Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

I think justice was served here.

Options
13468924

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    I'm open to correction here but a court determined he was a flight risk because flights to Brazil were booked in the immediate aftermath of the incident were a 16 year old kid was killed at his hands.

    He had a case to answer. If he got on that flight he was gone for good. Then you would be complaining about the justice system allowing him to leave etc.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Fair play to the Brazilian guy. This country is far too lenient towards feral and criminal scum. I have yet to visit Dublin once in the past 10 years and not be subjected to an unwanted interaction with some tracksuit wearing brute. If it were allowed, I would keep a gun or two in my home for self-defense purposes and have no qualms whatever about using it on any intruder. I think it is wrong for the state to try to monopolize violence when it cannot protect citizens in the moment when they are attacked.



  • Registered Users Posts: 56,244 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    You may agree of disagree with the verdict, but the system here did not break.

    The DPP/state (after considering all the facts) decided the man had a case to answer. Read up on the facts that we know about. The prosecution argued he was OTT in defending himself.

    The man knew he had a knife on him, and pursued individuals with the knife on him (he had to know that there could then be aggro), and he then produced that knife to do damage. Yes, he will say self defence, but why go there and pursue knowing you have a knife on you and that you may use it.

    Anyone dismissing this out of hand and slating the DPP for bringing it is way off.

    Post edited by walshb on


  • Registered Users Posts: 506 ✭✭✭asdfg87


    To say its fair to be in prison for 18 months and be innocent "fair" i have to disagree...



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,222 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    I agree the verdict was correct. As someone who lives in the area, those gangs of young lads on bikes and scooters roaming the area were really threatening, even when it wasn't you they were targetting. I had seen them chase food delivery guys before this happened.

    You would have to question all the parents who didn't give a **** that their kids were out of home at night during a lockdown doing God knows what.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 506 ✭✭✭asdfg87


    I am talking about what happened, youn are talking of what might happen. Of course there was a case to answer assault and causing harm, i expect if this was the charge it would have being prosessed quickly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,733 ✭✭✭Allinall


    Why would they only charge him with assault and causing harm- if that is even a charge?

    He killed a guy with a knife. Murder was the correct charge.



  • Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Ham_Sandwich


    Disgusting and racist comments here, a young boy ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time and is stabbed to death buy a grown man and people are cheering because its technicly "self defence" sickened I am.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    I can't believe he had temerity to pursue a bike thief who had just stolen a bike. Surely the correct course of action is to ring the gardai and be told that there's nothing they can do

    The jury said self defence as his actions were justifiable. The DPP pursued the case as there's nothing that scares them more than someone "talking the law into their own hands" rather than accepting that they should just be good little victims



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    "What might happen "

    Flights to Brazil were booked in the immediate aftermath of this incident. That is fact. A court determined he was a flight risk based on that fact so bail was denied. Correct course of action.

    Assault and causing harm doesn't wash as a charge when there is a body in the morgue.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ Madison Shapely Duet


    I don’t think that it is unreasonable that a person accused of murder who is also a flight risk, should be remanded before their trial.

    My opinion is that the outcome of the trial was fair.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,658 ✭✭✭Nermal


    Think of the money lavished on social programmes for the teenage gangs in the East Wall, and the opportunities available to them that they carelessly spurn. Contrast it with the drive of someone who travelled half-way round the world to work a low-wage job to advance himself.

    True justice would see him well compensated for his year and a half of imprisonment. Fund it from the taxpayer donations made to Dublin 3.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,991 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Anyone that thinks that they know better than those 12 persons that unanimously found the man not guilty after seeing and hearing more than anyone needs a long hard look at themselves.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,385 ✭✭✭corner of hells




  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    16 is not a young boy

    Being part of a gang that is assaulting a man is not the wrong place at the wrong time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 56,244 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    You can agree with the verdict and also not slate the DPP for bringing the case.

