Ballyjamesduff

[mouview]

Good piece in Belfast Telegraph worth a read.  There would be many people out there with fragile mental health issues, but to do this is something else. 
Agree with ONeil in that until this tragedy is fully analysed from all angles it would be unfair to speculate what caused this

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/news-analysis/stop-making-excuses-for-alan-hawe-he-killed-three-sons-and-wife-with-hatchet-and-knives-35024458.html

Great article.

Don't agree. Over-sensationalist, using language like 'she fought like a tigress to save her own and her children's lives', when she actually had defensive injuries and may not have known that he also intended killing their children. How did the youngest child know the fate of the others, as she suggests? I'm not misogynistic but the journo does seem like she is fitting the story to an agenda of her own.

[seafoid]

I read the article above and I've no idea why people think it's good.

Is it not the case that most of the coverage has centred on trying to find an explanation for what happened? If it has been stated that Alan Hawe was a good man in the community etc., surely it's only to highlight how utterly incomprehensible the act was, and not to make him out to be a great fella.

The journalist (ironically given how she' criticising the other coverage) has decided, with no evidence, that Alan Hawe was misogynistic, backed up by the "fact" that it was difficult to get a photo of Clodagh.

Where's the evidence that he was misogynistic?

I have no idea why he did what he did. I cannot comprehend a father hacking his kids to death and I doubt I ever will. But as far as I can see this is a journalist criticising what she perceives as the defending of a killer and at the same time painting a picture of the man based on...............well I don't know what.

I think her article is good in so far as we judge someone like this Alan Hawe in a one dimensional manner and she's questioning that.

He collected at mass, the priest visited the home, done the gate at the local GAA ground and was a school VP, so he has to be a good husband, father and so forth when really we don't have a clue as he could still do this and be a violent thug.

She is also right to point out that we seem to be looking to explain away his evilness as a one off act of madness, driven by mental illness, but why him and why do we not consider him an evil f**ker who hacked his wife and three children to death and how do we not consider that he may not be a good person to his own family?

We are socially conditioned to an extent to think like this, Breen is right to point out our own failings in this regard.

If she thinks that people are saying that he must be a good husband, then fair enough. Maybe he was a good husband up until this point. Why would she say he wasn't? Like I said above, any mention of this normality that I've read is to show that this act was completely unexpected as he appeared to be an average man. If there was any indication that this might have happened then this line wouldn't be used. I think she's confusing this with people defending him which I don't think is the case.

As you say, we don't really know why this happened but the journalist throws misogyny into the equation. So it's wrong to suggest that he may have been a normal husband but it's ok to use your platform as journalist to imply that he hated women? And where does the murdering of his children fall into this theory.

If he disliked women then why kill himself?

I think it's a highly irresponsible piece and I'd wonder what she hoped to achieve with it.

Why would he kill his wife ? Breen said he must have thought of her as a possession. That would qualify as misogyny
Like he was some sort of Viking that had to go to the next world with his chattels.

[muppet]

Good piece in Belfast Telegraph worth a read.  There would be many people out there with fragile mental health issues, but to do this is something else. 
Agree with ONeil in that until this tragedy is fully analysed from all angles it would be unfair to speculate what caused this

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/news-analysis/stop-making-excuses-for-alan-hawe-he-killed-three-sons-and-wife-with-hatchet-and-knives-35024458.html

Great article.

Don't agree. Over-sensationalist, using language like 'she fought like a tigress to save her own and her children's lives', when she actually had defensive injuries and may not have known that he also intended killing their children. How did the youngest child know the fate of the others, as she suggests? I'm not misogynistic but the journo does seem like she is fitting the story to an agenda of her own.

Agree.

I see Hawe as a murderer of 4 innocent victims. As an aside he was also a victim of suicide and obviously had mental health issues, but the latter doesn't, in any minuscule way, forgive the murders imho.

As for the article, it is way too sensationalist and tabloid in style for me.

E.G.: "The eulogising reached such dizzy heights last weekend, that I wondered if Alan Hawe was being canonised along with Mother Teresa."

Really? Did the journalist really confuse Irish people's strong tendency to avoid speaking ill of the dead, with canonisation? Daft hyperbole like that read ridiculously in an article on such a serious and sensitive matter.

[Esmarelda]

I read the article above and I've no idea why people think it's good.

Is it not the case that most of the coverage has centred on trying to find an explanation for what happened? If it has been stated that Alan Hawe was a good man in the community etc., surely it's only to highlight how utterly incomprehensible the act was, and not to make him out to be a great fella.

The journalist (ironically given how she' criticising the other coverage) has decided, with no evidence, that Alan Hawe was misogynistic, backed up by the "fact" that it was difficult to get a photo of Clodagh.

Where's the evidence that he was misogynistic?

I have no idea why he did what he did. I cannot comprehend a father hacking his kids to death and I doubt I ever will. But as far as I can see this is a journalist criticising what she perceives as the defending of a killer and at the same time painting a picture of the man based on...............well I don't know what.

