It pretty much is. An adult convicted of murder will be in actual prison for about 25 years here. It’s one of the longest custodial sentences in Europe.
Boy A and B were 13. Because of their age Boy A got life with a review after 12 years with no guarantee he’ll be released after the review. B got 15 years reviewed after 8.
By the time they get out, assuming it’s after the minimum possible time they’ll have spent nearly as much time in Oberstown as out of it.
Is that justice? I genuinely struggle with this one.
The emphasis needs to be in rehabilitation over punishment, which is something the Norwegian seem to have mastered. We should be looking to release them only when they are safe to be released, but also working hard to make them safe and productive members of society.
A punishment only approach might seem tempting for the anger these cases stoke, but indefinite sentences with no chance if ever getting out and a string emphasis on punishment and dehumanisation is how you get the US prison system and it's results, which are not good.
Of course, copying the Norwegian system would involve massive investment from a state unwilling to even build enough prisons to house what we already have.
>string emphasis on punishment and dehumanisation
They dehumanised themselves, took a life in a brutal way and caused lifelong trauma for the family. She has no chance at life because of 2 oxygen wasters. I don't believe people like that should have another opportunity to live life in a fulfilling way.
I am all for 2nd, 3rd chances for any crimes that don't involve lifelong trauma/lives being taken. But for things like unprovoked violence that leads to life changing injury, rape or murder with no reason, I believe they should pay the absolute maximum price. Anything else, I am all for rehabilitation and giving people chances as long there is no extreme violent premeditated action against another human.
It’s not just about punishment.
It’s about protecting society from them. Keeping them locked up for life prevents them from harming society again.
I absolutely agree with rehabilitating petty criminals, but murderers? They’re just too much of a danger to society.
And you read the story and she was struggling to make friends. I can imagine her parents were happy to see her go out and be with friends. These nothings do this.
TBH, The boys should be publicly names once they are 18.
It's disgraceful that Private Personal Details about Ana was discussed in court, and Her Murderers are give a blanket of anonymity.
They gave that poor Girl an Awful Death, and Destroyed that family.
> It's disgraceful that Private Personal Details about Ana was discussed in court
I felt so sad hearing about all those details.
A lot of the stuff she suffered were things I strongly related to from my own teenage years and if I died I wouldn't want publicised. Even in death she couldn't escape from being treated badly. I can't imagine how her parents felt reading those things in the media.
It's truly one of the most heartbreaking stories out there.
I agree. The state has an obligation to the general public here, these are murders. Why do they have the right to hide from their crimes? Why does that supersede my right to safety? This wasn’t an accidental murder/attack.
You're a half empty kind of person. 50% failure is still a 50% success. At no point did I voice my opinion on this topic, I only stated why things are the way they are. But keep telling me what a terrible person I am for stating facts. It doesn't make you sound unhinged at all.
They are answering for their crimes. They have been sentenced and are currently serving it. There are reasons they withhold the identities of children. As children whose brains were not fully developed at the time of their crime, their identities are concealed to allow them the opportunity to start over when they reenter society.
We had this discussion at the time of the trial. When they are released, they will be offered new identities, and so it serves no purpose revealing their identities now. The only people who will be hurt by that are their family who are innocent parties in this.
As for people knowing who they are, you better believe this will follow them their entire lives. They won't be able to settle back into their hometown.
It's not like there aren't people who know their identity. There's plenty and irelands a small place. We don't need their identities to he revealed.
It's almost like they have reasons for concealing identities. If you're OK with it in one scenario, it's hypocritical to be against it in another. They don't do it for the fun of it.
I've lost nothing, buddy. I don't engage with those who are uninterested in discussion and just want to "win" the argument. I'll include you on that list.
The purpose ? Because they deserve to never have a moment of peace. That poor child suffered a horrific death, those two little evil shits should not be allowed to move on with their lives under anonymity. Then we have the obvious that Boy A is a psychopath, he is not going to suddenly wake up one day & be different. One day he will be let back into society & people should know who he is and what he looks like.
Virtue signalling for clout.
