# Gardai plan for the early release of violent rapist.



## bb12 (12 Jul 2010)

How can this guy be allowed out on the streets again....from what i've read he's never shown any remorse for what he did and is believed to be involved in the disappearance of all those other young women and now he's simply going to be set free? something seriously wrong with the system here i believe.

[broken link removed][broken link removed]


----------



## Complainer (12 Jul 2010)

Should be be locking people up based on what they are 'believed' to have done?


----------



## DB74 (12 Jul 2010)

No of course not but he has refused treatment whilst in prison which IMO should negate the early release for good behaviour.

We also have to waste money employing a "team of detectives" who will be "assigned to closely monitor Murphy after his release" as well as a "a dedicated inspector" who "will be appointed to monitor on an ongoing basis whether he is, in fact, living at his nominated address"


----------



## Mpsox (12 Jul 2010)

Whilst I agree he shouldn't have been released early, due to his failure to co-operate with treatment programmes, he can't be locked up because he "might" have done something. That moves us as a country into the realms of a police state/dictatorship.


----------



## Firefly (12 Jul 2010)

DB74 said:


> No of course not but he has refused treatment whilst in prison which IMO should negate the early release for good behaviour.
> 
> We also have to waste money employing a "team of detectives" who will be "assigned to closely monitor Murphy after his release" as well as a "a dedicated inspector" who "will be appointed to monitor on an ongoing basis whether he is, in fact, living at his nominated address"


 
To be fair, we'd have to employ these teams whether he got out early or not. This looks good on paper, but the reality of the statement below doesn't inspire me with confidence:

"The truth is *we don't know* what he is going to do or* where he is going to stay*," said a garda source. "We have been having a number of meetings about it."


----------



## liaconn (12 Jul 2010)

14 years for raping a woman several times and trying to kill her is a ridiculously short sentence in the first place. If Judges could sentence people to 30 years for a crime like that they might actually serve a reasonable sentence, even with time off for 'good behaviour'.


----------



## csirl (12 Jul 2010)

How come people like this dont get sectioned under the mental health acts?


----------



## bb12 (12 Jul 2010)

liaconn said:


> 14 years for raping a woman several times and trying to kill her is a ridiculously short sentence in the first place. If Judges could sentence people to 30 years for a crime like that they might actually serve a reasonable sentence, even with time off for 'good behaviour'.



i agree completely liaconn.  this woman would definitely have been dead within minutes if those hunters hadn't come along.  he should have gotten life inmo.  

i don't believe they will be able to monitor him correctly when he gets out and i just hope some other unwitting young woman out there doesn't have to pay the price in the future.


----------



## demoivre (12 Jul 2010)

Complainer said:


> Should be be locking people up based on what they are 'believed' to have done?



No we should just abolish concurrent sentences.


----------



## Purple (12 Jul 2010)

demoivre said:


> no we should just abolish concurrent sentences.



+1


----------



## Mpsox (12 Jul 2010)

Desert Island discs on BBC 4 was interesting this week, guest was a lead psychotherapist from Broadmoor.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Purple (12 Jul 2010)

Mpsox said:


> Desert Island discs on BBC 4 was interesting this week, guest was a lead psychotherapist from Broadmoor.
> 
> [broken link removed]



Let me guess, "I don't care what I have to listen to as long as I don't have any of those guys with me"?


----------



## shanegl (12 Jul 2010)

DB74 said:


> No of course not but he has refused treatment whilst in prison which IMO should negate the early release for good behaviour.
> 
> We also have to waste money employing a "team of detectives" who will be "assigned to closely monitor Murphy after his release" as well as a "a dedicated inspector" who "will be appointed to monitor on an ongoing basis whether he is, in fact, living at his nominated address"



As opposed to all the money spent keeping him behind bars?


----------



## DB74 (12 Jul 2010)

The money is wasted on a team of detectives having to monitor. They could be doing more productive work.


----------



## Chocks away (13 Jul 2010)

demoivre said:


> No we should just abolish concurrent sentences.


I agree. The criminal, after committing one crime, works out that he may as well hung for a sheep as for a lamb.


----------



## dockingtrade (13 Jul 2010)

DB74 said:


> The money is wasted on a team of detectives having to monitor. They could be doing more productive work.


 
+1

if a team of detectives have to monitor him as in he's seen as a threat to society he shouldnt be out.


----------



## Complainer (13 Jul 2010)

DB74 said:


> The money is wasted on a team of detectives having to monitor. They could be doing more productive work.


I wouldn't believe everything I read in the Indo about this. Personally, I think it is unlikely that there will be a team monitoring this guy 24x7. The State very rarely goes to the expense and effort of this kind of monitoring for anybody - except maybe The General. It is just not feasible on an ongoing basis.


