Tom Humphries: Guilty of child abuse

BoatMad

anna080 wrote: »

Imagine that. Taking his loss of reputation as a mitigating factor. Surely that's a just consequence of being a paedo?

I personally accept it's the judges professional judgement to form an opinion as regards to punishment based on all factors . After all it's why we pay them the big bucks ! Alternatively we could dismiss judges and apply the " duck test " to all sexual crimes.

retro:electro

BoatMad wrote: »

I personally accept it's the judges professional judgement to form an opinion as regards to punishment based on all factors . After all it's why we pay them the big bucks ! Alternatively we could dismiss judges and apply the " duck test " to all sexual crimes.

Would you feel the same if she was your daughter?

BoatMad

Red_Wake wrote: »

The fact he used his relationship as her GAA coach to groom her has not received any scrutiny. Bear in mind that she believes he got her number via the GAA.

Their relationship as player-coach is at most a footnote in any article. 

This has not been discussed at all in the media, and I would be very wary of how easily the GAA has been allowed to distance itself from this predator. As an organisation which has access to thousands of impressionable children, it is only right that it's role in this be scrutinised[bear in mind Humphries himself wrote about the problem of paedophiles in the GAA], as it was with the RCC and Swim Ireland.

Yes indeed, but presumably this was covered in the trial.

I am very wary of trial by public opinion. It's almost always wrong , most likely the GAA is completely innocent in this regards and attempts , without any evidence to the contrary tomdraw them into it are highly dubious

Shurimgreat

BoatMad wrote: »

I don't see a single post defending humphries

I do see many posts defending the judicial system.

But hey I'm related to the second shooter in Las Vegas if you must know

Ps stop slinging dirt , it's very obvious

BS.
You said in some countries it wouldn't even be a crime as she'd be above the legal age of those countries. If that's not defending him I don't know what is.

BoatMad

anna080 wrote: »

Would you feel the same if she was your daughter?

See my post about this above , the justice system exists to stop me rounding up my mates and hanging the likes of humphries.

I am not defending him or his crime , I am defending the rights of the judicial system to consider a specific crime and taking into account all factors arrive at a punishment

I personally might not like it , but the system is more important then just my views

CeilingFly

lawred2 wrote: »

14/15/16 is the definition of a young child. Your equivocation is creepy.

so you think someone who sexually abuses a 5 year kid should get the same sentence as someone who takes advantage of a 16 year old?

I find that quite disturbing.

Someone who abuses a 5 year old should get minimum 20 year.

Red_Wake

BoatMad wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

The fact he used his relationship as her GAA coach to groom her has not received any scrutiny. Bear in mind that she believes he got her number via the GAA.

Their relationship as player-coach is at most a footnote in any article. 

This has not been discussed at all in the media, and I would be very wary of how easily the GAA has been allowed to distance itself from this predator. As an organisation which has access to thousands of impressionable children, it is only right that it's role in this be scrutinised[bear in mind Humphries himself wrote about the problem of paedophiles in the GAA], as it was with the RCC and Swim Ireland.

Yes indeed, but presumably this was covered in the trial.

I am very wary of trial by public opinion. It's almost always wrong , most likely the GAA is completely innocent in this regards and attempts , without any evidence to the contrary tomdraw them into it are highly dubious

Most likely they are, but it's worth scrutinising their role to avoid such a predator taking advantage of them again.

Bear in mind, Humphries met and most likely identified his victim through his volunteering in the GAA.

Shurimgreat

Red_Wake wrote: »

The fact he used his relationship as her GAA coach to groom her has not received any scrutiny. Bear in mind that she believes he got her number via the GAA.

Their relationship as player-coach is at most a footnote in any article. 

This has not been discussed at all in the media, and I would be very wary of how easily the GAA has been allowed to distance itself from this predator. As an organisation which has access to thousands of impressionable children, it is only right that it's role in this be scrutinised[bear in mind Humphries himself wrote about the problem of paedophiles in the GAA], as it was with the RCC and Swim Ireland.

I think the victim definitely has a very serious case for compensation from the GAA. They let her down badly. And you are right about the closing of ranks in the GAA.

Being a member of the GAA seems to equate to sainthood in Ireland. It acts as a cover for some very disturbed individuals. I suppose some people get a thrill from doing their deeds in plain sight.

retro:electro

BoatMad wrote: »

See my post about this above , the justice system exists to stop me rounding up my mates and hanging the likes of humphries.

I am not defending him or his crime , I am defending the rights of the judicial system to consider a specific crime and taking into account all factors arrive at a punishment

I personally might not like it , but the system is more important then just my views

Why don't you answer my question?

BoatMad

Shurimgreat wrote: »

BS.
You said in some countries it wouldn't even be a crime as she'd be above the legal age of those countries. If that's not defending him I don't know what is.

You're just dirt slinging , attempting to associate people with an offender from n order to tarnish them

Cheap trick

I Simply pointed out , as a follow onfrom another posters comments about the uk, that the sexual act he was convicted on, would not have been an offence , in those countries, I didn't comment on the grooming because many countries have different approaches.

This was in the context of trying to point out that all crimes have mitigating circumstances that must be considered by a judge

But hey, maybe Ryan's in parkgate street should start selling torch oil

retro:electro

"It would be difficult not to have some sympathy for him".

