Tom Humphries

Started by bottlethrower7, January 29, 2007, 09:35:03 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

johnneycool

Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

I'd have thought the character reference would have been used in a case where it was seen that the guilty party had a one off aberration and this was seen as out of character for this individual.

Tom Humphries and his systematic abuse of this young girl over a prolonged period of time is a very different world and IMO character references should not ever have been considered.


magpie seanie

Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

What's brave about it?

Syferus

Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

Christ. You're serious. Wow.

magpie seanie

Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:01:01 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 01:42:31 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

What's brave about it?

whether you agree or disagree with what they did, it is brave in that they were going to get hammered for it.

Sorry, this does not make sense. If I turn up in Cardiff tonight, take my clothes off, run on the pitch and set fire to an Irish flag - is that brave? I'd know I'd get hammered for it.

Owen Brannigan

In court cases, the defendant may provide the judge with references from a range of individuals usually from friends and neighbours through to those associated by their interaction with the defendant in terms of their work or professional standing.

In this case I would be surprised if anyone from the world of GAA would have been asked or willing to provide a reference. 

In a previous existence, I was sometimes asked to provide such references for submission to the judge.  In writing such a reference, you are instructed that you cannot refer to the actions of the defendant in the particular court proceedings as a form of mitigation, otherwise the reference would be disregarded.  All such references are considered by the judge alongside the evidence in the case.  In all cases the references form part of the court papers made available to everyone involved. Requests to me for such references have come from family members who were collecting the references for their legal representatives to evaluate before submission.  I never received requests from the defendant. I have never known whether any references I provided were ever used depending on whether the person was found guilty.

In some instances, people with no direct connection to the defendant in a personal or professional level are asked to provide references, e.g. Mickey Harte has given references for individuals because he is recognised as a specialist in his field (google this) and regarded by some as a person whose opinion on an individual and/or his family counts.  This may be the case in some of the references being provided for Humphries.

LooseCannon

But he ghost-wrote Dónal óg's book.
Dónal óg willingly put his name to it.
Ewan McKenna said it on twitter.

magpie seanie

Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:04:38 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:01:01 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 01:42:31 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

What's brave about it?

whether you agree or disagree with what they did, it is brave in that they were going to get hammered for it.

Sorry, this does not make sense. If I turn up in Cardiff tonight, take my clothes off, run on the pitch and set fire to an Irish flag - is that brave? I'd know I'd get hammered for it.

Bizarre comparison - they done it as they believed was right thing to do... if you believed doing that in Cardiff tonite was the right thing to do, i guess it would be brave...

OK - differnet example. Let's go for the KKK and their Nazi brethren. They do what the do and they know they'll get hammered for it but they believe they're right. I suppose they're brave too by your definition?

armaghniac

Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:45:55 PM
OK - differnet example. Let's go for the KKK and their Nazi brethren. They do what the do and they know they'll get hammered for it but they believe they're right. I suppose they're brave too by your definition?

That you think that providing a factual statement to a court is analogous to the activities of  KKK is an example of the kind of imbalanced view that threatens the integrity of such courts.
If at first you don't succeed, then goto Plan B

Mayo4Sam

The problem lies in it being a character reference. You are placing your  good name on the line vouching for this persons character. Walsh wrote in the times yesterday that he couldn't turn his back on Humphries after knowing him for 30 years. However these two things are different. I have no problem in him supporting him, visiting him in prison, helping him rehab or at the very least not reoffend. I imagine if it was one of my friends, they still need a support network.
However vouching for their character is awful IMO, this person has none, they've violated a child's trust and ruined their life.
Excuse me for talking while you're trying to interrupt me

magpie seanie

Quote from: armaghniac on October 09, 2017, 02:53:12 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:45:55 PM
OK - differnet example. Let's go for the KKK and their Nazi brethren. They do what the do and they know they'll get hammered for it but they believe they're right. I suppose they're brave too by your definition?

That you think that providing a factual statement to a court is analogous to the activities of  KKK is an example of the kind of imbalanced view that threatens the integrity of such courts.

I was asking a question. I wasn't providing my opinion. The comparison for want of a better word was in the context of a definition of "brave" provided by another poster. I didn't set the definition on this thread for what is "brave" - I'm merely showing how farcical the provided definition was. If you were making any attempt to follow the thread you'd know that and not make a silly comment like that.

magpie seanie

Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 03:41:31 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:45:55 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:04:38 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:01:01 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 01:42:31 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

What's brave about it?

whether you agree or disagree with what they did, it is brave in that they were going to get hammered for it.

