• 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 us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

Michael McAleavey freed yesterday.




Mar Tweedy

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
625
I think 27 years is sufficient in this case especially as there appears to be no risk of reoffending. The man has done his time.
 

drjimryan2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,721
lets get the facts straight....

hes 'free' on licence.....
he has served 27 years...not long ago, some murderers only served 7-10 years

there is nothing to suggest that if he was in prison in the south, we would not have released him too......

time served...
 

BlowIn

Active member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
267
I think 27 years is sufficient in this case especially as there appears to be no risk of reoffending.
I do hope you are right. But I think the prospect of him wigging out in a few years to come and shooting a couple of other people dead is still there. The depth of disturbness that must be present to shoot three of your own comrades dead mut be very hard to reach.

he has served 27 years...not long ago, some murderers only served 7-10 years
The fact that murders have served less time for worse is a mark of our deeply flawed justice system.

I suppose it comes down to the true reason for our penal system is it there to rehabilitate or punish?
 

Twin Towers

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
5,882
A friend of mine spent time with him in Mountjoy and said Mad Mick was the only person he'd ever met that was pure evil and he terrified all the inmates. Strange to see him described in the media as a model prisoner.
 

BlowIn

Active member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
267
Troll thread.
Not at all odie1, I'm just intereted to see what others think, I am all ways open to what others think.
 

thebig C

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
856
Certainly 27 years is more then most murderers get, unfortunately. However, in the context of 3 lives ended, its nothing!
 

cricket

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
13,959
Fact is that if he served 40 years , survived and was released, relatives of victims would still be very upset. That's just human nature.
 

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,871
Certainly 27 years is more then most murderers get, unfortunately. However, in the context of 3 lives ended, its nothing!
He did 11 years at first. He was re-arrested and jailed again.
 

Luke McFadden

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
30
Micheal McAleavey's case is not straightforward, insofar as it involved a crime committed under military law and in circumstances that were highly unusual within the parameters of Irish criminal history.

It's unlikely that similiar circumstances that might trigger re-offending behaviour will again occur on McAleavey's life as a freed prisoner, i.e standing at a checkpoint in a UN-designated war-zone holding a loaded assault rifle and just having undergone a very stressful encounter with members of the Israeli army and then his own section corporal.

Questioned pertaining to the actual case include:

(1) There were concerns as to how McAleavey, as a Northern Irish Catholic from the Falls Road, was fitting in with a Dublin-based unit of the Irish Army. Was due consideration given to his psychological suitability for service in Lebanon?

(2) Was it correct after the initial incident at Tibnine Bridge involving the Israelis for McAleavey to be allowed to remain on duty? Wouldn't it have made more sense for him to be stood down, returned to Camp Shamrock and disarmed, instead of being sent in an obvious state of agitation to stand guard at Tibnine Bridge?

(3) In a previous blog we've heard him described as 'Mad Mick' by a former prisoner. Does that mean that we now automatically believe the word of someone who has been convicted of a crime and sent to prison?

McAleavey has been vilified for far too long. He served almost two years in military prison before civilian trial (he was also court-marshalled at The Curragh) including time at Gallows Green in Lebanon and the Curragh Military Prison. During this time he was treated like a soldier under sentence and at that time the regime at the Curragh wasn't exactly the 'chain gang' but it was tough, involving daily punishment details of menial chores, military drill and high-intensity P.T. Beatings were dished out by MPs but back then there were no human rights lawyers that were interested in the welfare of Irish soldiers so the beatings mostly went unreported. There was no motive of robbery or personal gain attached to McAkeavey's crime, no aforementioned malice or intent. The man was obviously psychologically unprepared for the particular service he'd been selected for and 'cracked up' in a moment of stress. There's no other reason why he done what he done.

He's served 27 years, twice as much time as others who set out to plan and carry out vile killings for personal gain. During his imprisonment he was abused verbally for being a Northerner, had his food poisoned and was assaulted. And in the first instance he came down from the North, volunteered for the Irish Army and showed determination to serve Ireland proudly. Do we have to constantly allow the hatred of the human heart to cloud all considerations of justice and fair punishment? Many paramilitaries served paltry sentences because of the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. And the crimes in question were not done in a moment's madness.
 

mickdotcom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
826
Are any of you bleeding heart liberals members of the Defence Forces

or members of a family that have had loved ones murdered.
 

Keith-M

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
15,779
Website
www.allkindsofeverything.ie
A slight aside if hes out on licence why not the same for Malcom MacArthur
Agreed. We have left many other cold blooded killers free, so why not MacArthur? He has surely served his time. I can't help but think he's paying a very high price for the circumstances of his arrest rather than the crimes themselves.
 
Last edited:

Dohville

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
2,528
Micheal McAleavey's case is not straightforward, insofar as it involved a crime committed under military law and in circumstances that were highly unusual within the parameters of Irish criminal history.

It's unlikely that similiar circumstances that might trigger re-offending behaviour will again occur on McAleavey's life as a freed prisoner, i.e standing at a checkpoint in a UN-designated war-zone holding a loaded assault rifle and just having undergone a very stressful encounter with members of the Israeli army and then his own section corporal.

Questioned pertaining to the actual case include:

(1) There were concerns as to how McAleavey, as a Northern Irish Catholic from the Falls Road, was fitting in with a Dublin-based unit of the Irish Army. Was due consideration given to his psychological suitability for service in Lebanon?

(2) Was it correct after the initial incident at Tibnine Bridge involving the Israelis for McAleavey to be allowed to remain on duty? Wouldn't it have made more sense for him to be stood down, returned to Camp Shamrock and disarmed, instead of being sent in an obvious state of agitation to stand guard at Tibnine Bridge?

