Were the comments not after the not guilty verdict?
In my mind, hook shouldāve gotten the bullet and Cusack will right be subjected to criticism. Had he had his name out there in the first place rather than āgaa starā Iād actually have some respect but to have it hidden and then not to comment when the storm shows a lack of judgement, at best.
I wonder if Tom wrote any of his articles when he was supposedly on suicide watch?
Thing is art, I absolutely agree with you, but itās our justice system that is at fault here. The whole " good gaa man/ from a good family" pre-sentencing thing is just wrong, and worse that it is an accepted mitigation in sentencing. Look at your man from ballymaloe. Downloaded the grossest of images of child abuse, and many of them, hence perpetuating that sick, awful āindustryā (I donāt know what else to call it), and didnāt get any punishment at all, despite doing it repeatedly.
It is, however, the system as it currently stands. Iām not sure whether Iād have given a character reference in such circumstances, I donāt think I would, but Ive never been put in that position.
Cusack, having given a reference, as he was asked, and entitled to do, has rowed back solely as public opinion has gone against him. If he had remained anonymous, he would have let this lie.
It would, in my opinion, befit him better if he stood behind his considered reference, and published what he said, and why. It may even open the whole thorny character reference topic up for debate.
We are in a country where a predatory violent rapist had a queue of people from the locality line up and shake his hand in front of the victim relatively recently.
There is something rotten in the Irish justice system, which reflects something which has been rotten in society for generations, and is a thread that runs through the childrenās homes, magdalena laundries and what have you, that we, as a nation, have an entirely unhealthy respect for status and the wealthy.
There is currently no guilty verdict. There will be a retrial. Hook made his comments on the basis of the defendant being guilty.
There is legitimate and fair criticism that can be aimed at Cusack re his judgement in giving the reference and whether it was appropriate in this case, however he has committed no crime whatsoever and has acted entirely within the law whether one agrees with what he did or not.
The problem is that social media has already vilified him and is basically treating him as an accessory to the crime, which is extremely unfair.
Also, given that unlike Walsh, he made no public comment about Humphries during the duration of the allegations, Iād tend to have a bit more sympathy for him.
Humphriesā articles stopped immediately when he was found out. His last article was March 19th, 2011, I think. The story came into the public domain on April 10th.
No he didnāt, not really. He asked a stupid question in the circumstances, but one not, in general, entirely without merit. People then decided to take his words at their absolute worst.
He did. It was a clearly rhetorical question.
Hook first of all stated that he wasnāt blaming the victim. And then he went ahead and did exactly that.
He then ascribed mock āsurpriseā to the victim at finding herself being raped by another man after going to the bedroom of the first man who she had consensual sex with.
My take on it was that it was a general point about ladies not putting themselves in harms way, but I had, in truth, forgotten that the poor lass was allegedly set upon by a second man, which does indeed make his comments less excusable.
I still donāt think it was outright blaming the poor girl, but maybe it was.
Iād state clearly here that I wouldnt have said such a thing, though Iād agree with hook in that Iād be deeply upset if my daughter went back to a hotel room drunk, with a complete stranger. Iād be exactly worried that she was putting herself in harms way, same as Iād be upset if she walked back from the dart station on her own at night. Should she be able to? Absolutely. Should she? Probably not.
Of course hes entitled to give a character reference. Everyone is entitled to be a cunt
There was one acquittal and one retrial due
I meant Cusackās articles, allegedly written by TH.
The content of Cusackās reference is problematic in that he lauded humphries for his GAA volunteering, which humphries used to gain access to the victim. It shows either a stunning lack of awareness of the case or a lack of empathy. Itās like a character for ted Bundy saying he was a great lad for giving women a lift.
If you want to give a character reference by all means do so, but at least be aware of the facts of the case which I donāt think Cusack has done and either stand over your words or donāt give it.
You are the one making a connection between Hook and the Cusack/TH case where there is none. You are assuming some ālogicalā follow on, logical in your head only. You are characterising it as victim blaming (again people disagree with that assertion), it is your assertion and then you are using it as a stick to beat posters who find Cusackās reference abhorrent. Defending Cusackās character reference with your mental gymnastics is bizarre here.
No, he wouldnāt have anyone defending him. You have created this fantasy defense in your head.
No, you donāt know this.
He knowingly gave a reference to a man guilty of sexually grooming an underage kid, whom the defendant was acquainted with through the gaa, the sport Cusack lives and breathes. (We know it was within the law to do so, we get it). Hook made comments regarding the safety of women and a rape case, where it was disputed if they were victim blaming. He and others didnāt think it was victim blaming, he made it quite clear the alleged rapist was a disgusting individual in his opinion, but he has since rowed back and apologised for the remarks.
You seem to be saying Cusackās actions and character ref are favourable compared to Hooks remarks?
Itās a strange moral compass you possess.
my God thatās an all merciful clamping
is this fucking deviant still involved with Clare hurling? he needs to be ran out of the county if he is
they love their nonces down around East Cork
Think youāll find Sid that point was made on here at the time and was very much shot down. Trying to equate a 14 year old who was groomed to victim blaming as being similar to hooks comments is not at all the same
I see Tadgh Kennelly got in on the victim blaming act down in the AFL
do guys condone riding underage fellas?
didnt yer man david norris try to use some comparison with greek mythology where it was deemed acceptable
Did you hear the piece? What a weird fucking accent
Very weird.