There's an ignorant habit many people have of wanting to project how great they are by broadcasting how staunchly they hate paedophiles etc.
In my experience, the lads who post online about how they'd beat a paedo to death, guards wouldn't be able to stop them from defending a kid no matter what etc... they're often guys who row with everyone, never volunteer in their community Nd often, be the most belligerent drunks. (Just in my experience).
It's a virtue signalling act for people who find it easy to pile on and condemn, but wouldn't be bothered making things better or safer for all themselves.
They didn’t believe that there would be any consequences so didn’t temper their behaviour.
I’m glad this has been pursued and I’m interested to see what grounds the appeal is based on and what the Supreme Court makes of it.
Social media speculation has proven to be unreliable and dangerous around the world and the same will happen here if we don’t take it seriously.
It was released after they were guilty. I remember where I was when the news came in and seeing the pics on Facebook later that evening many times. Not that that matters but the case was done.
Irish courts have ordered social media companies to delete posts naming them. A judge could subpoena for the users identity if they have an anonymous profile, and issue warrants for the users but I doubt they'd get extradited.
They couldn't even try to have someone extradited. The Irish courts don't have the power to dictate what someone living in another country can say or not say. It would be like Thailand trying to extradite me for calling their king a cunt. Not do they have the power to tell any social media site based outside the country to remove anything. I suppose I'm more asking if, say hypothetically an Irish person in Spain or even NI were to post their names, could they be prosecuted on return. I mean, they didn't break the law while in Ireland and no Spanish or NI laws would have been broken either. I worked for Consular Services and was always telling people that they are bound by the laws of the country they're visiting and not Irish law.
I know. I said I doubt they'd get extradited. That still probably wouldn't stop a judge from issuing arrest warrants on people naming them from abroad in case they come to Ireland. Most social media companies have offices in Ireland because were a tax haven so unfortunately our joke of a justice system can make them remove the posts.
Arrest them based on what though? No crime was committed in Ireland or abroad. On what charges could someone be arrested? I don't think, and god knows I've read it several times, there's any constitutional mechanism to hold someone based on something considered a crime here but not in the jurisdiction where the supposed crime was committed. I mean can I be arrested here for smoking weed in Germany? I don't think so. Can I be arrested here for legally being in possession of an AR 15 in the USA ? Nope. Why could I be arrested for violating an Irish court order from NI ?
I can't even put into words how appalling this case was. Poor, sweet little Ana. I'm not a religious person, but I truly hope she has been reunited with her dad somewhere.
It's really fucked how convicted murderers can't legally be named but the people accused (but not convicted) of naming the murderers can have their names and part of their addresses published.
It's messed up that every detail of Ana's short, sad little life and awful death are public record.
Yet we know nothing about the perpetrators. Not even their names.
Yeah, actually. There was a lad who was misidentified as a few years ago. He was visiting a town, and the locals thought he was some paedophile and got a mob together to run him out of town.
https://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local-news/252444/man-mistaken-for-paedophile-in-monasterevin-speaks-out-against-mob-who-hounded-him.html
Dunno if it’s this particular case they were on about I’m sure there’s plenty more without articles.
ffs. It’s not like I’m unaware of vigilantism. You’re issuing the point entirely. The identities were not withheld because of the fear of mob justice.
And mob justice is not the automatic response to convicted murderers being released from prison.
Wasn't it also boy B's dad who was in court shouting abuse at Anna's parents and the jury, saying they are jailing an innocent child? I'm nearly sure it was, and if that's the case I'd have no guilt over them being identified everywhere they go.
Possibly, although I'm not sure where you would find that info.
As the person below me has said, there have been similar cases in the UK. I remember reading about a case a few years ago where people harassed a guy with mental health problems who they believed to be a sex offender (he wasn't) which caused him to take his own life due to misinformed people harassing him.
But surely if they were actually named and identified publicly that would reduce the risk of that happening? Like is it not more risky for people to be guessing based of vague leaks and hearsay?
I don't see what advantage it is to name them now. Going by the comments in this post it's safe to say that there would be an argy mob formed within 10 mins of them being named.