Judge O' Connor you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.

BoatMad

anna080 wrote: »

Why don't you answer my question?

I have already done so in this thread ( see my mention of shotgun earlier ) I saw no point in duplicating my post

lawred2

CeilingFly wrote: »

so you think someone who sexually abuses a 5 year kid should get the same sentence as someone who takes advantage of a 16 year old?

I find that quite disturbing.

Someone who abuses a 5 year old should get minimum 20 year.

I'm not going to object to twenty years for a pedophile.

Were you expecting me to disagree with you?

I also think the person that grooms a 14 year old and subsequently sexually abuses them should see something roughly similar. A good deal more than 2.5 years anyway.

Carry on being disturbed if you like.

BoatMad

anna080 wrote: »

"It would be difficult not to have some sympathy for him".

Judge O' Connor you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.

Woe betide we should listen to a female judge and select a single comment from a whole trial

BoatMad

lawred2 wrote: »

I'm not going to object to twenty years for a pedophile.

Were you expecting me to disagree with you?

I also think the person that grooms a 14 year old and subsequently sexually abuses them should see something roughly similar. A good deal more than 2.5 years anyway.

Carry on being disturbed if you like.

Obviously you place far less value on human life and premeditated murder.

Oh the santity of moral outrage,except of course when it disappears when we actually needed it.

lawred2

BoatMad wrote: »

Obviously you place far less value on human life and premeditated murder.

Oh the santity of moral outrage,except of course when it disappears when we actually needed it.

do I?

do I really?

ok... you're going on ignore.

Shurimgreat

BoatMad wrote: »

You're just dirt slinging , attempting to associate people with an offender from n order to tarnish them

Cheap trick

I Simply pointed out , as a follow onfrom another posters comments about the uk, that the sexual act he was convicted on, would not have been an offence , in those countries, I didn't comment on the grooming because many countries have different approaches.

This was in the context of trying to point out that all crimes have mitigating circumstances that must be considered by a judge

But hey, maybe Ryan's in parkgate street should start selling torch oil

Are you going to sign off every post with a snide remark about hanging, lynching or burning at the stake?

BoatMad

lawred2 wrote: »

do I?

do I really?

ok... you're going on ignore.

I'm trembling , cutting yourself off from opinion , however you feel about it , must be the ultimate in social media self delusion

BoatMad

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Are you going to sign off every post with a snide remark about hanging, lynching or burning at the stake?

As long as you debate disingenuously , yes

Are Am Eye

BoatMad wrote: »

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.

This has nothing to do with the point you were asked to source and reference. So we've demonstrated you're making stuff up.

BoatMad

Are Am Eye wrote: »

This has nothing to do with the point you were asked to source and reference. So we've demonstrated you're making stuff up.

I have no intention of reaching for my various books and transposing passages to simply satisfy your curiosity

I have outlined in simple form why advanced societies created a juducal system and the point of separating that system both from the community on a day to day basis and similarly rulers and monarchs.

retro:electro

BoatMad wrote: »

I have already done so in this thread ( see my mention of shotgun earlier ) I saw no point in duplicating my post

Hmmm I don't see you answering that anywhere..

BoatMad

anna080 wrote: »

Hmmm I don't see you answering that anywhere..

Look back , I was asked the same question previously

( and it's a old and outdated debating trick to try and personalise it )

retro:electro

BoatMad wrote: »

Look back , I was asked the same question previously

( and it's a old and outdated debating trick to try and personalise it )

It's also an old and outdated debating trick to deflect from the question asked and talk around the point instead of actually answering what you were asked.
Grand.

tupenny

WhyTF is sinn f referred to in such threads. Leo and zappone have been claiming credit. The irony 😂

Are Am Eye

BoatMad wrote: »

I have no intention of reaching for my various books and transposing passages to simply satisfy your curiosity

I have outlined in simple form why advanced societies created a juducal system and the point of separating that system both from the community on a day to day basis and similarly rulers and monarchs.

I'm not curious. I just know you couldn't back this up...

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

...because it has no basis in fact.

And you've just conceded that you can't back it up. Have a nice evening.

BoatMad

anna080 wrote: »

It's an old and outdated debating trick to deflect from the question asked and talk around the point instead of actually answering what you were asked.
Grand.

Sheesh , look back where I directly asked the same question ( which was followed by a poster calling me Charles Bronson)

I didn't defect, but I'm not prepared to retype several,posts because you can't be bothered to scan back a few pages.

JP Liz V1

anna080 wrote: »

"It would be difficult not to have some sympathy for him".

Judge O' Connor you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.

OMG

BoatMad

Are Am Eye wrote: »

I'm not curious. I just know you couldn't back this up...



...because it has no basis in fact.

And you've just conceded that you can't back it up. Have a nice evening.

I don't know why I bother but a simplistic history of the criminal system is here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_criminal_justice

You can see for example how in the US the system evolved from community run to more federally run , especially felonies , originally in the US the criminal case had to taken by and funded by the victim.

Zebra3

lawred2 wrote: »

so if ol' Tom was unemployed and relied on the dole the judge wouldn't have taken loss of livelihood and his reputation into account and he might have got the 5 years?

The corruption of the Irish judicial system.

Allows Those Who Count to be treated differently.