Joe Brolly

[Itchy]

I think he's been trying to make the point that it's near impossible to have a coherent and constructive discussion on the subject as people fly off the handle into moral outrage mode at the mere mention of the word Paedophile. I agree with him 100%, it's such a touchy / taboo subject, that a helluva lot of people cannot discuss rationally.

Well said.

We 're talking about child rapists. What rational discussion is to be had? It seems to me the victims of these rapists are considered last in this equation, the destroyed family, the stolen childhood and a trauma carried for life for the victim and family. Yet we should have a rational discussion about the rapist? Load of auld bollox.

there has been a whole mob mentaility and as Joe says theyll move on to something else next week...  he has been a voice of rational discussion

So let's have a rational discussion. I'll start, Famous man rapes a child after grooming her. His famous friends tell us of how he's a great lad altogether. He gets a patheticly low sentence. The victim and family get life sentence. So what next...

[imtommygunn]

Question which i don't know answer to....

When those guys gave character references did they know he was guilty?

[Itchy]

I think he's been trying to make the point that it's near impossible to have a coherent and constructive discussion on the subject as people fly off the handle into moral outrage mode at the mere mention of the word Paedophile. I agree with him 100%, it's such a touchy / taboo subject, that a helluva lot of people cannot discuss rationally.

Well said.

We 're talking about child rapists. What rational discussion is to be had? It seems to me the victims of these rapists are considered last in this equation, the destroyed family, the stolen childhood and a trauma carried for life for the victim and family. Yet we should have a rational discussion about the rapist? Load of auld bollox.

there has been a whole mob mentaility and as Joe says theyll move on to something else next week...  he has been a voice of rational discussion

So let's have a rational discussion. I'll start, Famous man rapes a child after grooming her. His famous friends tell us of how he's a great lad altogether. He gets a patheticly low sentence. The victim and family get life sentence. So what next...

Is the legal system and judge you may ask. So how did you feel about Mickey Harte giving a reference for sex attacker? No-one wants to address that question on this topic...

I think Harte a total and complete hypocrite.

[bennydorano]

It would probably be better to be a Murderer than a Paedophile in our society. There's plenty of released murderers walking the streets of the world with not 1/100th of the stigma of any paedophile, is that not fucked up in it's own way? You can recover from the actions of a Paedophile, not a murderer.

[Itchy]

It would probably be better to be a Murderer than a Paedophile in our society. There's plenty of released murderers walking the streets of the world with not 1/100th of the stigma of any paedophile, is that not fucked up in it's own way? You can recover from the actions of a Paedophile, not a murderer.

A murderer might do a bit more time in prison. For example Humphries probably will serve 18 months for raping a child.

[southtyronegael]

id say alot of children who were abused by paedos may as well have been murdered because they will never recover from it. should be the same long sentence for both.

[bennydorano]

If you think being murdered and being subject to the actions of a Paedophile are on a par it illustrates the fact of how entrenched the taboo is and why discussions on the subject are often very irrational.

[Tony Baloney]

It would probably be better to be a Murderer than a Paedophile in our society. There's plenty of released murderers walking the streets of the world with not 1/100th of the stigma of any paedophile, is that not fucked up in it's own way? You can recover from the actions of a Paedophile, not a murderer.

Age of the victim is the issue, I think. Someone who murders a child would not have 1/100th of the stigma of a paedophile IMO. I'd say anyone committing serious crimes on children would be seen as the lowest of the low in our society. Is it wrong for us to be more outraged about serious crimes being committed against the most vulnerable people in our society? I don't think so.

I'm not going to defend Humphries or his ilk but when the sex act was performed, she was 16. Under the legal age of consent but in many countries she'd be married off at this stage. In my opinion language from Itchy about "raping a child" does not reflect what happened here and reduces the impact of what the horror of that really is.

[southtyronegael]

If you think being murdered and being subject to the actions of a Paedophile are on a par it illustrates the fact of how entrenched the taboo is and why discussions on the subject are often very irrational.

im just saying the devastation left behind is on a par.