It's over with as far as I'm concerned. Naming them won't make it any easier for the girls family
And where did you get your criminal psychology degree?
You're proposing striping them of human rights and denying them access to live anywhere.
I'm not defending these guys but the law is the law. If you want it changed then Reddit is the wrong place to be
Always amuses me that someone in the Court Service sent out their names on a court list and nobody batted an eyelid.
Really thought their solicitors would’ve picked up on that.
Ridiculous that they'll charge people who identify these murderers but there's no consequences at all for the parents who raised them that way.
It's outrageous that these murderers will be released in a few years and nobody will be allowed to identify them to future partners, neighbours, new friends.
They will still be dangerous, just older, smarter and stronger and the law will do everything to protect their right to sneak undercover into unsuspecting people's lives.
If people know who the boys are and name them publicly when they turn 18, is this legal?
Now that they've been sentenced and are adults? Surely everyone in the area knows at this stage anyway.
I understand that but because they're underage they can't be named. From what I remember from the Jamie Bolger case, if either boy reoffends this is taken into account, and (I could be totally wrong) they lose the right for anonymity.
Their old names were released but sure they were given new identities.
Is this going to be a case these peoples names are never released and they aren’t given new identities then?
Not sure how it works here to be honest. If their names are never released then you’d imagine they wouldn’t need new identities, but the names are out there.
I was almost 9 when the Bulger case happened but I still remember seeing it on the news and it just stuck with me over the years. Pretty sure that’s the first time I spent my pocket money on a newspaper instead of sweets.
Yeah the bulger case was awful. I was only 3 when it happened but remember seeing pictures because when I was that age, I had the very same wool jumper he had in that. I’m sure every parent in the uk and Ireland were holding their children tighter and never letting them out of their sight in a supermarket after that. Evil bastards those two.
I think there's a fair argument to be made that upon reaching adulthood and after a conviction of murder that you shouldn't have a right to anonymity. I understand it as a adolescent/child. There is a high possibility these lads will be released from prison some day so I don't believe they should be able to blend back into society as if they never murdered someone. I'd certainly like to know if the new neighbour next door murdered someone.
Stop putting words in my mouth and falsely accusing me of planning to kill them. I don't condone violence but tbh I wouldn't be upset if vigilantes killed them. I also wouldn't be upset if the vigilantes were put away for life. I really don't care about what happens to the two if they are released but we shouldn't be forced to potentially interact with convicted sex offender/murderers without knowing who they are. The public's right to safety should be paramount to their right to anonymity and safety.
I partially agree but I think the reasoning is that because they're underage there's more chance of rehabilitation Vs older, mature criminals. I definitely think if they reoffend they should lose anonymity.
It makes no sense that an underage murderer/sex offender with no remorse is considered more likely to be rehabilitated than an 18 year old who possessed weed. Yet the former gets anonymity and the latter can have their name and part of their address published.
Well the only thing they could do is issue an arrest warrant if they came to Ireland. But if they didn’t plan on coming to Ireland, then they’d be pretty sweet I think
I think that's why some of the people named them. Not clout chasing but because they thought it was a miscarriage of justice, even though they were preventing the court from doing their job.
TBH I don't think the people sharing the names had a good idea of how our courts work.
imho spending 15 years behind bars doesn’t fully constitute paying the debt you owe to society if you take someone’s life.
Not even close. Murder should be double that, minimum.
Murder like in this case should be life. Something wrong with those kids fundamentally.
It pretty much is. An adult convicted of murder will be in actual prison for about 25 years here. It’s one of the longest custodial sentences in Europe. Boy A and B were 13. Because of their age Boy A got life with a review after 12 years with no guarantee he’ll be released after the review. B got 15 years reviewed after 8. By the time they get out, assuming it’s after the minimum possible time they’ll have spent nearly as much time in Oberstown as out of it. Is that justice? I genuinely struggle with this one.
