Ah here, it wasnât.
Was head of sports at the Sunday Times when kimmage got the boot.
Most DEIS schools feel the advantage of the scheme and itâs great for the kids involved. What was the argument on here as I cannot be arsed to go searching for it?
1 Like
To be fair to the judge, I believe that the maximum sentence she could give was 5 years. The guilty plea, and other mitigating factors (first offence etc) would automatically entitle TH to a reduction, so I doubt if she had too much in the way of discretion. But itâs easier to blame a judge than the legislation.
6 Likes
Kimmageâs article is a sort of non-legal character reference. But it also makes clear that he condemns Humphriesâ abuse.
The article is getting a lot of praise here, presumably because it attempts to paint Humphriesâ character, as he saw it in the time he has known him, in the round.
But isnât that what people both in the media and in social media have been objecting to? That a child sex abuserâs character cannot be divorced from his abuse?
The question is, can an abuserâs character before they were an abuser be divorced from their character when they became that abuser?
Or, were they always an abuser in waiting and did they always have the character of an abuser, even before they were an abuser?
If you believe the latter, you would have to, by definition, believe that a humanâs character is an unchanging thing throughout the course of their life. That, to me, seems a preposterous belief.
And you would have to believe that to believe that a character reference has no place in such a trial.
I suspect that she is actually quite a courageous woman. It would have been a lot easier to throw the book at him. I wouldnât presume to question the sentence she handed down not being privy to what she was. If you cannot trust judges, your society is fucked. I was surprised more at the severity of some of her other sentences than the leniency or otherwise of this one.
Iâd say she was only doing her job. There was no point in banging him up for the max (5 years) because heâd only appeal that and get the 2 1/2 years again and thereâd be another furore over that. On her other sentences you donât see in a two line summary what she sees over the course of a trial so itâs unfair to draw too much out of that.
Of course they did
It was a joke ffs. Backinatracsuit got it.
But of course schools want it, they get a fortune from it and it makes life easier for the teachers (a goid thing of course as quality goes up)âŚ
My main point and that if experienced people in schools i know is it really doesnât get to the bottom of the issues that retard the education process for the most vunerable.
And from what i see now having discussed it in more depth, regular schools are getting screwed cos they are not disadvantaged
No room for two big houses in Limerick GAA
I canât wait to get one of the tablets off the kids and read it.
1 Like
For me one of the big problems is how long the case took to get to court.
Oh right, I get it now 
4 Likes
So Fran
Why did you engage that moron Mac?
He never reads anything back and jumps into debates with zero context.
Usually angry cos his wife owns him
12 Likes
Oooofffttt
Oooooooft 
Do you have no understanding of the difference between providing a character reference in court to reduce someoneâs sentence versus an article on how somebody was a fine writer but a horrible person beneath that professional brilliance? It seems youâre struggling to grasp that for some reason.
11 Likes