----------



## Ash 22 (25 Jul 2010)

I think the fact that this guy has refused treatment he should be kept inside. What has changed with him over the years. As I see it this guy is not fit to be left out, the brutality of his attack, no remorse shown, may have committed other murders. Imagine the fear of knowing he's living in your area and a predator like him will cover many many miles.
His brother came across well on Miriam and it must be very hard on his family


----------



## Chocks away (25 Jul 2010)

If this guy has not repented, has not voluntarily undergone treatment and could still be regarded as a danger, then could he not be committed under the mental health act. Signing on regularly at a Garda station would be in the publics' interest.


----------



## Shawady (26 Jul 2010)

Jamie Bulger's murderer got a light sentence (2 years) for viewing and swapping the most serious category of child porn.
I can't understand why his identity must remain a secret now that he has broken the conditions of his parole in this serious way.


----------



## Caveat (26 Jul 2010)

Shawady said:


> Jamie Bulger's murderer got a light sentence (2 years) for viewing and swapping the most serious category of child porn.


 
As only a technical point, I believe it was *not* the most serious category of child porn. That was the issue being made in his defence.


----------



## Shawady (26 Jul 2010)

Caveat said:


> As only a technical point, I believe it was *not* the most serious category of child porn. That was the issue being made in his defence.


 
I thought he was caught with images of different levels and some of these were described as level four, the most serious type of image?


----------



## MrMan (26 Jul 2010)

Shawady said:


> I thought he was caught with images of different levels and some of these were described as level four, the most serious type of image?


I think level 5 is the worst one, but either way he should not have a new identity once released, it's just a matter of time before he is caught for something else.


----------



## Caveat (26 Jul 2010)

I don't know about levels but my understading was that *none* of the material was considered the *most* serious type.

Anyway, a moot point as obviously all child porn is serious and no further taxpayers money should be wasted on this individual IMO.


----------



## DeeFox (26 Jul 2010)

What about electronic tagging of serious criminals?  A system whereby the tagged individuals movement can be tracked on a computerised system - maybe imposing curfews, etc.  Serious criminals could be tracked for life.


----------



## The_Banker (26 Jul 2010)

Judging by the hassle Larry Murphys brother is receiving (prompting his appearance on the Miriam O'Callaghan show on Sat night) I would think Larry Murphy would be torn assunder once he gets outs and any 24 hour surveillance will be used to protect him rather than protect the public.


----------



## micmclo (26 Jul 2010)

Watched the MOC show there on the RTE Player.

Terrible how his brother is getting treated.
Shame on the locals. Of course they have fears and concerns but the family is not responsible for the actions of Larry Murphy


----------



## demoivre (26 Jul 2010)

Shawady said:


> Jamie Bulger's murderer got a light sentence (2 years) for viewing and swapping the most serious category of child porn.



Venables was originally released on a life licence so after the two years he will have to convince a parole board that it is safe to release him into the community. Hopefully the parole board will get the decision right unlike the judge's sentence imo!


----------



## roker (26 Jul 2010)

Note: It also cost a £250,000 to change his name again


----------



## redbhoy (30 Jul 2010)

Maybe post this in askaboutlaw section and see if the experts over there have anything to say.
There will never be a change in the way 'we' deal with real criminals as then we'd have too much time to concentrate on the shortcomings of our government and the system it helps perpetuate.
Cases like Murphy and Venables help to create the climate of fear that we are subjected to on a daily basis.


----------



## Mpsox (4 Aug 2010)

Looks like he won't be moving "home" for now anyway
[broken link removed]


----------



## Ash 22 (5 Aug 2010)

Hopefully his whereabouts will be made public.


----------



## shnaek (6 Aug 2010)

Ash 22 said:


> Hopefully his whereabouts will be made public.



The Gardai are electronically tagging him because of the seriousness of his crime and lack of rehabilitation, so they will know his whereabouts all the time. This is to help prevent the possibility of his reoffending upon release, and perhaps even save someones life. The law is there after all to protect the law abiding citizen...


----------



## Caveat (6 Aug 2010)

Ash 22 said:


> Hopefully his whereabouts will be made public.


 
Why on earth would that be a good idea? Get "the mob" onto him? 

Never a good idea.


----------



## DB74 (6 Aug 2010)

So people are aware that their neighbour is a potentially violent rapist

Doesn't have to be about the "mob"


----------



## shanegl (6 Aug 2010)

Considering the treatment his brother was allegedly receiving, I'd say its all about the mob.


----------



## DB74 (6 Aug 2010)

So we can't reveal his whereabouts because of what the mob might do to him but there is no consideration given to what he might do to an innocent woman, somebody's wife or daughter or mother or sister or niece or aunt.