    I respect the jury’s verdict.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,473 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    I think there would have been huge pressure on the DPP to bring a trial for "political" reasons.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,250 ✭✭✭monseiur


    The Brazilian was not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. Trouble was brewing for some time and he decided that enough was enough and took a stand and was deliberately armed for the purpose. The fact that he has already served some time in jail and is unlikely to reoffend a suspended sentence may be the correct verdict in law. I agree 100% that the court was right in setting him free. I can't but wonder what the courts verdct would be if the victim was from a different socio - economic class, say a Blackrock student.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,232 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    My question about compensation was genuine, because I don't actually know. There is provisions in law about excessive unlawful detention incorporated into our statute in the past 10 - 20 years from European and Human Rights rulings.

    But the question remains, a person had his liberty removed from him for a rather long period of time for a crime he was found not guilty of. That is of the upmost seriousness. A persons liberty in this state is a fundamental right.

    Everyone can be deemed a flight risk to be fair, I'm reminded of what appears to be a more "blatant" case recently where the same thing was suggested in denial of bail, this was won on appeal. But then again their was expertise and money to back that up. That all said I haven't found anything to suggest he was denied bail, so maybe he didn't apply for it.

    The murder charge was as a flimsy as a case I have seen, the Judge should have stepped in and quashed it and put the charge of Manslaughter to the Jury.

    The Jury's questions of why key witnesses were not giving evidence was very pertinent and not answered.

    It was a complete mess by the prosecution, summed up by the fact that someone cycling a bike doing their job having rocks thrown at them was characterised as "low level" aggression. Room lost at that point I'd say.

    Sad case, with absolutely no winners.

    Ironically the accused grew up in the slums of Rio but had a very supportive family that kept him out of trouble.

    There is a lesson there.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Justice has been served. Hopefully this will send a message to those who attack people who are doing their job.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,597 ✭✭✭✭For Forks Sake




  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Nah you can't question parents for anything. Sure they all do their best for the angles.

    Racist for... Defending the brown foreigner or?...

    Wrong place wrong time. Yup, he was more than 2km from home during lockdown. You're 100% correct. He then try to jump someone him and his buddies outnumbered. My dad heard the nonsense snippets in the media during the trial (Jesus they love shaping bullshit) and was thought it was awful. When he was acquitted and I mentioned there was CCTV showing what happened and the jury even acquitted him of assault then yeah, he was like "But why did they print all that?".

    Anyway, some more details https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/george-bento-murder-trial-what-the-jury-didnt-hear-41753432.html

    Some good quotes, his defence counsel:




  • Registered Users Posts: 11,473 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    Just a low level scuffle is all with broken teeth and a broker nose and a robbed bike, ah boys will be boys after all...



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,826 ✭✭✭monkeybutter


    the guy on the moped mostly likely got off scott free, right



  • Registered Users Posts: 9 11112


    I am delighted for him . A bunch of them stoned me a couple of years ago . Nearly lost an eye, it is still sore and I have just recently added another problem to my eye. One pupil bigger than the other , just like David Bowie.

    I bet the **** out of her , a 12 old girl. I had some explaining to do to the guards, but they didn't charge me.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ Madison Shapely Duet


    What political reasons?

    A person was killed, and a trial of the person accused of the killing took place. Where is the politics?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,067 ✭✭✭✭fryup


    Surely he'll have to leave Ireland or at least Dublin after this, he may be a target for reprisals?



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    The DPP could have decided not to proceed but they did. Because the DPP sees self defence in an extreme situation as the public "taking the law into their own hands" or, to be more accurate, as taking the law out of their hands.

    The instruments of the Irish state tend to do this, allow lawlessness to run riot and then react when ordinary people protect themselves



  • Registered Users Posts: 648 ✭✭✭MakersMark


    I'm genuinely shocked that some posters think this guy somehow "got off".


    He defended himself from potentially being murdered by a pack of uncontrolled animals.


    I hope the bleeding hearts are never forced into such a situation.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,473 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    Political reasons like a foreign adult killing a 16 year old from what could be deemed a poor socio economic circumstance. Pressure from the family, community, local councillors etc on DPP.. Show trials often happen for political reasons, the state has to be seen to seek justice no matter the cost or likelihood of the outcome. I don't know if it was the case here but it was a relatively high profile case so could understand if the DPP felt compelled to act in some way.

    Trials are expensive, people often get killed by someone else and no trial happens. Look at the burden of proof needed for the Sophie Toscan Du Plantier murder.



Advertisement