Double Rapist gets 12 year sentence, Judge decides to suspend 3 years why?



carruthers

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
4,143
Is it possible to save the taxpayers money by deporting him at the end of 12 years?
12 years with three suspended and 25% remission I think? So closer to seven years or around the same seriousness as re-labelling garlic... Go figure as they'd say in the US. This creep has previous so once again it's a pathetic sentence. I truly hope he is deported on completion of his sentence.
 

Barrycelona

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
310
No the Judiciary have a tolerance for sex crimes no matter what colour, race or ethnic group the rapist comes from.
Two young woman go out on the town for a night out. They get plastered and start looking for drugs from a stranger, the stranger says he got some''e's'' back at his flat, if they want to come back with him, they can have some, so they go back (RTE news report) Based on reading reports from previous trials, I reckon the Judge suspended 3 years because both women showed no personal responsibility for their actions and in my opinion he was right. But he should have made that clear in court. All Judges should have to explain why they are suspending part of the sentence.

Of course I agree that rape should carry a severe penalty and criminals who carry out such crimes should be more publicly exposed after their release to protect the public i.e. people living near them should be made aware.

I cannot understand why the judge only imposed the sentence and did not make the rapist pay compensation to these two women as well. I guarntee that if compensation was paid out to victims of crime, there would be less of it.
 

Dadaist

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
13,625
Two young woman go out on the town for a night out. They get plastered and start looking for drugs from a stranger, the stranger says he got some''e's'' back at his flat, if they want to come back with him, they can have some, so they go back (RTE news report) Based on reading reports from previous trials, I reckon the Judge suspended 3 years because both women showed no personal responsibility for their actions and in my opinion he was right. But he should have made that clear in court. All Judges should have to explain why they are suspending part of the sentence.

Of course I agree that rape should carry a severe penalty and criminals who carry out such crimes should be more publicly exposed after their release to protect the public i.e. people living near them should be made aware.

I cannot understand why the judge only imposed the sentence and did not make the rapist pay compensation to these two women as well. I guarntee that if compensation was paid out to victims of crime, there would be less of it.
So he should get a lesser sentance because the women came to his home willingly. Would it have made any differnce to you if he had offered them an after closing hour drink, instead of some commonly used ecstacy. I'm not sure where you are going with this. Two women going to a single mans flat, looking to party, I don't see the issue. They are adults, after all. If the man then drugs and rapes them, all the reponsibility for the crime is on him. Again I don't see how the judge would reduce the sentance on the grounds that the women came to his flat willingly.

Compensation was offered to the women, they refused and I think it is obvious why.
 

Barrycelona

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
310
So he should get a lesser sentance because the women came to his home willingly. Would it have made any differnce to you if he had offered them an after closing hour drink, instead of some commonly used ecstacy. I'm not sure where you are going with this. Two women going to a single mans flat, looking to party, I don't see the issue. They are adults, after all. If the man then drugs and rapes them, all the reponsibility for the crime is on him. Again I don't see how the judge would reduce the sentance on the grounds that the women came to his flat willingly.

Compensation was offered to the women, they refused and I think it is obvious why.
Maybe you should read my post again!

Two women going to a single mans flat, looking to party....... Plastered and looking to do drugs and you don't see the issue. Is that the norm today? If that is the norm, is it any wonder there are so many fatherless children around today.

Of course all the reponsibility for the crime is on him, the rapist and a lot more besides and he was lucky to get off so lightly. I was making the point that each criminal action should also carry a monetary fine, as well as a prison sentence. Hit them where it hurts!
 

The Owl

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
2,901
From the RTÉ News article linked in the OP:

"Garg met two intoxicated women outside a Dublin nightclub at 3am on 2 July 2011."

"He lured them back to his rented room at Whitefriar Place by promising them ecstasy, but instead he drugged them and raped them."

My emphasis.
So what you are saying is they deserved to be raped. Right. No surprise there for me that you would think that. You make me vomit.


No, my point is that intoxicated women are in no fit state to mind themselves.
Women who are drunk, which is a legal drug, and make a drunken decision to accompany a man to his home for drugs as claimed, were not to know that the man they had obviously been charmed by was a known international rapist. They were drunk, then drugged by this rapist, but still they tried to resist the sexual abuse. So according to your little sick mind these girls "asked for it". Does a drunken pedestrian who is killed by a drunken driver "ask for it" too. Or the wife of a drunken husband deserve to get her head bashed in because she says something he doesn't like, or doesn't do something he wants.

You are one sick dude. You really are. I cannot believe there are still neanderthals like you roaming this world.
 

dresden8

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
14,598
Two young woman go out on the town for a night out. They get plastered and start looking for drugs from a stranger, the stranger says he got some''e's'' back at his flat, if they want to come back with him, they can have some, so they go back (RTE news report) Based on reading reports from previous trials, I reckon the Judge suspended 3 years because both women showed no personal responsibility for their actions and in my opinion he was right. But he should have made that clear in court. All Judges should have to explain why they are suspending part of the sentence.

Of course I agree that rape should carry a severe penalty and criminals who carry out such crimes should be more publicly exposed after their release to protect the public i.e. people living near them should be made aware.

I cannot understand why the judge only imposed the sentence and did not make the rapist pay compensation to these two women as well. I guarntee that if compensation was paid out to victims of crime, there would be less of it.
Are you saying the judge suspended because they "got what they deserved"?
 

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,633
12 years with 3 suspended is a pretty hefty sentence for rape, to be honest.

I'm surprised nobody has wondered yet if the Times of India has reported the case ;)
 

Barrycelona

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
310
So what you are saying is they deserved to be raped. Right. No surprise there for me that you would think that. You make me vomit.