Is this the logic you are attempting to stand by?


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

Of course it is about the mob. Look at what happened in Wicklow recently

http://www.wicklownews.net/index.php/2010/07/protest-at-wicklow-council-buildings-over-sex-offender/


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

DB74 said:


> So we can't reveal his whereabouts because of what the mob might do to him but there is no consideration given to what he might do to an innocent woman, somebody's wife or daughter or mother or sister or niece or aunt.
> 
> Is this the logic you are attempting to stand by?


 
Of course there is consideration given but how will revealing his location make people safer? Are all the women in the area going to start carrying guns?


----------



## DB74 (6 Aug 2010)

My point still stands that people should have a right to know if their next door neighbour is a potential threat to their family and there is are very few people who would welcome Larry Murphy to their community or who would not want to know if he is their new next-door neighbour.

Where are the rights of the ordinary citizen in this case?

If the government and judiciary did their jobs properly there would be no need for a mob mentality. All ordinary people want to is be able to live their lives in peace and safety.


----------



## DB74 (6 Aug 2010)

Sunny said:


> Of course there is consideration given but how will revealing his location make people safer? Are all the women in the area going to start carrying guns?


 
No but people can be more vigilant, which is what happens when there is a spate of any type of crime in a community, be it burglaries, cars being broken into etc etc and that's without getting into physical crimes, like assaults, rapes etc.


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

DB74 said:


> My point still stands that people should have a right to know if their next door neighbour is a potential threat to their family and there is are very few people who would welcome Larry Murphy to their community or who would not want to know if he is their new next-door neighbour.
> 
> Where are the rights of the ordinary citizen in this case?
> 
> If the government and judiciary did their jobs properly there would be no need for a mob mentality. All ordinary people want to is be able to live their lives in peace and safety.


 
And what would you do if you found out? 

A child is more likely to be sexually assaulted by a family member than a stranger. We would all like to live in peace and safety but the world doesn't work like that.

Someone like Larry Murphy should not be allowed out of prison but he is and we have to deal with it. Just don't think the Evening Herald following him around publishing pictures of him is the way to keep people safe.


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

DB74 said:


> No but people can be more vigilant, which is what happens when there is a spate of any type of crime in a community, be it burglaries, cars being broken into etc etc and that's without getting into physical crimes, like assaults, rapes etc.


 
You can be vigilent anyway without knowing who is living there. What happens if there is an incident in the area and they know where Larry Murphy is. Do you think the local people will wait for justice or just reach their own conclusions?


----------



## DB74 (6 Aug 2010)

Sunny said:


> You can be vigilent anyway without knowing who is living there.


 
That is not what happens in reality and you know it. It's not human nature to be on high alert all the time.


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

DB74 said:


> That is not what happens in reality and you know it. It's not human nature to be on high alert all the time.


 
So, if you know there is an sex offender in your area, you will be more alert? Sorry to say this but there probably is a sex offender in all our areas.


----------



## DB74 (6 Aug 2010)

Comment removed because I'm not prepared to go down the route that I can see the conversation going!


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

Removed as it was in response to removed comment above.


----------



## shnaek (6 Aug 2010)

DB74 said:


> If the government and judiciary did their jobs properly there would be no need for a mob mentality. All ordinary people want to is be able to live their lives in peace and safety.



This is a good point. How much confidence does the citizen have in the judiciary in Ireland? It would be interesting to have a survey on this. Surely we should be able to say we have resounding confidence in them, and if we can't say this, then our elected legislators should take action on our behalf to make sure we can have confidence in them and our institutions of state.


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

shnaek said:


> This is a good point. How much confidence does the citizen have in the judiciary in Ireland? It would be interesting to have a survey on this. Surely we should be able to say we have resounding confidence in them, and if we can't say this, then our elected legislators should take action on our behalf to make sure we can have confidence in them and our institutions of state.


 
Not much confidence but I do feel sorry for judges sometimes. 

[broken link removed]

The system is probably wrong but trying to come up with a better alternative is above my paygrade!


----------



## Ash 22 (6 Aug 2010)

Caveat said:


> Why on earth would that be a good idea? Get "the mob" onto him?
> 
> Never a good idea.


 
The reason I would like to know if he was in my area is simply for safety sake. Take for instance going for a walk, well if you know this guy lives in your area you're not going to go alone and risk being another victim.
This is an extremely violent and dangerous man who should never be let out in the first place and his neighbours should be entitled to know he's living in their community.


----------



## Sunny (6 Aug 2010)

Again, chances are there are dangerous sex offenders (maybe not on the same level) in your area. Do you still walk alone? Knowing that this guy is in your area isn't going to make you any safer. It's what the Guards do with him that will make it safer.


