• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.

Is our sentencing of criminals too lenient?

Kev408

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
5,025
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0226/orourked.html

29 years to run concurrently and he gets out after 9? Why do concurrent sentences exist? Are not all victims equally damaged?

A youngfella was shot the other night in the south inner-city. In 2003 he was convicted of a horrific crime whereby he threatened to slice a girls throat. Why was he free in 2007 the first place? He had also been charged prior to that of shooting at Gardai from a stolen car (not sure if he was convicted).

Are we too lenient in sentencing criminals?
 


feargach

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
4,968
We only have space for 3000 prisoners at any one time. Every new bad guy locked up requires a "reformed" guy like our throat-slicer friend being let out.
 

The OD

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
11,091
Kev408 said:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0226/orourked.html

29 years to run concurrently and he gets out after 9? Why do concurrent sentences exist? Are not all victims equally damaged?

A youngfella was shot the other night in the south inner-city. In 2003 he was convicted of a horrific crime whereby he threatened to slice a girls throat. Why was he free in 2007 the first place? He had also been charged prior to that of shooting at Gardai from a stolen car (not sure if he was convicted).

Are we too lenient in sentencing criminals?
Depends. For a start theres the economics of it - we just dont spend enough on the justice system, a large proportion of money goes into tribunals designed to lie to us about the true exent of the corruption.

Then theres the fact that it also depends on the social 'class' of the victim and the perpetrator. If the perpetrator and/or victim is perceived as 'lower class' then the sentencing is lenient because no one of importance was hurt. If the perpetrator and or victim is perceived as 'upper class' then its much more severe.

The fact is, most judges live very far removed from the people they deal with. They look down upon vicitms and accused alike.

Justice rarely shows up in courts, not just in Ireland but around the world.

Anyone who believes otherwise is a moron.

And should chew old style razors.

Good night listeners.
 

badinage

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
776
When life imprisonment means 8-12 years, then I think you could safely say we're too soft on murderers
 

Kev408

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
5,025
badinage said:
When life imprisonment means 8-12 years, then I think you could safely say we're too soft on murderers
Then why do we not do something about it? Derry O'Rourke never expressed remorse and was quite happy to smirk at his victims.

Is it an Irish thing that we aren't appalled at flagrant injustice?
 

cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,347
Website
www.google.com
The sentencing system in this country isn't very transparent nor does it appear "precisely/scientifically" administered/determined. However nor is the jury system. But some rough sentencing guidlines, say updated every 5 years, would be useful - I don't believe these exist right now ?

I'd propose that the President of each court be responsible for them & then we'd have something semi objective to benchmark sentences against.

cYp
 

rkeane

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
109
Tbh our sentencing is a joke, life must mean life etc. As mentioned previously he never expressed any remorse, I really don't understand how he is getting released after only 9 years.
 

rkeane

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
109
Might be a good idea, the judges don't seem to live on the same planet as the people who suffer at the hands of criminals.
 

Respvblica

Active member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
212
Of course, but lets not forget the bluecollar crime and the crimes commited by our ruling establishment. Leniant? Some poor junkie gets the can but some rich politcian steals from under our very noses?
 

jcw

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
10
Respvblica said:
Of course, but lets not forget the bluecollar crime and the crimes commited by our ruling establishment. Leniant? Some poor junkie gets the can but some rich politcian steals from under our very noses?
Then both should go to jail but why is some junkie poor unfortunate for being convicted especially given that they fund their habits by mugging pensioners and various other theft methods, ie. using syringes as weapons or other acts of brutal violence?
 

EvotingMachine0197

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
8,552
feargach said:
We only have space for 3000 prisoners at any one time. Every new bad guy locked up requires a "reformed" guy like our throat-slicer friend being let out.
The revolving door prison system is a major contributor to early releases. We could easily double prison capacity and fill it. However, the cost of keeping a prisoner would have to be seen to. 150K per annum is just plain nuts. I think this is one area where some privatisation could help.

There is also the problem whereby judges issue a soft sentence in order to reduce the likelyhood of an appeal. Maybe the appeals process needs some tidying up as well.
 

DonRoche

New member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
3
either A- lockem up for good. or B- completely rehabilitate them. ie brainwashing.
 

FakeViking

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
8,932
One thing that always baffles me is the fact that a high proportion of the short-term inmates of the 'Joy are in for non-payment of fines.

This great reforming MoJ, the one with the mouth the size of Dublin Bay, has had 5 years in office, and 5 more as AJ, to introduce simple reforms that would open up many proison places for those who deserve them.
 

Kev408

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
5,025
Kev408 said:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0226/orourked.html

29 years to run concurrently and he gets out after 9? Why do concurrent sentences exist? Are not all victims equally damaged?

A youngfella was shot the other night in the south inner-city. In 2003 he was convicted of a horrific crime whereby he threatened to slice a girls throat. Why was he free in 2007 the first place? He had also been charged prior to that of shooting at Gardai from a stolen car (not sure if he was convicted).

Are we too lenient in sentencing criminals?
I forgot to mention that the guy who was shot also had 48 other convictions.
 

patslatt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
13,637
A key sentencing principle should be to imprison criminals with a record of violent crime until they are in their late thirties, an age when they would be less prone to violent acts.
 

patslatt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
13,637
However, the cost of keeping a prisoner would have to be seen to. 150K per annum is just plain nuts. I think this is one area where some privatisation could help.

----------

There are two problems with privatisation. If the private contractor can profit
hugely by providing substandard services to prisoners,he will tend to do so. That can only be corrected by frequent inspections. Second, if privatisation is successful in lowering costs per prisoner dramatically, the government would tend to put huge numbers of people in prison instead of addressing the underlying social causes such as inadequate primary education in deprived areas and inadequate social services for children in problem families.

But don't hold your breath for privatisation. The public sector unions have a veto on government actions.
 

patslatt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
13,637
However, the cost of keeping a prisoner would have to be seen to. 150K per annum is just plain nuts. I think this is one area where some privatisation could help.

----------

There are two problems with privatisation. If the private contractor can profit
hugely by providing substandard services to prisoners,he will tend to do so. That can only be corrected by frequent inspections. Second, if privatisation is successful in lowering costs per prisoner dramatically, the government would tend to put huge numbers of people in prison instead of addressing the underlying social causes such as inadequate primary education in deprived areas and inadequate social services for children in problem families.

But don't hold your breath for privatisation. The public sector unions have a veto on government actions.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
96
Frankly, they should be made pay for their own incarceration through forced labour.
 

beardyboy

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
207
irishpeoplearewhingers said:
Frankly, they should be made pay for their own incarceration through forced labour.
I agree - they should be made to pay back - but you will get every civil rights advocate screaming at you.

For the lesser, "teenage crimes" bring back the stocks. I know, I know. Middle Age brutality. But stop and think about it.

A 19 year old hard man gets to sit in stocks for about 5 hours each saturday for 4 weeks in the nearest county town. The whole country looks at him and laughs - cheap and easy. the humiliation will be enough for most
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top