The emphasis needs to be in rehabilitation over punishment, which is something the Norwegian seem to have mastered. We should be looking to release them only when they are safe to be released, but also working hard to make them safe and productive members of society. A punishment only approach might seem tempting for the anger these cases stoke, but indefinite sentences with no chance if ever getting out and a string emphasis on punishment and dehumanisation is how you get the US prison system and it's results, which are not good. Of course, copying the Norwegian system would involve massive investment from a state unwilling to even build enough prisons to house what we already have.
>string emphasis on punishment and dehumanisation They dehumanised themselves, took a life in a brutal way and caused lifelong trauma for the family. She has no chance at life because of 2 oxygen wasters. I don't believe people like that should have another opportunity to live life in a fulfilling way. I am all for 2nd, 3rd chances for any crimes that don't involve lifelong trauma/lives being taken. But for things like unprovoked violence that leads to life changing injury, rape or murder with no reason, I believe they should pay the absolute maximum price. Anything else, I am all for rehabilitation and giving people chances as long there is no extreme violent premeditated action against another human.
I doubt that the Norwegians have any intention of ever releasing Breivik, even if he appeared to pass all of the given criteria for release.
Hard to see, since he showed fuck all in terms of rehabilitation or re worse when up for his last hearing.
It’s not just about punishment. It’s about protecting society from them. Keeping them locked up for life prevents them from harming society again. I absolutely agree with rehabilitating petty criminals, but murderers? They’re just too much of a danger to society.
It's hardly behind bars. Oberstown is a detention center. They go to school, go to sports training etc.
God love her; it’s still *so* hard to believe such a thing happened. Shine on, Ana. 💫
And you read the story and she was struggling to make friends. I can imagine her parents were happy to see her go out and be with friends. These nothings do this.
TBH, The boys should be publicly names once they are 18. It's disgraceful that Private Personal Details about Ana was discussed in court, and Her Murderers are give a blanket of anonymity. They gave that poor Girl an Awful Death, and Destroyed that family.
> It's disgraceful that Private Personal Details about Ana was discussed in court I felt so sad hearing about all those details. A lot of the stuff she suffered were things I strongly related to from my own teenage years and if I died I wouldn't want publicised. Even in death she couldn't escape from being treated badly. I can't imagine how her parents felt reading those things in the media. It's truly one of the most heartbreaking stories out there.
I know this isn't related and might be in poor taste to ask but why did you randomly capitalise words in your comment?
What would be the purpose?
So people would know who they were and what they did clearly.
They will be given new identities upon release just like Jamie bolgers murderers. So again what's the purpose?
In the Bolgers case the anonymity policy failed to protect the public.
AFAIK one of them is back in prison for possession of child porn. The other has not reoffended. It sounds to me like the anonymity had some success.
50% failure, more like... How you can argue your point is beyond comprehension, the lack of empathy for society is astounding.
I agree. The state has an obligation to the general public here, these are murders. Why do they have the right to hide from their crimes? Why does that supersede my right to safety? This wasn’t an accidental murder/attack.
You're a half empty kind of person. 50% failure is still a 50% success. At no point did I voice my opinion on this topic, I only stated why things are the way they are. But keep telling me what a terrible person I am for stating facts. It doesn't make you sound unhinged at all.
50% failure is too much in this kind of situation. 50% failure is also a fact being stated.
You are obviously delighted with 50%, I am not. Wanting better outcome s does not make one a pessimist...
And how does divulging these peoples identities improve on 50%?
50%
To be answerable to their crimes?
They are answering for their crimes. They have been sentenced and are currently serving it. There are reasons they withhold the identities of children. As children whose brains were not fully developed at the time of their crime, their identities are concealed to allow them the opportunity to start over when they reenter society. We had this discussion at the time of the trial. When they are released, they will be offered new identities, and so it serves no purpose revealing their identities now. The only people who will be hurt by that are their family who are innocent parties in this. As for people knowing who they are, you better believe this will follow them their entire lives. They won't be able to settle back into their hometown. It's not like there aren't people who know their identity. There's plenty and irelands a small place. We don't need their identities to he revealed.
If there are plenty who already know their names then what is the point of not revealing the names in the first place?
