Irish Justice System

Baldrick wrote: Baldrick wrote: PanteirA wrote: corkery wrote: 1,100 people arrested for pick pocketing in Dublin, 610 were Romanian.   That just means a little less than 50% of pick pocketing was done by Dubs. No it doesn't  bump  you are struggling with logic Panteira. That stat does not imply that the remaining 490 are Dubs, it just means they were in Dublin at the time of the pick pocket.  All that shows is that they were in Dublin and that 610 were Romania and 490 were non Romanian.

I thing you are struggling with sarcasm Baldrick

Baldrick wrote: PanteirA wrote: corkery wrote: 1,100 people arrested for pick pocketing in Dublin, 610 were Romanian.   That just means a little less than 50% of pick pocketing was done by Dubs. No it doesn't

Edited by Baldrick - 18 Jul 2013 at 10:26am

Most of these pick pocketers/beggars in around town regardless of their nationality/passport are from the Roma community.
Romanians hate the fact that they are always looked upon as one and the same as Roma. I know a few Romanian people and they will say they are Italian when they go on holidays because of the grief they sometimes get in regard to being Roma!

Before the PC crew go on a bender there are 'Irish' addicts and homeless people begging around town.

corkery wrote: 1,100 people arrested for pick pocketing in Dublin, 610 were Romanian.

Romanian or Roma? Big difference...

corkery wrote: 1,100 people arrested for pick pocketing in Dublin, 610 were Romanian.

 That just means a little less than 50% of pick pocketing was done by Dubs.

As solicitor, John Devane arrived not wearing a jacket, he was taken to task by Judge Eugene O’Kelly. 

Mr Devane, wearing a shirt and tie, explained that due to the intense heat he had removed his jacket so as not to pass out. He pointed out there was no air conditioning. 

Judge O’Kelly said a legal practitioner could make an application to the court to remove his jacket, but Mr Devane seemed to have made the decision to remove his jacket before entering court. 

Mr Devane applied for permission for practitioners to remove their jackets, due to the very warm weather. 

Judge O’Kelly consented and pointed out that as a judge he was obliged to wear robes in court.

PanteirA wrote: SuperDave84 wrote: How is that any different from a ten year sentence? He won't commit any crimes here for ten years and it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper for you, me and everyone else than imprisoning him for ten years. If he tries to get in, the Gardai will stop him at the airport, he'll be arrested for breaching the suspended sentence and hauled before the courts again. I have no issue with that sentence. I know where you are coming from Dave but I don't agree with you one bit. Look that man's family in the eye and tell them that. He is free to do whatever he wants and there is no justice in that decision whatsoever. That is why we have a justice system after all, isn't it. We all have to be held accountable for our actions. Its not there to save the state money. He left a man to die on the side of the street because of his actions.

There are many reasons we have a justice system. Punishment is not the sole reason for sentencing, but it is rightly or wrongly all victims are concerned with. Rehabilitation of offenders is another thing, protection of public order is another, the cost to the state is another, deterrence is another.

Have a look at this: http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/housesoftheoireachtas/libraryresearch/Sentencing_Policy_and_Practice.pdf.

Seen first hand recently how flawed our justice system is. If any of ye are familiar with the case of patrick enright and his brother denis, they pleaded guilty to forgery. Patrick received 12 months, denis 12 months suspeneded. A forgery of circa 15k euro which has been repaid in full. And neither have any previous convictions, and this case was from nearly 20 years ago. The judge was carol moran, and in this case they only submitted a guilty plea after the legal argument had taken place, they were advised to plead not guilty as the search warrent used was invalid, and therefore, considering this judge threw out the peadophiles case because of a search warrent which was out of date by 1 day, they assumed this case would also be thrown out. It was not to be and carol moran allowed the search warrent to be used. They were also arrested under the wrong act, again something which casts serious doubt on some evidence. The judge again allowed all of this to be used. f**king makes my blood boil, one rule for the elite, and one rule for another. Not saying what they did was not wrong, it was idiotic, but an exceptionally severe and wrong punishment in my, in fairness biased, eyes

corkery wrote: Who's to blame, the legislators or the Judges?

Trapattoni.