----------



## Ash 22 (6 Aug 2010)

I know the guards will keep tabs on him to their level best and he's not the only dangerous guy out there as you say but he's certainly at the high end of the scale. What really frightens me is the fact he took no treatment whilst inside and showed no remorse. Has he changed atall?


----------



## salaried (8 Aug 2010)

Complainer and mpsox.Nice to know civil rights are alive and well. You should maybe think about the victim first.It is a pity that his victim is not on here to give her opinion.I am not judging MR Murphy on allegations, but on what was already proven in court.Read dockintrades post again,it makes perfect sense.Somebody somewhere said MR Murphy is ok to join the rest of us in a civilised society ,just not next door to them.If someone has to be monitored by the gardai at the end of a sentence fair enough,but allowing him four and a half years off his sentence and then having to monitor him means there is something amiss here.Demoivre I agree concurrent sentencing has to be abolished.


----------



## shnaek (9 Aug 2010)

I was reading in the times over the weekend that studies show that the chance of this type of offender - serious violent sexual assault, no remorse, no therapy - reoffending is 50:50. So I hope those advocating and facilitating his release will have the good grace to explain themselves to his next victim, God forbid, if there is one.

I often think of Manuela Riedo in Galway, and how her life would have been saved had our system of Justice not been so lenient on violent criminals. A very sad case, and one which shows that her life, and the lives of other decent citizens, are less important than the lives and creature comforts of rapists and murderers. Murphy even managed to get himself a new drivers license! A man who used his car as a tool of rape. That is our system, as bad as our politics.


----------



## dusmythb (10 Aug 2010)

Correct me if im wrong but the maximum sentence a judge can pass for rape is life, correct? So lets assume this applies to the higher end of the scale.

(Parole on a life sentence is then at the discretion of the parole officer and is dependant on the risk posed by the offender.)

Larry Murphy is convicted of kidnap, multiple rape and attempted murder. He gets 15 years. 

Who was this sentencing judge?


----------



## redbhoy (10 Aug 2010)

[broken link removed])

The Just Us system in Ireland isnt there to protect the Population, its there to maintain the status quo.


----------



## Mpsox (10 Aug 2010)

salaried said:


> Complainer and mpsox.Nice to know civil rights are alive and well. You should maybe think about the victim first.It is a pity that his victim is not on here to give her opinion.I am not judging MR Murphy on allegations, but on what was already proven in court.Read dockintrades post again,it makes perfect sense.Somebody somewhere said MR Murphy is ok to join the rest of us in a civilised society ,just not next door to them.If someone has to be monitored by the gardai at the end of a sentence fair enough,but allowing him four and a half years off his sentence and then having to monitor him means there is something amiss here.Demoivre I agree concurrent sentencing has to be abolished.


 
I'm really not sure what you read into my comments given that you actually managed to agree with me when I said I didn't think he should have got remission for good behaviour. I also happen to think his sentence was too light and that it should have been more then 15 years (with one suspended). And yes, concurrent sentences should be done away with and perhaps if we abolished imprisoning people for non payment of fines (and simply sent the sherrif around to seize their assets instead), maybe we would have room in the prisons for those who deserve to be there. However, justice must be fair and visible, otherwise we will all end up living, not in fear of criminals but in fear of the state.


----------



## shnaek (10 Aug 2010)

Mpsox said:


> otherwise we will all end up living, not in fear of criminals but in fear of the state.


I think we are all living in fear of both!


----------



## browtal (10 Aug 2010)

Cant believe we have concurrent sentences at all. 

I remember as a child hearing that phrase on the news. I decided then that it must mean - one after the other -, it could not mean running together. 

 Now I am no longer a child I know that the law is an ass?????????
Browtal


----------



## daithi (12 Aug 2010)

*release of larry murphy*

here's a thought-release all prisoners convicted of non payment of fines and in the cases of people convicted of multiple crimes against the person (ie rape and assault,assault of>1 person etc) have the sentences run consecutively..

daithi


----------



## Teatime (12 Aug 2010)

dusmythb said:


> Correct me if im wrong but the maximum sentence a judge can pass for rape is life, correct? So lets assume this applies to the higher end of the scale.
> 
> (Parole on a life sentence is then at the discretion of the parole officer and is dependant on the risk posed by the offender.)
> 
> ...


 
I thought you could only get life for murder or manslaughter. As far as I know he got the max sentence for rape but got 25% remission for good behaviour.


----------



## Rois (13 Aug 2010)

Given the crimes we do know he actually did commit and his total lack of remorse and refusing treatment while he was in prison, it is clear the man is a psychopath.  This alone should be enough to deny him early release from prison as his likelihood of re-offending is extremely high.


