Justice denied

In this parallel universe where somehow I am a Taoiseach for life I would instruct Judges to adopt common a sense approach to executions.

Only the truly guilty beyond any reasonable doubt/standard would find themselves standing on the trapdoor.

Extenuating circumstances would be considered of course. However the first 6 months would be taken up with those already sentenced for these crimes and in prison and reviewing the appropriateness of the sentence with a view to execution.

The families of the victim or victim themselves would have the final vote, thumbs up or down.
 
I don't think that the State should have the power to execute its citizens.
Knuttell said:
The families of the victim or victim themselves would have the final vote, thumbs up or down.
Click to expand...
So you'd change it from a Justice system to a Revenge system, rowing back 500 years of evolution of the Common Law system.
 
You see regressive I see progressive. The justice system has failed victims again and again and again.
You commit a serious crime and are caught, I won't be concerned with measuring metrics like recidivism....you will never get a chance to do it again.
 
Last edited:
I'd be concerned about the Diarmuid Connolly case. It's one thing not getting what we may deem the appropriate sentence but its hard to understand how he avoided an assault conviction when he actually did it. And this was the 2nd time to avoid conviction for a similar repeated offense that was not disputed.
 
DPP lodges appeal against Cathal Crotty's three-year suspended sentence

THE DIRECTOR OF Public Prosecutions has appealed the three-year suspended sentence handed down to soldier Cathal Crotty for “undue leniency”.

Crotty, from Park Row Heights in Ardnacrusha, Co Clare, was convicted and given a fully-suspended sentenced last month for the assualt for the assualt of Natasha O’Brien in Limerick on 22 May 2022.

A date has yet to be set for the initial hearing of the appeal.

Crotty had pleaded guilty to the assault of O’Brien, where she was punched up to six times and was left unconscious after the unprovoked assualt.

https://jrnl.ie/6424199
 
Good comments from Justice Tony Hunt yesterday

Future employment of people guilty of serious crimes of ‘limited concern’ when sentencing, judge says

Comment comes just weeks after suspended sentence given to soldier Cathal Crotty in separate court
www.irishtimes.com

In a sentencing decision on Monday in the Central Criminal Court, Mr Justice Hunt jailed Jonathan (Johnny) Moran, of Tower View, Mullingar, Co Westmeath, for the 2019 rape in Galway of Bláthnaid Raleigh. Both were aged 21 at the time.

Referring to an employment reference for Moran, which had been withdrawn, Mr Justice Hunt said he was not sure of the extent to which a sentencing court should consider the future employment of people convicted of serious crime.

People, he said, should not get too “carried away” with the notion that sentencing courts paid significant attention to employment references. A person’s previous good behaviour “goes up in smoke” when they are before the court on serious charges.
 
Reactions: Leo
I don't get this (We are reading a news report so may have missed the context of the comments).

Brendan Burgess said:
Referring to an employment reference for Moran, which had been withdrawn, Mr Justice Hunt said he was not sure of the extent to which a sentencing court should consider the future employment of people convicted of serious crime.
Click to expand...
The Judge in the Crotty case explicitly referred to the future employment of the convicted soldier in sentencing.

This is evidently not true. It is often cited that previous good behavior is a factor in sentencing. In fact, lack of previous convictions is explicitly cited as a mitigating factor in the current sentencing guidelines. And in the UK (see below) there is a spectrum for how previous convictions are aggravating or mitigating to the current circumstances.

Here's a detailed walk through of the sentencing approach used in the UK.

Assault occasioning actual bodily harm / Racially or religiously aggravated ABH – Sentencing

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk

Mitigating Factors:
  • Prospects of or in work, training or education - "This factor is particularly relevant where an offender is on the cusp of custody"
  • Positive character and/or exemplary conduct (regardless of previous convictions) - "Evidence that an offender has demonstrated a positive side to their character may reduce the sentence"
  • No previous convictions or no relevant/recent convictions

These are factors cited by the Judge in the Crotty case. The sentence seems to be in line with how the case would be sentenced in the UK and is also in line with for example, the other Judge who sentenced Kyle Hayes in the Limerick (who got a glowing character reference from John Kiely).

The point is, if the sentencing guidelines understate what is required, then that is what needs to be addressed. We need to have confidence in the process and the independence of the Judiciary and the DPP to execute the process. All i've seen in relation to this is inflammatory and reactionary statements, first from the politicians, then the DPP appealing in response to them and this statement from the Judge, which seems out of line with existing practice.