Sorry, this does not make sense. If I turn up in Cardiff tonight, take my clothes off, run on the pitch and set fire to an Irish flag - is that brave? I'd know I'd get hammered for it.

Bizarre comparison - they done it as they believed was right thing to do... if you believed doing that in Cardiff tonite was the right thing to do, i guess it would be brave...

OK - differnet example. Let's go for the KKK and their Nazi brethren. They do what the do and they know they'll get hammered for it but they believe they're right. I suppose they're brave too by your definition?

your comparisons are getting more bizarre.

I'm merely fulfilling the terms of the definition of "brave" given above to show how ridiculous it is.

magpie seanie

Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 03:52:27 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 03:48:27 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 03:41:31 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:45:55 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:04:38 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:01:01 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 01:42:31 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

What's brave about it?

whether you agree or disagree with what they did, it is brave in that they were going to get hammered for it.

Sorry, this does not make sense. If I turn up in Cardiff tonight, take my clothes off, run on the pitch and set fire to an Irish flag - is that brave? I'd know I'd get hammered for it.

Bizarre comparison - they done it as they believed was right thing to do... if you believed doing that in Cardiff tonite was the right thing to do, i guess it would be brave...

OK - differnet example. Let's go for the KKK and their Nazi brethren. They do what the do and they know they'll get hammered for it but they believe they're right. I suppose they're brave too by your definition?

your comparisons are getting more bizarre.

I'm merely fulfilling the terms of the definition of "brave" given above to show how ridiculous it is.

A lot of people dont do or say what they think because of fear of the consequence... derision, being ostracised, criticised or worse. So I think they'd have known would be  a backlash... so I think it was brave... No doubt you'll come up with some other example but thats my feeling in this case.

Even if something is completely wrong then it's brave to do it if you know you'll get hammered for it. That's what you're saying. I more equate bravery with standing up for what is right.

Pardon me if I'm unable to see the merit in assisting a predator paedophile get his sentence reduced.

seafoid

The thing about the justice system is that it distinginguishes between civilians and disreputable  knackers via the concept of "comes from a respectable family".  Respectable family members get shorter sentences. Habitual criminals do not. The 2 references are from respectable people.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

magpie seanie

Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 04:03:25 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 03:56:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 03:52:27 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 03:48:27 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 03:41:31 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:45:55 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:04:38 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: longballin on October 09, 2017, 02:01:01 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on October 09, 2017, 01:42:31 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on October 09, 2017, 01:09:23 PM
I agree they are irrelevant. It's also a brave enough thing for Walsh & Cusack to do as they're hardly going to get many plaudits for doing it.

What's brave about it?

whether you agree or disagree with what they did, it is brave in that they were going to get hammered for it.

Sorry, this does not make sense. If I turn up in Cardiff tonight, take my clothes off, run on the pitch and set fire to an Irish flag - is that brave? I'd know I'd get hammered for it.

Bizarre comparison - they done it as they believed was right thing to do... if you believed doing that in Cardiff tonite was the right thing to do, i guess it would be brave...

OK - differnet example. Let's go for the KKK and their Nazi brethren. They do what the do and they know they'll get hammered for it but they believe they're right. I suppose they're brave too by your definition?

your comparisons are getting more bizarre.

I'm merely fulfilling the terms of the definition of "brave" given above to show how ridiculous it is.

A lot of people dont do or say what they think because of fear of the consequence... derision, being ostracised, criticised or worse. So I think they'd have known would be  a backlash... so I think it was brave... No doubt you'll come up with some other example but thats my feeling in this case.

Even if something is completely wrong then it's brave to do it if you know you'll get hammered for it. That's what you're saying. I more equate bravery with standing up for what is right.

Pardon me if I'm unable to see the merit in assisting a predator paedophile get his sentence reduced.

I see what your saying there lest you think I have any sympathy for a paedo. NONE. I still however think they stood by a friend which was brave considering they would get hammered for it... so we'll agree to disagree.

Fair enough. I think we just disagree on the choice of word.

magpie seanie

Quote from: seafoid on October 09, 2017, 04:21:33 PM
The thing about the justice system is that it distinginguishes between civilians and disreputable  knackers via the concept of "comes from a respectable family".  Respectable family members get shorter sentences. Habitual criminals do not. The 2 references are from respectable people.

Yeah - this is something that gets on my wick. I've heard of many cases before where people have written these "character references" and I disagree entirely with them. I'd class myself as a pretty compassionate person, more willing than most to believe in people having an ability to change but when they've caused such damage - well they deserve their punishment.