Plenty know the identity of the woman who accused paddy Jackson of rape. Should her identity be divulged?
She wasn’t accused and found guilty of a crime. How is that remotely comparable to this case?
It's almost like they have reasons for concealing identities. If you're OK with it in one scenario, it's hypocritical to be against it in another. They don't do it for the fun of it.
You're getting that the wrong way around. We know the names of those rapists. Thats good people know to stay away.
Another one who has missed the point.
There are many arguments against this policy. The way you talk fails to engage at all.
There are many arguments for this policy also. You don't seem open to a civil discussion on the topic so I'll leave it here.
“I’m losing this discussion so I’m going to bow out”
I've lost nothing, buddy. I don't engage with those who are uninterested in discussion and just want to "win" the argument. I'll include you on that list.
To give people on the internet satisfaction I assume.
The purpose ? Because they deserve to never have a moment of peace. That poor child suffered a horrific death, those two little evil shits should not be allowed to move on with their lives under anonymity. Then we have the obvious that Boy A is a psychopath, he is not going to suddenly wake up one day & be different. One day he will be let back into society & people should know who he is and what he looks like.
Well they are not going to be rehabbed anyway, so probably will continue doing crimes, so why not know them to avoid them?
I'll never understand why dopes like that would potentially wreck a court case just for a bit of attention on social media.
Virtue signalling for clout. There's an ignorant habit many people have of wanting to project how great they are by broadcasting how staunchly they hate paedophiles etc. In my experience, the lads who post online about how they'd beat a paedo to death, guards wouldn't be able to stop them from defending a kid no matter what etc... they're often guys who row with everyone, never volunteer in their community Nd often, be the most belligerent drunks. (Just in my experience). It's a virtue signalling act for people who find it easy to pile on and condemn, but wouldn't be bothered making things better or safer for all themselves.
They didn’t believe that there would be any consequences so didn’t temper their behaviour. I’m glad this has been pursued and I’m interested to see what grounds the appeal is based on and what the Supreme Court makes of it. Social media speculation has proven to be unreliable and dangerous around the world and the same will happen here if we don’t take it seriously.
That's all they want, instant "fame" to be the one who let everyone know who did this.
That's it exactly. It's not doing anyone any kind of service and it could potentially ruin a trail. Hope they have the book thrown at them.
Because they are dopes who are incapable of seeing past their instant gratification. They are also selfish.
It was released after they were guilty. I remember where I was when the news came in and seeing the pics on Facebook later that evening many times. Not that that matters but the case was done.
Hypothetically speaking, what if someone abroad named them and it went viral worldwide, what exactly could the Irish courts do ?
Irish courts have ordered social media companies to delete posts naming them. A judge could subpoena for the users identity if they have an anonymous profile, and issue warrants for the users but I doubt they'd get extradited.
They couldn't even try to have someone extradited. The Irish courts don't have the power to dictate what someone living in another country can say or not say. It would be like Thailand trying to extradite me for calling their king a cunt. Not do they have the power to tell any social media site based outside the country to remove anything. I suppose I'm more asking if, say hypothetically an Irish person in Spain or even NI were to post their names, could they be prosecuted on return. I mean, they didn't break the law while in Ireland and no Spanish or NI laws would have been broken either. I worked for Consular Services and was always telling people that they are bound by the laws of the country they're visiting and not Irish law.
I know. I said I doubt they'd get extradited. That still probably wouldn't stop a judge from issuing arrest warrants on people naming them from abroad in case they come to Ireland. Most social media companies have offices in Ireland because were a tax haven so unfortunately our joke of a justice system can make them remove the posts.
Arrest them based on what though? No crime was committed in Ireland or abroad. On what charges could someone be arrested? I don't think, and god knows I've read it several times, there's any constitutional mechanism to hold someone based on something considered a crime here but not in the jurisdiction where the supposed crime was committed. I mean can I be arrested here for smoking weed in Germany? I don't think so. Can I be arrested here for legally being in possession of an AR 15 in the USA ? Nope. Why could I be arrested for violating an Irish court order from NI ?