----------



## Sunny (13 Aug 2010)

The coverage of this has gone over the top. He is not the only dangerous sex offender released onto the streets. The guards say they know where he is and have a plan to monitor him. We should leave them to it. Otherwise this guy will end up living on the streets where it will be impossible to monitor the scumbag. Gangs of people turning up at halfway houses where he is not even staying shows how dangerous the situation is getting.


----------



## Ceist Beag (13 Aug 2010)

sunny said:


> the coverage of this has gone over the top. He is not the only dangerous sex offender released onto the streets. The guards say they know where he is and have a plan to monitor him. We should leave them to it. Otherwise this guy will end up living on the streets where it will be impossible to monitor the scumbag. Gangs of people turning up at halfway houses where he is not even staying shows how dangerous the situation is getting.



+1


----------



## demoivre (13 Aug 2010)

Teatime said:


> I thought you could only get life for murder or manslaughter. As far as I know he got the max sentence for rape but got 25% remission for good behaviour.



Murphy got sentenced to 97 years in total for his crimes but because the sentences were to run concurrently the effective sentence was 15 years, reduced to 10.5 years with remission - how any right thinking individual can be happy that justice was done in this case is beyond me.


----------



## Shawady (13 Aug 2010)

As well as being a sex offender, police strongly suspect his involvement of the disappearance of 3 other women. There is no hard eveidence but he may be a seriel killer so I can understand the media interest. 
You only have to look at some recent murders such as the swiss girl in galway and the lady in the limerick hotel that were commited by people on bail despite the objections of gardai.


----------



## Complainer (13 Aug 2010)

Rois said:


> Given the crimes we do know he actually did commit and his total lack of remorse and refusing treatment while he was in prison, it is clear the man is a psychopath.


I'm amazed at your ability to come to a definitive psychiatric diagnosis based on a few media reports. Perhaps we could get rid of some of the HSE's waiting lists with this 'diagnosis by media' technique?


----------



## truthseeker (13 Aug 2010)

Complainer said:


> I'm amazed at your ability to come to a definitive psychiatric diagnosis based on a few media reports. Perhaps we could get rid of some of the HSE's waiting lists with this 'diagnosis by media' technique?


 

Well purely based on the facts of the crime he committed Id be inclined to think there is something very very wrong in this mans brain also - I dont think one needs to be a psychiatrist to deduce this.


----------



## MrMan (13 Aug 2010)

Complainer said:


> I'm amazed at your ability to come to a definitive psychiatric diagnosis based on a few media reports. Perhaps we could get rid of some of the HSE's waiting lists with this 'diagnosis by media' technique?



You must admit though that we hardly need qualifications to realise that this is a man with evil tendencies. 'Diagnosis by media' might be a term that his defence team use next time, should he ever fall foul of the law again.


----------



## redbhoy (13 Aug 2010)

MrMan said:


> You must admit though that we hardly need qualifications to realise that this is a man with evil tendencies. 'Diagnosis by media' might be a term that his defence team use next time, should he ever fall foul of the law again.


 

You must bow down before the professional classes. Its the way things work in Ireland. 
Only their opinions count!


----------



## micmclo (13 Aug 2010)

One day, maybe evidence will be uncovered on the missing women.
Evidence that links to Larry Murphy.

How is that man ever going to get a fair trial, he's already been convicted by the media and a lot of people.
If you want a conviction you need a fair trial first.

If it did go to trial, I'd bet one newspaper would manage to collapse it by being reckless.

This isn't helping


----------



## VOR (13 Aug 2010)

Sunny said:


> The coverage of this has gone over the top. He is not the only dangerous sex offender released onto the streets. The guards say they know where he is and have a plan to monitor him. We should leave them to it. Otherwise this guy will end up living on the streets where it will be impossible to monitor the scumbag. Gangs of people turning up at halfway houses where he is not even staying shows how dangerous the situation is getting.



+2

I saw the front of today's Indo and it would not have been out of place on a red top rag. 

The Gardai will monitor this man and others as is the law. 

I for one believe that the focus and energy of the public should be applied to ending concurrent sentences.


----------



## Phibbleberry (13 Aug 2010)

micmclo said:


> If it did go to trial, I'd bet one newspaper would manage to collapse it by being reckless.


 
This would be a worry of mine too, but I think its important also, to have as much exposure in the initial couple of days, so every woman in the country, unless living under a rock, will at least have a vague idea of what he looks like.  
Without being flippant I pity fair-haired chin-dimpled men across the country for the coming months.  

The fear with this sort of exposure is, hes damned if he does and damned if he doesn't - his thinking may be 'I might as well'.  I believe he will reoffend, but I'm no expert.  
It also opens the door for other sexual pedators - his MO has been so widely reported and its not at all impossible, though perhaps implausible, that others may use his 'ways' to go about their own evil doings, assuming/hoping he will get the blame.

