How is this thug allowed to roam free

recedite

Nermal wrote: »

There is no value to be gained from attempting to rehabilitate this person. He will be a drain on society his whole life. A society with morals would have only one answer to the cost/benefit analysis: a bullet.

Maybe something less extreme. Could they not set up some sort of prison industries, where these guys would work and pay for their keep?

mynamejeff

Simple fact is that his rights and his freedom is more important that your safety and your family safety.

that is what the justice system and political system are saying ,

Sam Quentin

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Clare Daly and Mick Wallace supported this guy in court during one of his many appearances. True story. The pair of drunken malcontents.

I lmao at this post...
Stopped laughing suddenly as I realised how true and sad it is.

splinter65

recedite wrote: »

Maybe something less extreme. Could they not set up some sort of prison industries, where these guys would work and pay for their keep?

That’s my idea basically. I have no idea what kind of industries but someone else probably does. 6 hours a day 5 days a week would at least go some way to covering the cost of the incarceration. If you want to go to rehabilitative courses in the prison after the evening meal then that could be facilitated

Boggles

splinter65 wrote: »

He assaulted 3 prison officers in 2017 in one incident, was found guilty of that and only got an extra 6 months.
He should have got 5 years.

Link?

splinter65

Boggles wrote: »

Link?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/pictured-irelands-most-dangerous-criminal-walks-free-38454949.html

You’d have to actually read it though boggles...

splinter65

Here’s the bit in case you “can’t see it”

At his most recent court appearance, in which he had faced charges of attacking prison staff Wright was accompanied in court by five prison officers clad in riot gear.

In that case in March 2017 he was given an extra six months for assaulting three prison officers as he attempted to headbutt the governor of the Midlands Prison.

Boggles

splinter65 wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/pictured-irelands-most-dangerous-criminal-walks-free-38454949.html

You’d have to actually read it though boggles...

splinter65 wrote: »

Here’s the bit in case you “can’t see it”

At his most recent court appearance, in which he had faced charges of attacking prison staff Wright was accompanied in court by five prison officers clad in riot gear.

In that case in March 2017 he was given an extra six months for assaulting three prison officers as he attempted to headbutt the governor of the Midlands Prison.

Relax. I hadn't seen it, I only asked in good faith.

So he got a 6 month custodial sentence for assault and an attempted head butt. So he was punished by the courts where it should be done.

In short he committed a crime, was found guilty and sentenced.

Is that not the justice system working?

splinter65

Boggles wrote: »

Relax. I hadn't seen it, I only asked in good faith.

So he got a 6 month custodial sentence for assault and an attempted head butt. So he was punished by the courts where it should be done.

In short he committed a crime, was found guilty and sentenced.

Is that not the justice system working?

The whole point of this thread is that a lot of us don’t think that 6 months for attacking prison officers is enough.
What do you think an appropriate sentence is for a violent attack on an innocent unarmed person?

Boggles

splinter65 wrote: »

The whole point of this thread is that a lot of us don’t think that 6 months for attacking prison officers is enough.

I don't think that is the point of thread at all.

splinter65 wrote: »

What do you think an appropriate sentence is for a violent attack on an innocent unarmed person?

Judges have a sliding scale for that, it depends on various variables.

But again you are going away from the point I pulled you up on, allowing the prison service to sentence people to custodial sentences for even minor infractions, that is beyond daft and quite frankly a fairly moronic policy.

You now want to talk about harsher sentencing laws, which I fully agree with.

But lets get one out of the way before we indulge in wanton conflation.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Boggles wrote: »

Relax. I hadn't seen it, I only asked in good faith.

So he got a 6 month custodial sentence for assault and an attempted head butt. So he was punished by the courts where it should be done.

In short he committed a crime, was found guilty and sentenced.

Is that not the justice system working?

Did it even affect his day of release?

Nermal

recedite wrote: »

Maybe something less extreme. Could they not set up some sort of prison industries, where these guys would work and pay for their keep?

There is no industry this man could work in where we would gain more from his labour than we would lose supervising him.

Think of the untold hundreds of thousands, quite possibly millions he has cost us... social workers, psychologists, medical professionals, police, prison officers, solicitors, barristers and judges. What a waste of resources!

Habitual violent criminals deserve the death penalty. Nothing more.

hatrickpatrick

Boggles wrote: »

Relax. I hadn't seen it, I only asked in good faith.

So he got a 6 month custodial sentence for assault and an attempted head butt. So he was punished by the courts where it should be done.

In short he committed a crime, was found guilty and sentenced.

Is that not the justice system working?

