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

You are forgetting what you wrote, so I'll remind you:

all women are in that situation with all men, all the time. So when she spoke up, she wasn't being reckless in the way some male posters are saying, she was doing what women do all the time when they contradict a man: taking her life in her hands. I think that imbalance of strength requires some recognition in law.

"She was doing what all women do when they contradict a man, taking her life in her hands".

As I said, place yourself in the last dispute or disagreement you had with your father, son, colleague or partner. Were you terrified? If not, why not? You said you should be.

No, out of character obviously, if the record of Crotty's character Togher has is 'exemplary' and 'disciplined' soldier'

I've said it before, but it's a pity has been labelled as a gender based crime. I'm sure it suits the government though as it's a popular issue and it ignores all the other victims of assault who saw their attackers walk out of court with a suspended sentence, if they were caught at all.

If all of these victims protested together that would have a greater impact, men and women from young to old calling for change.

And on the gender violence, pay attention that in this particular case this criminal said the victim had instigated the "attack". By speaking to him. This is well known as a gender phenomenon. Violent men often perceive women disagreeing with them, or contradicting them as an attack, or asking for violence. They don't perceive it the same way coming from men.

You hear the same excuses constantly with gender-based violence.

"I just snapped, My buttons were pushed" = someone's words provoked me to violence.

"I had too much to drink" - Alcohol excuses violence.

"It wasn't that bad" = thinking violence doesn't have serious consequences for women.

It's the same story over and over again.

That video you posted is so depressing. Just disappointing that this is even required in Irish society. Is this the norm in Dublin now? That you need to be prepared to be attacked in public at all times and watching for signals? I don't live in Ireland anymore... this couldn't be any further opposite to my daily life. Two examples

I was on a tram. A large intimidating looking man, looking a bit like this man in the video, including all the body language, was also on the tram. It's hot, busy. He was looking daggers at everyone, clearly grouchy. His backpack was taking up the seat beside him. Some people were standing. A tiny elderly woman sitting behind him tapped him on shoulder with her walking stick and asked him (angrily!) to move his bag so others could sit down. The scary fella transformed into a little lamb. Apologised profusely, took his bag off the seat, and behaved himself.

Another day my kids were having some icecream in a city, and one of them dropped a napkin on the street. I'd say 5 seconds later someone pointed it out to us, we said sorry and picked it up.

My point is that strangers correcting eachother is a fundamental part of how we all keep our cities livable and nice places to be for everyone. Relying on gardai or security to do this for us is lazy and defeatist.

It's a lot nicer to live in an environment were people stand up for others, and protect their living environment without fear of backlash, than it is to be constantly in fear of being beaten up for doing the right thing.

You have hit on the only plausible defence of Togher’s evidence - “He wasn’t asked the right question”.

If anyone says that to the Tribunal, there will be an explosion of public anger which will make the weekend’s protests look like a picnic.

Keep digging, but I’ll leave you to your fantasy world.

I know people who refused to acknowledge the court or that it had any legitimacy over them, and I backed them in that for political reaons.

I've seen people refuse to cooperate with the court because they felt that they didn't need to answer questions put to them and it cost them the case, even though they were in the right.

I've had to be a witness in an assault case and helped secure the conviction.

Whatever else was going to happen with a Commadant Inthe state army, he wasn't going to ignore a court warrant or refuse questioning.

People need to stop watching Matlock reruns

Who knows, I know neither you nor I do, so I'm not willing to speculate.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Anyone looking to make this about themselves and their own cause is driven by pure narcissism. The reason why this situation is highlighting gender based violence is because in itself is so triggering to women who have experienced the same on a day to day basis in domestic abuse scenarios. The not being allowed to have an opinion, and asking them to stop being abusive often leads to violence. These are the issues that tend to arise as part of dsgbv situations. Many women were triggered.

If you want to hop on the men are bigger victims bus by all means take a detour to I'm a victimville but with all respect, the vast majority of violent perpetrators are men. You can't take one bite of the apple and then throw the rest away when it suits.

Every part of this discussion has sought a balanced view with regard to violent conduct, not just who is affects but why it happens and how we (our country/justice system/government) are trying to approach it. It's maddening to see people ignore the reality and recognise the legislation and actions implemented over the last year or so in an attempt to deal with the growing number of violent events on our streets and in our homes.

The thought that it's not even reasonable to be permitted to discuss toxic masculinity in case someones feelings are hurt are the exact same issues that we have to contend with when dealing with dsgbv. You're not allowed to speak about it.

But Natasha did. She stood up when a judge did the same thing and dismissed her, despite the brutality of the act ignored her suffering and minimised her experience and then expected her to be grateful that he was sorry and go back about her business, nice and quiet like a good girl should.

Can you prove that you are not a murderer?

Whataboutery.

People would still be horrified, but not as emotive had it been a man attacked. Nothing wrong here, just human nature. The gender plays a part in how we react, as well as the physical capability and makeup of the person (man or woman).

The day the news story broke I was active in this thread, discussing the exact same issues with respect to a male victim of violent abuse.

That poor man. There should be minimum sentencing for falsely accusing someone of being a pedophile. Hopefullly they all get locked up for the sadistic assault they inflicted on him, but I somehow doubt 'Anto' and his ma and co will get more than a reprimand.

so the answer to that would be yes.

Because there are some people who believe that they are victims due to some invisible feminine privilege and not because men are comitting crimes.

Crotty won't be allowed to enter the US, Australia, Canada, and other countries on a visitor visa wavier system with his criminal conviction. He will have to apply at the Embassy in advance for a visitor visa, and I do believe the fact that he did not serve jail time gives him an advantage regarding securing a visitor visa (say for holidays or future work trips) ... but I'm not 100% sure about that ... does anyone know?

Tom is very big in to human rights and sees himself as working from that perspective.

Nothing wrong with human rights before we go there but it has become a hobby horse for self declared progressive activists types who are more interested in being seen to care than doing good.

Sentencing would be viewed as reactionary and counter productive, jail as not a progressive solution. The idea that the denial of liberty as just worthy as the price to pay for their crime and an attempt at restitution to a victim and also just purely as a social good in removing a threat to safety. That never occurs to them.