Cork city has gone to the dogs.

[Heartrate 111]

Judges can only sentence within a range prescribed by law. Which is set by legislature, not judiciary.

I know that but my point is they just use suspended sentences like confetti at a wedding.

Why do we have people with over 100 convictions if judges were doing their jobs properly?

 

[Matlock]

I know that but my point is they just use suspended sentences like confetti at a wedding.

Why do we have people with over 100 convictions if judges were doing their jobs properly?

Because for most of those people most of those offences will be minor in nature. You can't lock someone away forever for a district court offences, even if they pile up.

 

[Heartrate 111]

Because for most of those people most of those offences will be minor in nature. You can't lock someone away forever for a district court offences, even if they pile up.

Agree for first 5 but over 100 they should be taken out of society for a number of years not months .

Remember for everything they get caught there will be at least 3 other times they don't get caught.

 

[junior footballer]

Agree for first 5 but over 100 they should be taken out of society for a number of years not months .

Remember for everything they get caught there will be at least 3 other times they don't get caught.

Government policy across all political parties is that jail is a measure of last resort, this has been driven by academics, NGOs, civil service and adopted by the political, judges operate within that framework if you want it to change you need political change and there is none, add in the obvious incentive of thousands of cash cows for the legal profession and you have a system designed to operate the way it does

 

[Matlock]

Agree for first 5 but over 100 they should be taken out of society for a number of years not months .

Sometimes they are. It still isn't indefinite and if they (or society as a whole) don't address the underlying issues then they will reoffend.

Remember for everything they get caught there will be at least 3 other times they don't get caught.

We only sentence people for offences that they are actually convicted of though, rather than what we think they might have done.

Repeat offending is one of those things that seems easy to fix, but it actually isn't. If someone is offending because of addiction (for example) then no jail term is really going to fix that unless they get clean. That isn't to suggest that we don't jail them, of course we do and we should, but jail alone won't magically fix anything.

I had a client years ago, chronic addiction issues. I still see her name in the paper periodically though I haven't acted for her in ages. It is mainly public order matters and shoplifting. She shoplifts to get drugs, and then she is angry and out of control and gets arrested for public order stuff. She has had her kids taken off her, she had gotten a number of bad beatings (presumably for drug debts). She has been jailed for long stints (given that these are small offences). None of it is going to change until she gets clean. Now, you might argue "lock her up for 5 years" but firstly, the judges don't have the authority to do that for the offences she is accused of and secondly, we don't have the jail spaces to lock up those sorts of offenders for years on end.

 

[Matlock]

Government policy across all political parties is that jail is a measure of last resort, this has been driven by academics, NGOs, civil service and adopted by the political, judges operate within that framework if you want it to change you need political change and there is none, add in the obvious incentive of thousands of cash cows for the legal profession and you have a system designed to operate the way it does

You know that the vast majority of lawyers don't do criminal law at all, right?

Have you ever looked at the research on the efficacy of imprisonment when it comes to recidivism?

 

[TheOutdoorThreadmill]

I would love to see a 3 strike rule here like in Murrica
Three serious offences and it's life.

 

[Matlock]

I would love to see a 3 strike rule here like in Murrica
Three serious offences and it's life.

It has its challenges as a law, not least that it doesn't seem to work that well as a deterrent!

In any event, it would do nothing for the "100+ convictions" brigade that heartrate is talking about as they are DC offenders mainly.

 

[Jj72]

Meanwhile, in other news... a faction of the Faulkners filmed themselves as they bust into one of the Heaphys gaff in Ballincollig and put in the windows... thick fuckers live around the corner in the same estate as each other... and to emphasise the thick part, they filmed themselves doing it... Imagine armed masked men breaking into your house with a camera crew, fuckin eejits.

 

[Clairecarebear]

Sometimes they are. It still isn't indefinite and if they (or society as a whole) don't address the underlying issues then they will reoffend.

We only sentence people for offences that they are actually convicted of though, rather than what we think they might have done.

Repeat offending is one of those things that seems easy to fix, but it actually isn't. If someone is offending because of addiction (for example) then no jail term is really going to fix that unless they get clean. That isn't to suggest that we don't jail them, of course we do and we should, but jail alone won't magically fix anything.

I had a client years ago, chronic addiction issues. I still see her name in the paper periodically though I haven't acted for her in ages. It is mainly public order matters and shoplifting. She shoplifts to get drugs, and then she is angry and out of control and gets arrested for public order stuff. She has had her kids taken off her, she had gotten a number of bad beatings (presumably for drug debts). She has been jailed for long stints (given that these are small offences). None of it is going to change until she gets clean. Now, you might argue "lock her up for 5 years" but firstly, the judges don't have the authority to do that for the offences she is accused of and secondly, we don't have the jail spaces to lock up those sorts of offenders for years on end.

Correct. Not dealing with the underlying issues which usually compound each other is not going to offer any type of solution.
Building treatment centres, funding counselling and channeling resources towards dealing with root causes would prevent a far higher percentage of crime than putting the same money into building prisons.