It isn't, because the sentence should be much, much, much higher and most ordinary people seem to fully agree with that statement. Sentencing in Ireland is too lenient, it's as simple as that.

hatrickpatrick

Boggles wrote: »

I don't think that is the point of thread at all.

It absolutely is. the fact that this man is being released is evidence that the justice system is too lenient. How is that not the point of this thread?

splinter65

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It isn't, because the sentence should be much, much, much higher and most ordinary people seem to fully agree with that statement. Sentencing in Ireland is too lenient, it's as simple as that.

Most decent people agree. Decent is the operative word.

Boggles

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It isn't, because the sentence should be much, much, much higher and most ordinary people seem to fully agree with that statement. Sentencing in Ireland is too lenient, it's as simple as that.

Is that an actual fact in comparison to other EU countries or simply an opinion?

I don't actually know myself. I imagine you do though?

But on the face of it I would agree with you, especially for violent repeat offenders.

sondagefaux

splinter65 wrote: »

Most decent people agree. Decent is the operative word.

Reducing crime and reducing reoffending rates should be the aim of the criminal justice system.

If that means going against our gut instincts for vengeance and operating a system more like Norway's than the USA's, then so be it.

What kind of country do you want Ireland to be? One with high crime rates and high imprisonment rates, or one with low crime rates and low imprisonment rates? One with low rates of reoffending or one with very high rates of reoffending?

Vengeance or crime reduction and a reduction in reoffending rates.

Do 'decent people' prefer more crime and higher reoffending rates?

knockers84

sondagefaux wrote: »

Reducing crime and reducing reoffending rates should be the aim of the criminal justice system.

If that means going against our gut instincts for vengeance and operating a system more like Norway's than the USA's, then so be it.

What kind of country do you want Ireland to be? One with high crime rates and high imprisonment rates, or one with low crime rates and low imprisonment rates? One with low rates of reoffending or one with very high rates of reoffending?

Vengeance or crime reduction and a reduction in reoffending rates.

Do 'decent people' prefer more crime and higher reoffending rates?

Your talking in riddles here.

This guy has 84 previous offense’s and tried to kill someone by stabbing and admitted to doing so.

Ah sure we’ll just give him a few years and hope it doesn’t happen again.

sondagefaux

knockers84 wrote: »

Your talking in riddles here.

This guy has 84 previous offense’s and tried to kill someone by stabbing and admitted to doing so.

Ah sure we’ll just give him a few years and hope it doesn’t happen again.

No riddles my friend, just pointing out that adopting a harshly punitive criminal justice system has been proven not to reduce overall crime rates and not to reduce reoffending rates.

If your aim is vengeance, so be it.

But it doesn't work and it makes a country less safe and its residents more likely to be victims of crime.

What to 'decent people' want? More crime or less crime?

Eric Cartman

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Would any of the death sentence hardshaws around here be willing to take up the role of executioner themselves if their weird fantasy were ever to become a reality?

Ohh christ yes. The more brutal the better, line up all the yobs in an orderly queue and ill keep going till the muscles in my arm are sore from hoisting the guilotine and ive run out of tears of joy as i wipe them all out

mynamejeff

sondagefaux wrote: »

No riddles my friend, just pointing out that adopting a harshly punitive criminal justice system has been proven not to reduce overall crime rates and not to reduce reoffending rates.

If your aim is vengeance, so be it.

But it doesn't work and it makes a country less safe and its residents more likely to be victims of crime.

The argument that it doesn't work elsewhere shouldn't be taken as gospel though

While I agree that the states is a mess but people who get 30 years in america rarely re offend in that 30 years (wildly different culture than ours )

Japan has a very harsh and punitive justice system which seems to work fairly well but again vastly different culturally

knockers84

sondagefaux wrote: »

No riddles my friend, just pointing out that adopting a harshly punitive criminal justice system has been proven not to reduce overall crime rates and not to reduce reoffending rates.

If your aim is vengeance, so be it.

But it doesn't work and it makes a country less safe and its residents more likely to be victims of crime.

What to 'decent people' want? More crime or less crime?

Any links to back up these claims?

So this guy has eighty something previous convictions. The short terms in prison didn’t stop him reoffending.

I don’t agree with light sentencing and never will. If you were badly stabbed and had health problems for the rest of your life and the culprit was out after a few years would you be happy?

If a person is locked up for 20 years I believe they have a less chance of reoffending than someone locked up for a few years as there in JAIL.

If this guy was locked up for 20 years at the beginning would he currently have 84 convictions?? The answer would be NO!

sondagefaux

mynamejeff wrote: »

The argument that it doesn't work elsewhere shouldn't be taken as gospel though

While I agree that the states is a mess but people who get 30 years in america rarely re offend in that 30 years (wildly different culture than ours )

Japan has a very harsh and punitive justice system which seems to work fairly well but again vastly different culturally

You can commit violent offences in prison too you know, as this guy's record shows.