I believe many offenders have a right to a second chance.  But I believe they have had to earn it to deserve it and I think that elective rehabilitation, both inside and upon release, should be a absolute minimum.

Im general, when it comes to released prisoners, I struggle with 'they've served their debt' (though it has to be a resonable sentance, so not in this case) vs 'they disregard others human rights, they surrender their own'.

Unfortunately, none of us has all the answers.


----------



## shnaek (13 Aug 2010)

demoivre said:


> Murphy got sentenced to 97 years in total for his crimes but because the sentences were to run concurrently the effective sentence was 15 years, reduced to 10.5 years with remission - how any right thinking individual can be happy that justice was done in this case is beyond me.



Hear hear.


----------



## Rois (13 Aug 2010)

Complainer said:


> I'm amazed at your ability to come to a definitive psychiatric diagnosis based on a few media reports. Perhaps we could get rid of some of the HSE's waiting lists with this 'diagnosis by media' technique?


 
I am amazed at your arrogance in assuming that I have made this diagnosis "based on a few media reports".


----------



## Complainer (13 Aug 2010)

Rois said:


> I am amazed at your arrogance in assuming that I have made this diagnosis "based on a few media reports".



It's either that or you are a medical professional that has worked with the man and you are leaking confidential information on a public bulletin board. Take your pick.



truthseeker said:


> Well purely based on the facts of the crime he committed Id be inclined to think there is something very very wrong in this mans brain also - I dont think one needs to be a psychiatrist to deduce this.



Just to be clear - the crime was committed ten years ago. Very few people know what's going on inside that man's head today - despite the populist media rush to judgement.


----------



## truthseeker (13 Aug 2010)

Complainer said:


> Just to be clear - the crime was committed ten years ago. Very few people know what's going on inside that man's head today - despite the populist media rush to judgement.


 
Thats what worries me - the only person who knows whats going on in his brain is himself - no one can say with certainty that he will do something like this again. But given his past actions one can certainly say that he had, at one point, the capacity to be a psychopath - do you really think that the passage of 10 years would change someones nature so fundamentally?


----------



## redbhoy (13 Aug 2010)

Could the government not send him into a Mental home and pump him full of drugs (truth **************************??) and see if he had anything to do with the other girls disappearances or do they need his consent for that??


----------



## VOR (13 Aug 2010)

Complainer said:


> Just to be clear - the crime was committed ten years ago. Very few people know what's going on inside that man's head today - despite the populist media rush to judgement.



I agree with you that we should not rush to judge what is going on inside his head. Surely nobody can really know what goes on except Murphy himself. But there is no denying the following:
He raped
He was sentenced to 97 years in total for rape and attempted murder
He refused to undertake any rehabilitation while inside.
He has never apologised. His brother has though. 
He is out in 10.5 years.
He is still the prime suspect in a number of murders. 

I do not like this media witch hunt. It is gutter press journalism. But I also think that the system has let the people down in this case. This man should never be able to walk the streets again if he has not even attempted to rehabilitate.

As I said above, our energy would be better spent improving the legal system so people like Murphy cannot go free.


----------



## Complainer (13 Aug 2010)

truthseeker said:


> But given his past actions one can certainly say that he had, at one point, the capacity to be a psychopath - do you really think that the passage of 10 years would change someones nature so fundamentally?


I have absolutely no idea whether his nature has changed in 10 years, just like all the other posters on this thread have absolutely no idea whether his nature has changed. It doesn't seem to stop others from professing with certainty about his current state of mind.



redbhoy said:


> Could the government not send him into a Mental home and pump him full of drugs (truth **************************??)


You've been watching too many James Bond movies.



VOR said:


> He has never apologised.


Where did you get this from?



VOR said:


> He is still the prime suspect in a number of murders.


WHere did you get this from?


----------



## VOR (13 Aug 2010)

> Irish Times
> ...many reports have linked him to the disappearance and presumed murder  of a number of women in the Leinster area in the 1990s. These cases  include Annie McCarrick, Jo Jo Dullard and Deirdre Jacob.However,  extensive investigations by gardaí, during which Murphy was questioned  and his cars and property forensically examined, found no evidence  linking him to any of the cases.





> Newstalk Website
> Retired Detective Superintendent P.J. Brown says Murphy was considered their prime suspect. “He failed to cooperate with any of the Garda questions” he said.
> “And the question as an older policeman now retired I would ask why  did the disappearances stop when Larry Murphy went to prison” he added.




With regard to the apology I cannot find evidence but I am 100% certain I have heard it on radio. Unfortunately, Complainer, you'll just have to take my word for it.