Women who are drunk, which is a legal drug, and make a drunken decision to accompany a man to his home for drugs as claimed, were not to know that the man they had obviously been charmed by was a known international rapist. They were drunk, then drugged by this rapist, but still they tried to resist the sexual abuse. So according to your little sick mind these girls "asked for it". Does a drunken pedestrian who is killed by a drunken driver "ask for it" too. Or the wife of a drunken husband deserve to get her head bashed in because she says something he doesn't like, or doesn't do something he wants.

You are one sick dude. You really are. I cannot believe there are still neanderthals like you roaming this world.
You are missing the point. Nobody is arguing that the women deserved to get raped, that would be crazy. We are speculating as to why the Judge suspended 3 years of the sentence. I suggested that because rape is punished by the degree of consent involved ie two lovers 0%, this case 100%. Because the two women were drunk and possibly high, the judge probably used this info to suspend 3 years. Who Knows! That was my main point.

On a separate issue Binge drinking, doing drugs and with strangers etc etc etc etc esp given the type of society we live in, is not exactly ensuring your safety on the streets of Dublin. Women need to be more responsible and safety conscious in order to protect themselves from that type of scum. I have every sympathy for those two womenbut just wish women in general would be more responsible.
 

asset test

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
14,593
Well the question is how did he get in to the state in the first place the Judge said this when sentencing, taking from the link in the OP.

Speaking at the Central Criminal Court, Mr Justice White said "he could not ignore Garg's bad character and his previous attack on a woman in the US for which he spent time in the Los Angeles County Jail".

I don't think there is a hope in hell of an Irish person with a convictiion like that getting a visa to the States. All for one, and one for all.
 

Toidissatafu

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
1,014
12 years with 3 suspended is a pretty hefty sentence for rape, to be honest.

I'm surprised nobody has wondered yet if the Times of India has reported the case ;)
By what standards is it hefty?

Irish law based upon old colonial laws, themselves based on Norman feudal Colonial laws >> laws primarily designed to protect assets not people.
A hefty sentence! that would be death, & only inappropriate because the low life would not have to suffer for long.

The attacker is a serial rapist.
If his tattoo claim from Colverhill is true (probably his defense idea) then that is a shame.
They should have tattooed it on his forehead, so women could be well warned of his sick cowardly evil.
 

johnny365

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Messages
14,115
12 years with 3 suspended is a pretty hefty sentence for rape, to be honest.

I'm surprised nobody has wondered yet if the Times of India has reported the case ;)
Hefty sentence for raping two women? What will he serve 5 maybe 6 years?
 

johnny365

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Messages
14,115
I don't think there is a hope in hell of an Irish person with a convictiion like that getting a visa to the States. All for one, and one for all.
Its time our laws around immigration were bolstered a bit, we have enough predatory sex offenders in this state without importing them from other countries.
 

alloverbartheshouting

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
7,682
12 years with 3 suspended is a pretty hefty sentence for rape, to be honest.

I'm surprised nobody has wondered yet if the Times of India has reported the case ;)
If any friend or family member of yours ever, horribly, found herself (or himself, let's be real...) a rape victim, would you be as blasé in your commentary?
 

storybud1

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 25, 2011
Messages
6,531
Gilmore will be meeting with the Indian ambassador in the coming weeks, oh wait a minute, no he won't cos it is Irish people that were the victims and Gilmore could not give two Fooks about Irish people except when they fund his massive wages and his wifes massive wages and his wifes 500k CPO of land, and of course when he and his party lie their ass off to get their hands on the (you've guessed it) the millionaire pensions.

Labour and socialism are just fairweather friends, nothing in common just rhetoric.

There will be civil unrest in this Country within a year, enough is enough, current Labour are clearly a bunch of liberal prats that skillfully took over the party and the Shinners will eat their vote next time.
 

alloverbartheshouting

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
7,682
12 years with 3 suspended is a pretty hefty sentence for rape, to be honest.

I'm surprised nobody has wondered yet if the Times of India has reported the case ;)
If any friend or family member of yours ever, horribly, found herself (or himself, let's be real...) a rape victim, would you be as blasé in your commentary?
How am I being blasé? I'm just stating a fact
*pulls horns back in*

Okay, based on previous sentencing precedence for rape in this country, perhaps 12 years with three suspended may be a longer sentence that that which can be handed down.

However, what triggered my reaction to your post was the way that you put this, almost as though you were trivialising the crime and that serving nine years for a double rape (without time off for good behaviour) was a bit harsh.

So, if you were stating fact rather than opinion, I apologise I also add that I think that sentencing in sexual assault should be harsher and that offers of financial recompense to victims should never be tolerated by the Courts.
 

The OD

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
11,108
Why was he here in the first place if he already had a criminal record? I'm really confused here, he should never had gotten a visa, I recommend someone check out who granted it to him, from the sounds of it, his family seem to use money to solve their problems, so its hardly a stretch to imagine them capable of bribing an official.

As for the Judge, we all know Judges in this country don't see any real problem with sexual crimes, I'm still wondering who deliberately messed up the search warrant for Brian 'I like to look at images of children being raped' Curtin to ensure he got away with it.
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,157
From the RTÉ News article linked in the OP:

"Garg met two intoxicated women outside a Dublin nightclub at 3am on 2 July 2011."

"He lured them back to his rented room at Whitefriar Place by promising them ecstasy, but instead he drugged them and raped them."

My emphasis.
You really are an utter cretin, aren't you Scree.

My emphasis.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top