We need a system that runs consistently, not one that responds to the level of media interest. We need effective legislation and a system resourced properly to deliver, including e.g. sufficient prison places. That is 100% solvable at the political level. Talking about the role of the army in this is total misdirection and will do nothing to bring Justice to the many who are denied it.
 
Last edited:
Not sure of what the actual guidelines are.

But these are my views on the matter.

If someone is convicted and should serve a jail sentence, then they should be convicted and should be jailed.

The judge could probably say that the fact that they will lose their career is a significant punishment, and accordingly suspend part of the sentence - maybe 2 years in ten?

But the judge should never fully suspend a sentence because the person will lose their job. They committed the crime.

A less serious offence such as shoplifting or car theft might merit a sentence being entirely suspended but not such a serious assault as in the Crotty case or the rape in the case reported.

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
But the judge should never fully suspend a sentence because the person will lose their job. They committed the crime.
Click to expand...

In fairness, that didn't happen though. It was a factor in the suspension, not the reason for the suspension. Sentencing is obviously multi-factorial.

Natasha O'Brien said "this judge doesn’t want to jail him because it will mean he will lose his job". Which is not consistent with events, from my read. For example, if Crotty was unemployed does this imply he would have been jailed? I don't think so from looking at the British guidelines "The absence of work...should never be treated as an aggravating factor".

Brendan Burgess said:
A less serious offence such as shoplifting or car theft might merit a sentence being entirely suspended but not such a serious assault as in the Crotty case or the rape in the case reported.
Click to expand...

Again, I think this is a misunderstanding of what a suspended sentence is.

From the British Guidelines:
A suspended sentence is a custodial sentence. Sentencers should be clear that they would impose an immediate custodial sentence if the power to suspend were not available. If not, a non-custodial sentence should be imposed.
Click to expand...

and there are associated guidelines on when it is/is not appropriate to suspend. Which dont seem out of line in this case (this could be the problem however).
 
In my view, a suspended sentence should only be applied where there are extenuating circumstances for the offender's family, for example, if s/he is the sole carer for an infirm relative or a single parent with minor children. I can't think of any other good reason. In my examples, the dependents are as likely to suffer severe consequences of the offender's actions as s/he is, which is not justice.

In Crotty's case, there were zero extenuating circumstances, and given the nature of the crime, and the vulnerability of the victim, the full three years served would have been a light sentence.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that's a good enough reason.
mathepac said:
In Crotty's case, there were zero extenuating circumstances, and given the nature of the crime, and the vulnerability of the victim, the full three years served would have been a light sentence.
Click to expand...
I agree with that.
 
I agree with his views and I was a big fan of Rory Stewart when he was a politician.
 
Itchy said:
Really? Your views on Crotty's sentence seem quite at odds with Timpson's views?
Click to expand...
I don't believe that he would have agreed with the Crotty sentence.
I agree with him that sending people who lack the skills and education to function productively in society, many of them with mental health and addiction issues, to overcrowded prisons where they are brutalised does not produce outcomes that are good for society.
International evidence suggests that treating people humanely, educating them and teaching them life and work skills greatly reduces the incidences of recidivism. Since the primary function of the justice system is to make society safer that is what we should be doing.

The above applies to people who are in prison for relatively minor offences. It does not apply to people like Crotty who has not suffered such social deprivation, has received a comprehensive education, and does not suffer from mental health or addiction issues.
 
Purple said:
I don't believe that he would have agreed with the Crotty sentence.
Click to expand...
On what basis?
I don't follow, because he has not "suffered" in other ways, prior to his offense, he should be subject to the prison system for all its shortcomings that you reference? I don't think this reflects Timpson's views at all.

In fact, it seems to me to be entirely opposite. The risk of recidivism seems quite low in this case. I don't see how society would be safer with him behind bars? It seems a far greater risk to society is to place what was a seemingly functional member of society, into a system that can only disimprove his social functioning the longer he is in it.
 
Since when is a grown adult who walks down the street making homophobic comments, beats a women up and then boasts about it on social media a "seemingly functional member of society".

I'm not sure the members of the LGBQT community or the women of Ireland would agree that he is low risk.
 
We'll agree to disagree so. I find these conversations go nowhere fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register