----------



## Complainer (13 Aug 2010)

VOR said:


> With regard to the apology I cannot find evidence but I am 100% certain I have heard it on radio. Unfortunately, Complainer, you'll just have to take my word for it.



Re the 'is the prime suspect' bit - The retired Garda said that he WAS the prime suspect, not that he IS the prime suspect (as you claimed).

Re the apology - I absolutely take your word that you heard it on the radio. That gives me absolutely no comfort that it is actually true.

Let's not go basing very important decisions on what we hear/read in the (mostly tabloid) press.


----------



## Teatime (13 Aug 2010)

demoivre said:


> Murphy got sentenced to 97 years in total for his crimes but because the sentences were to run concurrently the effective sentence was 15 years, reduced to 10.5 years with remission - how any right thinking individual can be happy that justice was done in this case is beyond me.


 
Who thinks justice was done? I think all people acknowledge that the system is completely flawed.


----------



## Complainer (16 Aug 2010)

Some interesting views from http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-new...i-fear-media-could-push-murphy-over-the-edge/



> Gardaí have major concerns about the way the media is pursuing freed rapist Larry Murphy and believe that the conduct of the press may be putting the general public in danger.
> 
> 
> Commissioner Fachtna Murphy and his senior management team have been alarmed at the constant coverage of Murphy's movements and are worried that the pressure could ultimately lead to the 45-year-old either re-offending or committing suicide.
> ...


----------



## Shawady (17 Aug 2010)

Interesting article in this morning's times about the issue of whether people have a right to know about Larry Murphy's whereabouts.


[broken link removed]


----------



## csirl (17 Aug 2010)

The Gardai consider him so dangerous that he requires round the clock supervision by a team of Gardai, yet they wont have him sectioned? Why?


----------



## redbhoy (17 Aug 2010)

csirl said:


> The Gardai consider him so dangerous that he requires round the clock supervision by a team of Gardai, yet they wont have him sectioned? Why?


 
To keep the public in Fear!


----------



## Sunny (17 Aug 2010)

redbhoy said:


> To keep the public in Fear!


 
Are you trying to set a world record for how many times you can say the same thing about a conspiracy involving the 'establishment' in this Country?  I think we get it at this stage.


----------



## redbhoy (17 Aug 2010)

Sunny said:


> Are you trying to set a world record for how many times you can say the same thing about a conspiracy involving the 'establishment' in this Country? I think we get it at this stage.


 
Maybe 

Am I wrong?? I dont seem to think so. How about you? Do you think the Just Us system works in this country?


----------



## Sunny (17 Aug 2010)

redbhoy said:


> Maybe
> 
> Am I wrong?? I dont seem to think so. How about you? Do you think the Just Us system works in this country?


 
Well I think you are well on your way to the record!

Do I think the Guards leave him on the streets because they want us to live in fear? No, I dont.


----------



## redbhoy (17 Aug 2010)

Sunny said:


> Well I think you are well on your way to the record!
> 
> Do I think the Guards leave him on the streets because they want us to live in fear? No, I dont.


 
Let me know if I beat the current record will you. 

Can the Gardaí have him sectioned and sent to a Mental Home? Why arent they doing it? Because their Masters in the Law Society tell them they cant maybe?


----------



## Mpsox (17 Aug 2010)

redbhoy said:


> Let me know if I beat the current record will you.
> 
> Can the Gardaí have him sectioned and sent to a Mental Home? Why arent they doing it? Because their Masters in the Law Society tell them they cant maybe?


 
Since his mental state was not raised in his trial, it's questionable if any attempt to section him would stand up in court. As someone put it to me yesterday, he's bad, not mad

Of course this could all be fuel to your fire. Am I correct in thinking that you seem to be suggesting that the release of this man is a conspiracy of the Gardai, courts and politicians to keep us all in a state of fear.?


----------



## redbhoy (17 Aug 2010)

Mpsox said:


> Of course this could all be fuel to your fire. Am I correct in thinking that you seem to be suggesting that the release of this man is a conspiracy of the Gardai, courts and politicians to keep us all in a state of fear.?


 
Not just him. The whole system is a joke which seems to benefit the crooks and crims rather than the ordinary Joe Soap. But what would the Judges, Barristers, TDs etc care when they wont encounter reality in their Ivory Towers.


----------



## starlite68 (17 Aug 2010)

for god sake...this person has been through the court system, served his sentance, and has every right to get on with his life....like it or not!


----------



## redbhoy (17 Aug 2010)

starlite68 said:


> for god sake...this person has been through the court system, served his sentance, and has every right to get on with his life....like it or not!


 

The OP was questioning the system that allows a vicious criminal like him back out so early.
Whats your thoughts on the system and not Larry Murphy?