I think her article is good in so far as we judge someone like this Alan Hawe in a one dimensional manner and she's questioning that.

He collected at mass, the priest visited the home, done the gate at the local GAA ground and was a school VP, so he has to be a good husband, father and so forth when really we don't have a clue as he could still do this and be a violent thug.

She is also right to point out that we seem to be looking to explain away his evilness as a one off act of madness, driven by mental illness, but why him and why do we not consider him an evil f**ker who hacked his wife and three children to death and how do we not consider that he may not be a good person to his own family?

We are socially conditioned to an extent to think like this, Breen is right to point out our own failings in this regard.

If she thinks that people are saying that he must be a good husband, then fair enough. Maybe he was a good husband up until this point. Why would she say he wasn't? Like I said above, any mention of this normality that I've read is to show that this act was completely unexpected as he appeared to be an average man. If there was any indication that this might have happened then this line wouldn't be used. I think she's confusing this with people defending him which I don't think is the case.

As you say, we don't really know why this happened but the journalist throws misogyny into the equation. So it's wrong to suggest that he may have been a normal husband but it's ok to use your platform as journalist to imply that he hated women? And where does the murdering of his children fall into this theory.

If he disliked women then why kill himself?

I think it's a highly irresponsible piece and I'd wonder what she hoped to achieve with it.

Why would he kill his wife ? Breen said he must have thought of her as a possession. That would qualify as misogyny
Like he was some sort of Viking that had to go to the next world with his chattels.

He must have? Based on what? We can all have a guess at why he did it. Is it worthy of print?

[seafoid]

I read the article above and I've no idea why people think it's good.

Is it not the case that most of the coverage has centred on trying to find an explanation for what happened? If it has been stated that Alan Hawe was a good man in the community etc., surely it's only to highlight how utterly incomprehensible the act was, and not to make him out to be a great fella.

The journalist (ironically given how she' criticising the other coverage) has decided, with no evidence, that Alan Hawe was misogynistic, backed up by the "fact" that it was difficult to get a photo of Clodagh.

Where's the evidence that he was misogynistic?

I have no idea why he did what he did. I cannot comprehend a father hacking his kids to death and I doubt I ever will. But as far as I can see this is a journalist criticising what she perceives as the defending of a killer and at the same time painting a picture of the man based on...............well I don't know what.

I think her article is good in so far as we judge someone like this Alan Hawe in a one dimensional manner and she's questioning that.

He collected at mass, the priest visited the home, done the gate at the local GAA ground and was a school VP, so he has to be a good husband, father and so forth when really we don't have a clue as he could still do this and be a violent thug.

She is also right to point out that we seem to be looking to explain away his evilness as a one off act of madness, driven by mental illness, but why him and why do we not consider him an evil f**ker who hacked his wife and three children to death and how do we not consider that he may not be a good person to his own family?

We are socially conditioned to an extent to think like this, Breen is right to point out our own failings in this regard.

If she thinks that people are saying that he must be a good husband, then fair enough. Maybe he was a good husband up until this point. Why would she say he wasn't? Like I said above, any mention of this normality that I've read is to show that this act was completely unexpected as he appeared to be an average man. If there was any indication that this might have happened then this line wouldn't be used. I think she's confusing this with people defending him which I don't think is the case.

As you say, we don't really know why this happened but the journalist throws misogyny into the equation. So it's wrong to suggest that he may have been a normal husband but it's ok to use your platform as journalist to imply that he hated women? And where does the murdering of his children fall into this theory.

If he disliked women then why kill himself?

I think it's a highly irresponsible piece and I'd wonder what she hoped to achieve with it.

Why would he kill his wife ? Breen said he must have thought of her as a possession. That would qualify as misogyny
Like he was some sort of Viking that had to go to the next world with his chattels.

He must have? Based on what? We can all have a guess at why he did it. Is it worthy of print?

The fact that he killed her. Why didn't he kill himself and leave it at that ? I think there are 400 suicides a year. The vast majority don't murder their family.

[Esmarelda]

[/quote]

Why would he kill his wife ? Breen said he must have thought of her as a possession. That would qualify as misogyny
Like he was some sort of Viking that had to go to the next world with his chattels.
[/quote]
He must have? Based on what? We can all have a guess at why he did it. Is it worthy of print?
[/quote]The fact that he killed her. Why didn't he kill himself and leave it at that ? I think there are 400 suicides a year. The vast majority don't murder their family.
[/quote]
So you're saying that the only possible reason he killed his wife is because he considered her his possession?

[seafoid]

Why would he kill his wife ? Breen said he must have thought of her as a possession. That would qualify as misogyny
Like he was some sort of Viking that had to go to the next world with his chattels.
[/quote]
He must have? Based on what? We can all have a guess at why he did it. Is it worthy of print?
[/quote]The fact that he killed her. Why didn't he kill himself and leave it at that ? I think there are 400 suicides a year. The vast majority don't murder their family.
[/quote]
So you're saying that the only possible reason he killed his wife is because he considered her his possession?
[/quote]
Would explain why the kids were also killed. Any other theory? 

