hold on, its still a criminal offence to have sex with anyone under the age of 17. its just unconstitutional to not allow a defendant to enter a plea or a defence. all future prosections will be sound as they will actually be a trial.
the point here is that mcdowall is claiming he was unaware the DPP was defending the law in the supreme court appeal, he is either lying or has lost control, wither way he should go. that this method of prosection waws probably illegal was flagged to the government in 1990!!! and no plan b despite the appeal. madness
Last edited by Roverstillidie; 01/06/2006 at 7:23 PM.
That seems to make it clear - if people don't read previous posts then shouldnb't be on this forum.Originally Posted by Roverstillidie
Obviously politicians are culpable but as they come & go probably hard to totally at fault. I blame the Department of Justice (civil servants) as they were informed years ago & did nothing.
Amazing the governement can turn around a new law in a week when they want to.
pete
Apparently there were a few versions of draft legislation floating around before the Supremer Court decision
The dark side of me is quietly hoping that if this scumbag Mr. A is no longer behind bars, then he's no longer protected so someone might just decide to mete out a little a la carte justice.
I don't normally go in for bypassing due process - we've seen where that can lead to with the News of the World's shameful picket-a-paedo campaign in the UK, or the killing of Josie Dwyer by anti-smack vigilantes in Dolphins Barn a few years back. (And I say that as someone who was pretty much on the side of the vigies, so you can see I'm actually fairly ambiguous / all over the shop on due process - great in theory but sometimes it just lets people down.)
However, in this instance, the guy has been through due process, pleaded guilty to something heinous, done time and obviously STILL has no remorse - to the point where he's used a legal loophole to walk free. So he's let convince himself "Hey, I did nothing wrong there"? Bollócks to that.
The one good thing to come out of the whole sorry mess is that it seems likely (from what media commentary I've heard) that whatever new legislation is brought in to patch up the hole is likely to recognise that there's a difference between what is child abuse (regardless of whether there's consent, or if that "consent" is coerced) and what is consensual sex between "underage" peers.
Like the abortion amendment and the X Case to which it gave rise, this saga just points up the pitfalls of this kind of line-in-the-sand legislation. Having a concept of statutory rape is daft, regardless of where the age of consent is set, be it 15, 16 or 17. I know the concept is that it'll protect kids from the likes of Mr. A but it patently fails to do so in practice. There's got to be a way of protecting kids that doesn't criminalise teenagers, or brand them onto the sex offenders' register for hormone-driven experimentation.
On the McDowell aspect of things...
I don't buy that, John. They're at the top of the hierarchy and they're the ones we entrust with ministerial responsibility. Just as "I was only following orders" shouldn't be a valid excuse, neither should "My underlings screwed up."
Last edited by Dr.Nightdub; 02/06/2006 at 12:07 AM.
Revenge for 2002
Occasionally Ministers are themselves the victims of bureacracy.....
tough. the buck stops.
he wrote an article in 1995 calling for the method of prosecution to be scrapped yet in 2006 was unaware of a problem?
The people spoke today. The sooner Make up man and his ministers, sorry buddies fcuk off the better for one and all in this country. It's been all over Gerry Ryan and Joe Duffy today. Delighted the people are finally seeing the wood through the trees.
"Between 400 and 500 people gathered outside Leinster House in Dublin this afternoon to protest over what they claim are inadequate laws to protect children and victims of sexual abuse.
Protests were organised throughout the State by a range of victims' groups and supported by the Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (ISPCC) and the Rape Crisis Network of Ireland (RCNI).
They were organised earlier this week in the wake of the Supreme Court judgment striking down a section of a 1935 law on statutory rape.
That ruling has resulted in multiple applications from people serving sentences for having sex with underage girls, on the basis that the law under which they were convicted was unconstitutional.
Many families, mostly women with young children, stood in sunshine outside Leinster House.
Some carried placards urging changes in the law to protect children, or posters urging a "name and shame" policy for those convicted of sex offences.
People travelled from as far as Belfast and Wexford to express their concern over the current state of the law on statutory rape.
Some expressed anger at the release by the courts last week of a 41-year-old man who had been serving a three-year sentence for having sex with a 12-year-old girl after plying her with drink.
Elizabeth Broekhoven from Blackrock, Co Dublin, was at the protest with her daughter, Elizabeth, and granddaughter Lizze (12).
She said: "I came along because I think what's been going on is dreadful, and that the Government knew for so long that things should have been changed in the law.
"I have a 12-year-old granddaughter here and I think what if anything happened to her? I think it's very sad that we have to be forced to come here. We're not forced to come here, but morally, we are forced to be here."
A woman, who did not wish to be named, had travelled with a group from Belfast this morning.
"We just came down to lend our support to stop these predators getting out and endangering more children's lives, and to let people know down here that the people in the North are also thinking of them," she said.
Lorraine Smyth-Comiskey travelled from Wexford with her daughter, Aisling. She said she felt very strongly about the issue, particularly because she had young children.
Ciara Doyle travelled from Johnstown, Co Kildare, with her daughter, Abby, aged two-and-a-half. "I came because I'm a mum of two young children, and I've got nieces and nephews and neighbours with young children. I just think it's so sad that these guys are getting out and there will be other victims in the future. It doesn't have to be like this."
Also in the crowd was Fine Gael TD for Meath Damien English, who said he was delighted to see people taking such an interest in an issue that was "absolutely paramount to our children's safety.
"I have been saying for a long time that, across many issues, Dáil reform is needed," he said.
