Soldier beats a woman unconscious, gets a great reference from his commanding officer, avoids jail.

HildaOgdenx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290603#Comment_122290603

That was my point.
As I said, if they were members of the Defence Forces, surely their behaviour on that night, needs to be examined too, by the Defence Forces.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290443#Comment_122290443

Because he pleaded guilty after the Gardai got hold of CCTV, his buddies were spared the embarrassment of being cross-examined on their behaviour that night.

They will be lying low but let's see if the media can track them down!

Tork

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290614#Comment_122290614

Perhaps they will? As far as I know, we don't usually hear about Defence Forces disciplinary hearings. This one, for obvious reasons, is so high profile they were left with little choice but to release a statement.

Patrick2010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290608#Comment_122290608

Wonder what his wife thinks and how he’d feel if he had daughters beaten by a random man?

amacca

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290443#Comment_122290443

If they are just standing there then in fairness I don't think much can or indeed should be done to them

They may or may not be scumbags too or they could just be easily led or maybe caught by surprise by what yer man did...

The problem is imo the people that commit the crimes aren't suffering adequate consequences.

It's been that way for decades, peopleare wandering around with 100s of previous convictions for similar offences in some cases.... something is clearly not working.

I, wrongly or rightly and I'm open to correction/debate on this think there are a number of factors at play when I hear about what I consider to be the nonsensical farce our justice system has fallen into

In no particular order, ie: not sure how true or how much of an influence these factors have on where we are at the moment and I'll reserve my own opinion on these until the end and I've numbered them so it's easier to refer back

1. There is a certain lets call it "school of thought" (maybe ideology would be a better description) out there that by convicting people or handing out more robust punishment you aren't solving anything and convicting them of a crime means you are trapping them into continuing to commit crime...so therefore it's best to be lenient and try to rehabilitate.....

2. The state has failed or deliberately not created much in the way of additional prison spaces (even though population has risen) ...thus there is nowhere to put many of the offenders if they were convicted so the pressure probably comes back on the judge to only impose a prison sentence as a last resort....this is only speculation but I often wonder would a judge that handed out prison sentences like confetti at a wedding be more unpopular within the system as certain other judges that go the opposite way are outside of it....this imo is linked to an ideology that the state is better off having less and less involvement in services/institutions etc etc so less cost and less exposure to legal problems later....preferring instead privatesector (to take over stuff in its entirety it shouldnt imo) or public private partnership, or ngo etc etc....

3. The gardai (and I'm basing this on what I've witnessed over the last 30 years and stories my father/family told me etc so in fairness its anecdotal) have very little authority or incentive to deal with the recidivist low life scumbag and head the ball in the everyday scheme of things…and I personally don't blame them at all....you do your job, risk assault and then the scumbag walks out of court smiling in the end....the system creates pressures to focus on policing the generally law abiding or less problematic than tackling the more dedicated antisocial offender..taken with points 1 and 2 above this further emboldens the violent thug types and general low level low IQ scumbags.....the people more directly in contact with them/those at the coalface aren't really a threat unless things really come to head and that leads not to fear of consequences or viewing police as a necessary function for a reasonable society but derision and hatred within large parts of a community only making it a more fertile ground for more directed profitable types of criminal enterprise for the more intelligent members of the criminal fraternity

4. There are little or no meaningful consequences at the other end of the scale for white collar crime and skullduggery either (or they are not visible enough) ..... this can be motivator to, when a number of your public reps and successful wealthy prominent individuals engage in less than honourable dealings and fail to suffer consequences or it takes years and years for them to occur it can be corrosive

5. In my little head it occurs to me there will always be some level of crime, meaning there will always be a need for some level of policing, legal system etc ....however the legal profession is currently incentivised to not not catch all the fish...much better to let the little ones go and have a nice healthy source of future revenue.....we don't incentivise actually solving the problem and reward for good outcomes like a reduction in offences/crimes etc to create pressure to travel in that direction....just like we don't incentivise our public representatives to travel in the right direction....they are only incentivised to get re-elected by any means and then you get a hodge podge of sometimes good sometimes highly questionable actions etc...I think this one is probably the weakest but can't help wondering if there's a grain of truth that part of the system itself wants to keep a healthy supply of scrotes at the ready rather than apply consequences or reform the maximum number

Anyway...there you have it, my outline on how I think the whole thing has degenerated into a dysfunctional system and anyone that tries to change it will face an uphill struggle.

Fwiw this amateur (possibly naeive moron) thinks there could be a gradual incremental remedy for this

If you can't increase prison spaces etc and sentences mean they can't get a job etc then there still needs to be consequences.......for the ones on social welfare that come to the attention of the law repeatedly (multiple convictions) then a gradual reduction in the social welfare payments and then if they show up after that for offences related to making money other ways (drug dealing, robbery etc) then you do go to prison or if its such a holiday for some as we often hear then you work at something unpleasant (away from people's houses so you don't get to case your next joint etc)

There has to be some form of real consequences .....there's a whole cohort of people out there that can get creative when it comes to letting people off I see no reason why we can't be a little creative when it comes to consequences for being a **** too....there needs to be an occasional stick as well as plentiful carrots too

And mandatory jail terms for serious violent offences might help too....if you rape or assault someone and it can be proven and there are little or no excuses beyond a hard life/childhood or simple thuggery then you should do the time....drugs or temporary insanity etc shouldn't be a defence either and it shouldn't matter what section of society you come from....you should have to see consequences.

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290648#Comment_122290648

It's a pity the Irish Mirror didn't try that on the doorstep. They could have asked the father if he was annoyed Cathal was the only one identified when his friends were there and didn't intervene.

I'm sure he'd have been delighted to try to spread the blame. They could have names and pictures of all of them, or at least names and pictures of their houses.

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290656#Comment_122290656

I'd imagine she's of a similar ilk tbh.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290588#Comment_122290588

Then why did he give one?

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290670#Comment_122290670

He didn't. He was cross examined and asked a question.

A character reference is a very specific thing.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290675#Comment_122290675

So when Togher said the incident was out of character for Crotty he wasn't actually speaking about Crotty's character.

Ok.

Field east

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290656#Comment_122290656

was he married . Or if he had a sister, , female friend or cousin beaten up

HildaOgdenx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290654#Comment_122290654

I would hope so, and yes, I would not expect it to be public knowledge.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290608#Comment_122290608

Absolute media gold!

At this point Cathal Crotty, who had retreated inside the house, shouted at his father and said: “Dad will you shut up talking there and send him away.”

He's right - Dad dug an even deeper hole for him by telling the truth - the suspended sentence is practically an acquittal in the eyes of most defendants. And they are not wrong. So long as he doesn't get done for another serious crime in the next three years.

Blaming the media is guaranteed to keep his son's case on the front pages for months, maybe years, to come.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290685#Comment_122290685

He was asked a question and was obliged to answer it truthfully. He cannot control what questions he is asked.

A character reference is a specific thing, just like a victim impact statement. This wasn't that.

Leg End Reject

In that IM article Natasha is quoted as saying she has been advised it's unlikely the DPP will appeal because the sentence isn't excessively lenient.

WTF?

aloyisious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290694#Comment_122290694

In passing, the DF statement in today's Irish Indo report on the trial and conviction of Cpl Crotty for the assault on Natasha O'Brien confirmed what you wrote, that officers attending in court as liaison officers for the DF are not allowed give character references for the accused, they are there to provide information, if requested, of the accused person's career, to date, in the DF.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290694#Comment_122290694

He can control his answers.

This has already been done in the thread, people tried to handwave away what Togher said and none of it stands up to scrutiny, the handwaving has to keep changing and becomes contradictory. First he had to be there, then its only a DF regulation not a legal obligation, then actually he was called by the defense, but then its not a trial and he isn't a witness, but then he is a witness, then he has to read out the service record, but actually he doesn't have to do that, he only has to answer questions.

Then a poster who was charged with the same offence says that his attending officer didn't do what Togher did at all.

The quotes are there, Togher chose his words and they spoke glowingly to the character of Crotty.

Fakediamond

there was no trial so why was the CO giving evidence at all?

extra-ordinary_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290692#Comment_122290692

the suspended sentence is practically an acquittal in the eyes of most defendants. And they are not wrong.

They are wrong, they have a criminal conviction and a criminal record. (In short, they're a crim)

walshb

Folks can dress up Togher’s words whatever way they want. He had nothing but complimentary things to say about that toerag, save him being “disappointed.” He absolutely overstepped the mark in my view. He was there to assist Crotty. And he did assist him..

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290315#Comment_122290315

If the friends had told the truth, there'd have been no need to wait for the CCTV coverage to show up his lies. So unless they all claimed to have been struck blind during the attack, they must have backed up his version.

Patrick2010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290690#Comment_122290690

I was commenting on the culprits father

Witcher

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290801#Comment_122290801

They didn't have to say anything, there is no obligation on them or any witness to a crime to provide a statement.

Juran

The guy who attacked Nanci Poloski's husband in their California home is expected to recieve a life sentence in the coming weeks.

If he committed that crime here, he'd be enjoying his 99 cone by the beach this summer.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290759#Comment_122290759

It was a sentencing hearing

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290755#Comment_122290755

He can control his answers and his answers must be truthful. I haven't the slightest idea about the guy's service record, but if his service in the defence forces was indeed exemplary and the officer was asked about that than that is the answer he should give. Defence barristers are not fools, they curate their questions to get the answers they want.

It is then up to the judge to actually pass judgement/sentence.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290694#Comment_122290694

So he was forced to say glowing things about him - he couldn’t have said “his most recent report was excellent but what he’s done in that video is shocking to me”.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290851#Comment_122290851

He was obliged to answer the questions he was asked. You don't get to just randomly insert your own observations

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122290861#Comment_122290861

Sure yeah, spin away. It’s a sentencing hearing - are you trying to say the State prosecutor couldn’t have asked about hie opinion on his character ??

Witcher

..