----------



## ajapale (17 Aug 2010)

I don't understand why "automatic remission"  is frequently described as "remission for good behaviour". As far as I know if a convict behaves very badly he still qualifies for full automatic remission perhaps with a few weeks added on for various infractions.

Do judges take "automatic remission" into account when sentencing?


----------



## starlite68 (17 Aug 2010)

redbhoy said:


> The OP was questioning the system that allows a vicious criminal like him back out so early.
> Whats your thoughts on the system and not Larry Murphy?


 the system is not perfect!  nobody is saying that it is. but its all we have to work with.   like it or lump it!


----------



## shnaek (17 Aug 2010)

starlite68 said:


> the system is not perfect!  nobody is saying that it is. but its all we have to work with.   like it or lump it!



If everyone thought that way then nothing would ever change.


----------



## starlite68 (17 Aug 2010)

shnaek said:


> If everyone thought that way then nothing would ever change.


 i  hear what you are saying...but has any country in the world got a perfect system!  i dont think so.


----------



## Latrade (18 Aug 2010)

ajapale said:


> I don't understand why "automatic remission" is frequently described as "remission for good behaviour". As far as I know if a convict behaves very badly he still qualifies for full automatic remission perhaps with a few weeks added on for various infractions.
> 
> Do judges take "automatic remission" into account when sentencing?


 
That's the case, you get it no matter what. Aside from trying to escape and commiting other crimes while in prison, you get the remission. As far as I know judges can't take that into account as it's a separate system, i.e. that's a prison service policy/issue rather than judicial. The judges have to give the "appropriate" sentence for the crimes and so can't add on time knowing up to 25% could be knocked off. The concurrent sentence is a different issue and is a judicial issue.

I must admit, this case is one that tests the old liberal views to the maximum. It's right, Murphy has served the time given to him so like all others he deserves a chance. I hate the media coverage and think it will do far more harm (to me he's likely to just disappear). But...but, given what little we know it doesn't sound like he has put any effort into changing, can someone like that change? So how would my liberal views stack up if he did go out and hurt someone else? Would I extend the hand of concilliation if he moved in next door to me and my family? To be honest, no. I know it's NIMBY, I don't care. 

To me it's pretty simple, once you've served your sentence you're out, the problem here is the concurrent sentencing. If he had been sentenced fully for all his crimes, he'd be locked away for life and we wouldn't have this problem.


----------



## starlite68 (18 Aug 2010)

thats all very well, but if we are going to take the  'lock em up and throw away the key approach'  our prisons will be overflowing! there has to be a balance.  he has served his time...the gaurds say they are keeping an eye on him..so let him get on with his life.


----------



## Latrade (18 Aug 2010)

starlite68 said:


> thats all very well, but if we are going to take the 'lock em up and throw away the key approach' our prisons will be overflowing! there has to be a balance. he has served his time...the gaurds say they are keeping an eye on him..so let him get on with his life.


 
Not really, it's at breaking point because of imprisonment for crimes such as non-payment of fines. Put more resources into the Sheriff to deal with that and stop concurrent sentencing when we're dealing with serious crimes. 

As I said, I completely disagree with the media approach as it's more likely to mean the guards lose track of him at some point, a much more dangerous situation. 

As was pointed out there are numerous dangerous offenders like Murphy out there and all monitored successfully. I still can't shake the hypocrasy that I agree with the principle of serving their time, but still wouldn't want them near to me and my family. It's a natural human reaction, it doesn't make sense, it doesn't help when they are released, but it is what it is. 

If you are happy to let bygones be bygones are you also happy to have Murphy living nextdoor?


----------



## starlite68 (18 Aug 2010)

no, like yourself i would'nt like him living next door. so i dont know what that makes me! bu i agree with your point about people being locked up for fines..eg tv licence, parking ect..its stupid.


----------



## redbhoy (18 Aug 2010)

starlite68 said:


> no, like yourself i would'nt like him living next door. so i dont know what that makes me! bu i agree with your point about people being locked up for fines..eg tv licence, parking ect..its stupid.


 
How do we go about changing that? Lobbying TDs, counsellors maybe? But if people knew they wouldnt go to prison they stop paying fines therefore making them useless.
Hasnt the President recently signed a new bill into Legislation which stops people being jailed for being in debt and not being able to pay but there was an attachment which allowed for monies to be taken at source. I wonder does this apply to fines or just debts to banks etc?


----------



## Mpsox (18 Aug 2010)

starlite68 said:


> no, like yourself i would'nt like him living next door. so i dont know what that makes me! bu i agree with your point about people being locked up for fines..eg tv licence, parking ect..its stupid.


 
Easiest thing to do is pass legislation allowing the bailifs or sherrif to come along and take the TV/Car in the case of non-payment of fines. Has to be cheaper then locking people.


----------