(3) In a previous blog we've heard him described as 'Mad Mick' by a former prisoner. Does that mean that we now automatically believe the word of someone who has been convicted of a crime and sent to prison?

McAleavey has been vilified for far too long. He served almost two years in military prison before civilian trial (he was also court-marshalled at The Curragh) including time at Gallows Green in Lebanon and the Curragh Military Prison. During this time he was treated like a soldier under sentence and at that time the regime at the Curragh wasn't exactly the 'chain gang' but it was tough, involving daily punishment details of menial chores, military drill and high-intensity P.T. Beatings were dished out by MPs but back then there were no human rights lawyers that were interested in the welfare of Irish soldiers so the beatings mostly went unreported. There was no motive of robbery or personal gain attached to McAkeavey's crime, no aforementioned malice or intent. The man was obviously psychologically unprepared for the particular service he'd been selected for and 'cracked up' in a moment of stress. There's no other reason why he done what he done.

He's served 27 years, twice as much time as others who set out to plan and carry out vile killings for personal gain. During his imprisonment he was abused verbally for being a Northerner, had his food poisoned and was assaulted. And in the first instance he came down from the North, volunteered for the Irish Army and showed determination to serve Ireland proudly. Do we have to constantly allow the hatred of the human heart to cloud all considerations of justice and fair punishment? Many paramilitaries served paltry sentences because of the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. And the crimes in question were not done in a moment's madness.
You forget a few minor details.
He killed 3 of his workmates.
He reloaded his gun, and went to each one, shooting them again where they lay, to make sure they were dead.
He then tried to pin it on the Israelis.
He came home, and decided to associate himself with terrorist organisations, in order to seek early release under the GFA.
He has shown NO remorse ever for murdering his colleagues.

Most importantly... he was released already.

Your timing of this post is in the poorest of bad taste, so close to the anniversaries of the murder.
 

Luke McFadden

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
30
A chara, no I'm not a member of the Defence Forces nor a 'bleeding heart liberal', merely a citizen trying to comprehend the complexities of a complex legal case ... nor did I know anything whatsoever about an anniversary. As regards links re. the above, no I'm afraid I don't have any. The incidents I mention were all reported in the mainstream media and I collated them from the archives at Pearse Street.

I have an opinion on the Malcolm McArthur case but I'm not that informed as to the prevailing legal status so wouldn't be qualified to say much on the point you raised. Mise le meas. L McF
 

mickdotcom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
826
(1) There were concerns as to how McAleavey, as a Northern Irish Catholic from the Falls Road, was fitting in with a Dublin-based unit of the Irish Army. Was due consideration given to his psychological suitability for service in Lebanon?
There were and I am informed still are loads of Soldiers from the North in the Defence Forces and in his Unit.

So there was no Anti Northern Bias .


Was it correct after the initial incident at Tibnine Bridge involving the Israelis for McAleavey to be allowed to remain on duty? Wouldn't it have made more sense for him to be stood down, returned to Camp Shamrock and disarmed, instead of being sent in an obvious state of agitation to stand guard at Tibnine Bridge
I dont like the word incident- its to clinical, lets call it what it is- the murder of 3 of his comrades.

He reported that the Israelis had attacked the checkpoint and straight away (within minuets) the Checkpoint was reinforced.

Medics and Military police arrived after the reinforcements- he was taken for medical examination to the RAP in Camp SHamrock-

the only reason that there was a delay in his being sent to the RAP was that he was given the benefit of the doubt and the Military were expecting an attack from Israeli forces.

so again another moot point-


Wouldn't it have made more sense for him to be stood down, returned to Camp Shamrock and disarmed, instead of being sent in an obvious state of agitation to stand guard at Tibnine Bridge?
He murdered his comrades at Tibnine Bridge

so how could he have beensent in an obvious state of agitation to stand guard at Tibnine Bridge.


McAleavey has been vilified for far too long. He served almost two years in military prison before civilian trial (he was also court-marshalled at The Curragh) including time at Gallows Green in Lebanon and the Curragh Military Prison. During this time he was treated like a soldier under sentence and at that time the regime at the Curragh wasn't exactly the 'chain gang' but it was tough, involving daily punishment details of menial chores, military drill and high-intensity P.T. Beatings were dished out by MPs but back then there were no human rights lawyers that were interested in the welfare of Irish soldiers so the beatings mostly went unreported. There was no motive of robbery or personal gain attached to McAkeavey's crime, no aforementioned malice or intent. The man was obviously psychologically unprepared for the particular service he'd been selected for and 'cracked up' in a moment of stress. There's no other reason why he done what he done.
Its Court Martial;

He never claimed he was beaten, never reported it-there is no mention of it
anywhere- how do you know he was beaten.- do you know him personally.

The 2 year wait was because it was hard to gather evidence from the Lebanon,
I actually dont think it was a 2 year wait- but if you say so.

Do you think that a man suspected of 3 murders with no address in this state should have been let out on bail.

lets face it- he slyly killed 3 of his comrades and tried to blame it on the Israeli Army- he was an openly racist person,

He served 9 years for each murder and he has never once shown any
remorse-

There is no doubt that he murdered these men- yet he never once
said sorry or offered a plauisble explanation.

Whilst in Portlaiose he joined the various ira factions because its believed he wanted to come under the terms of the good friday agreement.



The timing in bringing up this thread again is at best suspicious and at worst
a cynical move.
 

Desperate Dan

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
5,741
I think everyone should read the transcripts of his trial it might enlighten everyone, his situation was not ideal nor his harrasment with his unit, then that is not an excuse for what he did, but under the circumstance his bosses did not see any reason to deploy him to active services.
 

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top