[T Fearon]

Next week,in the Belfast Telegraph,Ruth Dudley Edwards blames the IRA and Northern Catholics for this.

[mrdeeds]

The Belfast Telegraph and other publications have done the story to death at this stage and in a few weeks will have movef on while a community and family will still have to deal with this.

[omaghjoe]

For those that are interested...

I investigated a bit online and had a bit of a think about this mental health in relation to the law problem as well..

Anyway it seems that the difference between mental disorders in terms of culpability to laws is that if the disorder is only associated with criminal acts then it cannot be deemed criminally insane.

So in other words if a sociopath unremorsefully goes around assaulting people for his own benefit he is deemed responsible for his actions, whereas a schizophrenic who thinks that those same people are alien agents and he does the same thing to them he is deemed not responsible.

Seems rather weird reasoning to get to that place and widely variable based on interpretation, opinion and perhaps just personal belief.

To me its obvious where we want to get to is if the person made a conscious choice then its a crime. However how do you know who makes a conscious choice and who doesnt? I believe that everyone makes a conscious decision to some degree or another no matter what their condition, so this leads to another dilemma...

What if the person didnt understand the consequences? This is another grey area and impossible to truely know but lets assume we do have a fair idea from their condition.

I think this particular incident the gentleman was aware of what he was doing and the consequences of it in-spite of his condition.

Although I had mentioned schizophrenics earlier and someone with that condition could be aware of the consequences make a conscious decision to commit a crime and do it anyway such is their warped sense of reality... there is certainly no one size fits all when it comes to mental health and justice.

[Rudi]

Good piece in Belfast Telegraph worth a read.  There would be many people out there with fragile mental health issues, but to do this is something else. 
Agree with ONeil in that until this tragedy is fully analysed from all angles it would be unfair to speculate what caused this

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/news-analysis/stop-making-excuses-for-alan-hawe-he-killed-three-sons-and-wife-with-hatchet-and-knives-35024458.html

Great article.

Don't agree. Over-sensationalist, using language like 'she fought like a tigress to save her own and her children's lives', when she actually had defensive injuries and may not have known that he also intended killing their children. How did the youngest child know the fate of the others, as she suggests? I'm not misogynistic but the journo does seem like she is fitting the story to an agenda of her own.

Agree.

I see Hawe as a murderer of 4 innocent victims. As an aside he was also a victim of suicide and obviously had mental health issues, but the latter doesn't, in any minuscule way, forgive the murders imho.

As for the article, it is way too sensationalist and tabloid in style for me.

E.G.: "The eulogising reached such dizzy heights last weekend, that I wondered if Alan Hawe was being canonised along with Mother Teresa."

Really? Did the journalist really confuse Irish people's strong tendency to avoid speaking ill of the dead, with canonisation? Daft hyperbole like that read ridiculously in an article on such a serious and sensitive matter.

Would agree, good post Muppet. The line quoted about Mother Teresa smacks of awful tabloid scrap.

[seafoid]

The article was written from a female point of view. And a lot of women were scared by the story. Because it will happen again. Battery is bad enough but the slaughter of the family by the father is a different level of violence altogether. And nothing is done to investigate these cases. So women aren't even safe in their homes.

[mrdeeds]

The article was written from a female point of view. And a lot of women were scared by the story. Because it will happen again. Battery is bad enough but the slaughter of the family by the father is a different level of violence altogether. And nothing is done to investigate these cases. So women aren't even safe in their homes.

And what about Mary Keegan who stabbed her own two sons before committing suicide? She wasn't a man and not the only woman to carry out an atrocity. Also like Alan Hawe people spoke of her great character.

[muppet]

The article was written from a female point of view. And a lot of women were scared by the story. Because it will happen again. Battery is bad enough but the slaughter of the family by the father is a different level of violence altogether. And nothing is done to investigate these cases. So women aren't even safe in their homes.

And what about Mary Keegan who stabbed her own two sons before committing suicide? She wasn't a man and not the only woman to carry out an atrocity. Also like Alan Hawe people spoke of her great character.

There are too many people with agendas willing to twist a horrible story like this to suit themselves. Starting with the media.......

[seafoid]

The article was written from a female point of view. And a lot of women were scared by the story. Because it will happen again. Battery is bad enough but the slaughter of the family by the father is a different level of violence altogether. And nothing is done to investigate these cases. So women aren't even safe in their homes.

And what about Mary Keegan who stabbed her own two sons before committing suicide? She wasn't a man and not the only woman to carry out an atrocity. Also like Alan Hawe people spoke of her great character.

How many of the 30 or so murder suicide cases had women killing the kids ?