But the overall statistics show that the Norwegian approach is more likely to reduce crime and reoffending rates than the US approach.

Is Ireland more like Norway than the USA?

I think it is, and becoming more so day by day.

What works for a country with a population of around 5 million, with a high degree of social cohesion and a reasonably decent welfare state is probably going to work in a nearby country with a population of around 5 million, with a high degree of social cohesion and a reasonably decent welfare state.

1874

sondagefaux wrote: »

No riddles my friend, just pointing out that adopting a harshly punitive criminal justice system has been proven not to reduce overall crime rates and not to reduce reoffending rates.

If your aim is vengeance, so be it.

But it doesn't work and it makes a country less safe and its residents more likely to be victims of crime.

What to 'decent people' want? More crime or less crime?

What you are saying doesnt add up, what do you describe as harshly punitive? locking someone up for what amounts to attempted murder seems reasonable to me? a crime so violent that it could have lead to the death of the victim? seems to have been admitted by the offender.


IMO a person should be locked up for a set sentence to serve that, if there isn't the capacity to rehabilitate them or they wont partcipate then there should be no opportunity for early release ever, no sob story of a sad upbringing should change that, no matter how accurate that is, there is no right to inflict suffering on others because of that.


I think anyone caught and sentenced the first time should be dealt a strict sentence with limited potential for early release to show them how they may spend the rest of their lives. During this time they should receive rehab and education/skills/training and make use of their time. If they refuse to participate in rehab or training then rehab should be a requirement before they can be released.
Anyone who is involved in serious crime after release, should get a strict sentence and be moved to a second tier for rehab.
For a 3rd serious offense the sentence should be without opportunity for release and strictly imposed. Eventually people will see that early release is possible under certain circumstances, treating violent criminals and potential violent criminals with kid gloves isnt helping, multiple reoffending shows that the current model does not work.

Turtyturd

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Not quite true.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/prison_system/remission_and_temporary_release.html

“Whether or not you get remission depends on your good behaviour while you are in prison”

So getting remission does have something to do with good behaviour.

Definitely the case with TR and might have been the case in the past but everybody, from those who go in and give no trouble to the worst of the worst get their quarter remission. Have seen some attempts to punish a lag with loss of remission following a p19 but any challenge and it’ll be withdrawn because remission is a legal entitlement.

1874

sondagefaux wrote: »

You can commit violent offences in prison too you know, as this guy's record shows.

But the overall statistics show that the Norwegian approach is more likely to reduce crime and reoffending rates than the US approach.

Is Ireland more like Norway than the USA?

I think it is, and becoming more so day by day.

What works for a country with a population of around 5 million, with a high degree of social cohesion and a reasonably decent welfare state is probably going to work in a nearby country with a population of around 5 million, with a high degree of social cohesion and a reasonably decent welfare state.

So, by your logic, violent criminals especially repeat offenders should be released, just because there is social cohesion and a reasonably decent welfare state? the crime doesnt matter?

knockers84

sondagefaux wrote: »

You can commit violent offences in prison too you know, as this guy's record shows.

But the overall statistics show that the Norwegian approach is more likely to reduce crime and reoffending rates than the US approach.

Is Ireland more like Norway than the USA?

I think it is, and becoming more so day by day.

What works for a country with a population of around 5 million, with a high degree of social cohesion and a reasonably decent welfare state is probably going to work in a nearby country with a population of around 5 million, with a high degree of social cohesion and a reasonably decent welfare state.

Your completely forgetting about different cultures altogether. You have to take into consideration poverty, gangs, gun legalization, culture, welfare, population, urbanization, drug trade amongst many many other things. Just because it works in Norway does not mean it will work in ever country in the world.

I’d love to see what your proposing done in Venezuela.

BorneTobyWilde

Who miss him, no one, and hopefully Chuck would not miss him either.

Eric Cartman

How anyone could advocate for a scenario where somebody with double digit convictions for violent crimes is ever allowed back on the streets is beyond me.

corks finest

Potential-Monke wrote:

Because this is our justice system. Regardless of how violent or how much of a probability there is, they will be left out. He's been left out a year early from a 9 year sentence he got in 2011. With over 250 P19's, it's unfathomable to think he is getting early release... The sooner someone offs this scum the better. And yes, he's scum. Read the article and you will see why. Admitting he deliberately tried to go for organs on the second stabbing victim, and would have only 'his bird got in the way'. Jesus suffering christ he should be locked up for life or put down.

He's out early simply because he's too much hassle for the prison service/ afraid of him