[Itchy]

It would probably be better to be a Murderer than a Paedophile in our society. There's plenty of released murderers walking the streets of the world with not 1/100th of the stigma of any paedophile, is that not fucked up in it's own way? You can recover from the actions of a Paedophile, not a murderer.

Age of the victim is the issue, I think. Someone who murders a child would not have 1/100th of the stigma of a paedophile IMO. I'd say anyone committing serious crimes on children would be seen as the lowest of the low in our society. Is it wrong for us to be more outraged about serious crimes being committed against the most vulnerable people in our society? I don't think so.

I'm not going to defend Humphries or his ilk but when the sex act was performed, she was 16. Under the legal age of consent but in many countries she'd be married off at this stage. In my opinion language from Itchy about "raping a child" does not reflect what happened here and reduces the impact of what the horror of that really is.

Rape child or groom and abuse a child, all the same to me. He was texting the girl at 14 send her 16k texts in 3 years some with pictures of his genitals. There are also 2 other cases that never got to court I believe. Don't make any mistake, sc**bag is what we are dealing with here. He is not the victim.

[ONeill]

Say someone very close (friendship wise) to you is being investigated for having sex with a minor. You're asked to provide a character reference for that person for the time you've known them up to this point. At this stage the case has not been settled yet. What do you do?

I think I would give a reference as it has nothing to do with the possible crime. If convicted, and you're approached to give a reference to lessen the punishment, then no. At this stage you know they're not the person you thought they were.

At what stage were the references given?

[redhandefender]

If you think being murdered and being subject to the actions of a Paedophile are on a par it illustrates the fact of how entrenched the taboo is and why discussions on the subject are often very irrational.

Any conversation with this dummy is irrational

[Owen Brannigan]

Questions I don't know the answer to....

What is the relevance of a character reference in the legal process?
Who chooses the people to give them?
Are these always positive?

1. Character references are provided to the judge prior to sentencing by the defence, social work or psychiatric reports may be requested by the judge at the same time and nowadays the prosecution is allowed to bring forward those connected with the victim and/or the victim to make impact statements.  All of this information is taken into account by the judge before sentencing.  The defence will have gathered these references prior to the trial so that they at hand to provide to the judge should the case be lost.

2. The defence chooses the people who may give references and will take a range of people across the professional spectrum or community who are willing to provide such references referring to the character of the defendant.

3. The references are always positive because the defence will provide guidance on how to write them while cautioning the writer about the nature of the offence and that they may not state any facts relevant to the case or claim that the defendant is innocent of the crime.

In a previous work situation, I was often asked to provide references that could be used in court.  I always wrote references which were positive and relevant to my experiences in dealing with the defendant and did not refer to any opinion that I had regarding the guilt or innocence of the defendant. I always ensured that my reference was an honest and true report on the individual because the document would be part of a legal case.  Most times I would have believed that my reference would have had to impact on the opinion of the judge in sentencing the defendant.  In my work position I did not believe that I could refuse to write a reference about a person regardless of the matter in court especially as I did not refer to the crime with which they were charged and simply wrote the reference relevant to my experience of the person.

[Owen Brannigan]

Brolly is 100% correct about the references and the hysteria regarding paedophillia and this is reinforced by some of the comments above.

Humphries is not a paedophilia as his victim had reached puberty and beyond.  Paedophilia refers to sexual interactions between adults and pre-pubescent young people.  Humphries is a reprehensible and loathsome individual who used his position and trust to sexually abuse a young person and while found guilty was given a sentence which should be appealed by the prosecution because in reality he will serve little time in prison due to remission.

Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12, criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13. A person who is diagnosed with pedophilia must be at least 16 years old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.

[Asal Mor]

Great post Owen. Correct on all fronts though I'd say his actions in this case were loathsome and reprehensible. From reading Paul Kimmage's piece this morning it's clear there was also a large part of Humphries that was kind, compassionate and generous. Not much good to his victim and as you say, the sentence should have been longer, but nobody is all good or all bad either.