community the better in my view , it's track record is fairly appalling

BoatMad

Donald Trump wrote: »

Good man there Charles Bronson
The whole point of a justice system is also to protect people like you from yourselves.

Donald Trump wrote: »

I think that that very important historical document gave the Japanese peasants rights to draw comics or some such shite

Fingers and iPhones do not make for good spelling especially with apple spellcheck interfering

realdanbreen

eigrod wrote: »

Appalling leniency.

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

Nice bit of Sinn Fein dirty tricks there bud. Thing is people stopped falling for that years ago!