"What's happened this week is a very serious thing but it also shows how slow Dáil Eireann is to bring about changes and how slow it is to update laws.
"We do need to make people feel their children are safe and do all we can in our power. This is a failure of a system that is out of date. And our children are the ones that could have suffered this week. Because as it stands today, before we pass this new law, our children have not been as safe as they were two weeks ago."
Mr English said he believed the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) 2006 Bill before the Oireachtas today would close "a loophole" but was not perfect. He said he had asked the Minister for Justice today to consider amending the Constitution, if necessary.
"I am concerned that a 12- or 13-year-old girl should not be brought into the courts and should not be tried by barristers. I have asked that video evidence be used and I have asked the Minister today if he will explore constitutional avenues, to make our children even safer. If needs be, let's have a referendum."
"The legislation is not gender-neutral in all areas, and that could be a problem. There is a situation now where if two 16-year-olds have sexual intercourse, and she becomes pregnant, the father could be in prison when she's having the baby. That's madness - it has to be neutral across the board, and it has to reflect society," Mr English said."
The above is all opinion and based on personal experience. Unless stated otherwise it is not a dig at anybody, well probably none of you lot.
The state won their Supreme Court appeal so that **** Mr A is back in jail. I must say I'm surprised but even if it is a fudge, it's a worthwhile one.
We're not arrogant, we're just better.
Jeez I can't remember what I did in 1995.....apart from watching UCD win a treble of course!
Loophole should now be closed by the law passed yesterday and signed by President Maccer last night.
Duffy & Ryan love whipping up things like this. Be under no illusion, the only people at fault here are those than abuse, rape or molest children. All the white roses or white armbands aren't going to stop them.
Good point well made.
Agreed about the molesters etc, but there had to be some reaction by the public to the utter contempt shown by the Govt in this and many other incidents, it can't go on the way it is. Ryan and Duffy are only portraying what people want portrayed.
The above is all opinion and based on personal experience. Unless stated otherwise it is not a dig at anybody, well probably none of you lot.
Ryan & Duffy are making money out of it. Are you honestly saying that the government choose this? The supreme court should have been clearer their judgement, Mr 'A' should never have gotten out. What ever the government did they wern't going to win. The new law will have flaws after being rushed through, Explain what the government should have done. Why don't Duffy & Ryan go for election if, they have all the answers. Gay Byrne has found out that its not as easy as he thought to solve the road accident problem.
i think that the government did chose this, they were aware of the problem, but preciscly the hysteria surrounding this meant they werent touching it. no plolitician wanted to be the one who weakened the peado laws.
the reality is mr a had to walk as whatever you think of his crime, he is entitled to utter the words 'not guilty' and mount a defence. and the government knew this and continued to prosecute in this manner knowing it was unsafe.
they made shíte of it and were very evidently not in control of the situation.
Ryan and Duffy are doing a job, if it's not them it would be someone else. How else do ordinary people get their opinion across? I'm not one for burying my head in the sand and letting elected officials ride us bare back. Only way to make them sit up and take notice is through the media they themselves love using when it suits them.
How long are you going to give Gay Byrne? A couple of months? He's only in there at "the bumblers" insistance anyway to take the flack away from him and his thieves, as is Drum in the hsc.
If the Govt had acted on the info given to them over 12 months ago they could have been ready for the events of 2 weeks ago, not just making it up as they go along.
I for one won't just follow along like a lamb and there is a growing feeling like that where I come from and beyond. Take the people for granted at your peril would be my message - through Gerry Ryan or whoever you want to do it.
The above is all opinion and based on personal experience. Unless stated otherwise it is not a dig at anybody, well probably none of you lot.
By not voting these people in? I'm far (very far) froma Fianna Failer but they were elected in so they absolutely speak for this Mythical ordinary person you talk about. Now Joe Duffy or Gerry RYan, they're ****s who definitely cannot claim to speak for me. Or in fact most people who work during their broadcast hours.
In other news, Dermot Ahern's talk of a referendum is probably the worst piece of LCD pandering I've ever seen/heard..
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
If you have to post articles please post a link to source - you all know the rules!
I am unsure if the government could have done much more on this issue however i also think Bertie is going to lose more credability for not returning to the country to sort this mess out. He is paid to be the leader of this country so he should be seen to be acting in that capacity.
I am also unsure what the point of that "...will someone please think of the children..." protest.
People who don't work your hours are mythical ordinary people. I see.
Ryan and Duffy host a show where people ring in and give opinions, it's not Ryan or Duffy's opinion and it's not your opinion. Don't think anyone ever claimed to be voicing your opinion or otherwise.
So on your theory we should vote in whoever we want and them leave them do what they like irrespective of what they do. I don't want it like that, but thats only my opinion.
The above is all opinion and based on personal experience. Unless stated otherwise it is not a dig at anybody, well probably none of you lot.
This type of thing is known as parliamentary democracyThere's a time and a place for phone-show politics and it's good that people have an outlet to let off steam but in terms of representing the "voice of the nation" it can get greatly exaggerated because it helps the media push the story.
I certainly don't think society would gain by having yet another referendum on emotive legislative issues. I can see why people went out and protested (although I was surprised to see that there were much less people than the impression given by the tabloids/tabloid broadcasters) but, to me, a lot of it seemed along the lines of "Paedophiles are Bad! Mmkay?" which is an attitude that you don't really have to march in support of, it's kind of a given. Don't worry, someone will think of the chil-der-en.
"Lock up your Little Girls!" (as one of the rags screamed) - it's the exact type of thing that Brass Eye satirised so well.
SIGNATURESCOPE
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks