You donât even understand the point, do you?
Unless youâre talking about your various aliases, thereâs no âweâ involved here.
The only reason to give a character reference in a criminal case is to lobby the judge to give a more lenient sentence. In a country that already has far too lenient sentencing for serious crime, calling for a more lenient sentence for a convicted child predator isnât simply a lapse in judgement, itâs evidence of someone with a truly weird moral compas.
It was an outstanding book. Top class journalism. Utterly depressing alright
What would you expect - heâs from Listowel, a town where a man convicted of sexual assault gets applauded and the victim has to leave court with a Garda escort.
3 Likes
Do you believe that somebody who shows no remorse for a serious crime should get a longer sentence than somebody who does?
@Sidney is it OK for me to victim blame the fucking eejits from Galway whoâll be killed swimming in salthill tomorrow?
Is it OK for me to blame you for so obviously being the victim of such a shit education that you make such an idiotic âpointâ?
1 Like
Calm down @sidney. It was a joke. Iâd say youâve serious saddle sores from your high horse.
1 Like
Iâm not the one on the high horse here, pal. Donât look down, you might get dizzy, especially with the wind whipping up as it is.
Oooffft
Itâs one thing to give a character reference for a model citizen, lifelong friend never involved in anything untoward in their lives who got involved in a terrible, once off, heat of the moment incident that was enormously out of character with terrible consequences. (Eg Pushing a lad pissed up outside a chipper at 3am who falls and hits his head off the kerb when he only wanted him to fuck off and stop annoying him).
Itâs quite another to give one to a man who started texting a child at 14 who he had met through GAA coaching and proceeded to groom her for a further two years with inappropriate texts and images before going on to physically molest her. Thatâs nothing to do with bad luck or an awful mistake or a misjudgment that he regrets instantaneously. Itâs the actions of a sick, demented, calculated abuser.
Not sure why @Sidney is so virulently defending Cusack here. Then again maybe itâs not. Has to be seen to defend his liberal, left wing pinko mates at all costs.
Imagine his tune if it was some conservative right winger acting as a paedo apologist in the hope of getting a lesser sentence.
10 Likes
Depends on the crime and its circumstances. In the case of manslaughter for example I could see remorse being taken to account, as the crime could have been spur of the moment, versus premeditated murder where remorse is less relevant.
In this case I would say remorse is irrelevant. The time for remorse was after the first inappropriate contact.
1 Like
Itâs a common error to assume intelligence has to do with being right in terms of knowledge. As knowledge is constantly being updated, admitting you are wrong and adjusting your view is actually the true test of intelligence.
Sadly this is a capability Sid lacks.
Iâm defending Cusack because he the worst he could be guilty of is misplaced compassion for a friend. He hasnât defended what Humphries did in any way. Is anybody man enough to debate that point?
The same goes for Mick Galwey.
One wonders why those who defended, continue to defend and continue to deliberately misrepresent what George Hook said, do so.
Actually one doesnât.
Itâs quite obviously because theyâre so obsessed with trying to vilify their entirely imagined âPCâ bogeyman that they will descend to defending the blaming of a rape victim.
That kind of thing can be quite legitimately categorised as a form of mental illness.
Remorse isnât irrelevant. Itâs never irrelevant. There has to be a certain mimimum threshold below which the sentence for the crime cannot go. If you donât show remorse, the sentence should be longer.
The extreme left and the extreme right are a woeful pain in the hole these days,two noisey bunch a cunts who everyone wishes would just fuck off.Empty vessels and all that.
4 Likes
I addressed this point earlier. And you canât compare Galwey and Cusack as Galwey actually took the stand. Cusack clearly hoped that his name wouldnât be released and that smacks of cowardice coupled with the actual content of his reference praising Humphreys for being a volunteer i.e the way be got access to his victim.
Can t help but feel if it was hook that gave a reference in these circumstances youâd be wanting him blasted into space.
1 Like
Thereâs no equivalence.
The worst the âextreme leftâ as you call them can be accused of is being annoying, whatever that is, and it means different things to different people.
The âextreme rightâ provide an existential threat to the fundamental tenets of western liberal society, because they are out and out racists, misogynists and fascists.
Note the use of the word âliberalâ there.
Western societies and âwestern valuesâ are based on liberalism.
Yet the extreme right, who claim to want to defend âwestern valuesâ, actually despise them, hence their moronic use of the word âliberalâ as a pejorative term.
They are the last people who should be critiquing Islamist extremism, because they agree with the vast majority of it.
1 Like
Sorry weâll just have to disagree. For premeditated crimes remorse should be irrelevant. The time for remorse was before committing the crime. Especially a crime that occurred repeatedly like this case where each inappropriate contact was a crime.
How do you know or could you know that the remorse is genuine? A psychopath for example has no feelings of remorse but can easily fake remorse. Should their sentences be reduced if they âshowâ remorse?
Theyre nearly as bad as each other these days sid,obviously the extreme right are worse but extreme leftys are beginning to get on my tits.Maybe im getting old.
1 Like