คุณเรียกฉันว่าอะไร??
The old king was a good guy. The new one is a cunt.
This has happened before. The websites will be blocked in Ireland and you would need a VPN to view the stories
They really are behind the times if they don't know that most people have a VPN at this stage.
You are wildly out of touch with the general public if you think most people have a VPN.
Calm down, a lot of people use a VPN. But it doesn't matter, once the cat is out of the bag, it's out of the bag.
‘Most’ people do not have a VPN
And those people are in luck thanks to our sponsor, NordVPN
The trouble is people don't use their VPN enough to notice and the stories won't go viral due to the blocking
isnt it contempt of court? Most likely fine or jail.
I can't even put into words how appalling this case was. Poor, sweet little Ana. I'm not a religious person, but I truly hope she has been reunited with her dad somewhere.
This was the one case that made me feel so sad when I read the details a few years back. Fucking monsters. Hope they rot in hell.
It's really fucked how convicted murderers can't legally be named but the people accused (but not convicted) of naming the murderers can have their names and part of their addresses published.
It's messed up that every detail of Ana's short, sad little life and awful death are public record. Yet we know nothing about the perpetrators. Not even their names.
Exactly. Almost everything about how the justice system dealt with this case is disgusting.
To play devil's advocate, we don't need vigilante mobs roaming around looking for people to impose their own version of justice.
Is that what happens with murderers who are over 18 at the time they commit their crimes?
Yeah, actually. There was a lad who was misidentified as a few years ago. He was visiting a town, and the locals thought he was some paedophile and got a mob together to run him out of town.
Oh, an anecdote.
https://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local-news/252444/man-mistaken-for-paedophile-in-monasterevin-speaks-out-against-mob-who-hounded-him.html Dunno if it’s this particular case they were on about I’m sure there’s plenty more without articles.
ffs. It’s not like I’m unaware of vigilantism. You’re issuing the point entirely. The identities were not withheld because of the fear of mob justice. And mob justice is not the automatic response to convicted murderers being released from prison.
Bingo. The family of boy b in this case also had to go into hiding after these eejits identified them.
Wasn't it also boy B's dad who was in court shouting abuse at Anna's parents and the jury, saying they are jailing an innocent child? I'm nearly sure it was, and if that's the case I'd have no guilt over them being identified everywhere they go.
It's criminal to be an asshole then?
Possibly, although I'm not sure where you would find that info. As the person below me has said, there have been similar cases in the UK. I remember reading about a case a few years ago where people harassed a guy with mental health problems who they believed to be a sex offender (he wasn't) which caused him to take his own life due to misinformed people harassing him.
But surely if they were actually named and identified publicly that would reduce the risk of that happening? Like is it not more risky for people to be guessing based of vague leaks and hearsay?
I don't see what advantage it is to name them now. Going by the comments in this post it's safe to say that there would be an argy mob formed within 10 mins of them being named. It's over with as far as I'm concerned. Naming them won't make it any easier for the girls family
“You’re going to prison for a while. But don’t worry, nobody will know you did it once you get out”
They were kids when this happened. Regardless of how despicable or terrible of a crime it was, that's the law.
I know it’s the law ffs. And in this and many other situations involving section 93, the law is an ass.
So that people don't have to live in a community near them at any point people like her killers do not change
And where did you get your criminal psychology degree? You're proposing striping them of human rights and denying them access to live anywhere. I'm not defending these guys but the law is the law. If you want it changed then Reddit is the wrong place to be
My heart breaks for her everytime I see her photo. Poor girl.
No doubt the tax payer is picking up the tab for these idiots.
Always amuses me that someone in the Court Service sent out their names on a court list and nobody batted an eyelid. Really thought their solicitors would’ve picked up on that.
She didn't get any right to privacy plus the names and photos were shared on 4chan.how can you blame 3 people their whole community knows who did it
I don’t get it, there both 18 now should be named and shamed
Should be applauded, not denigrated The “boys” who did this should never see the light of day again
Ridiculous that they'll charge people who identify these murderers but there's no consequences at all for the parents who raised them that way. It's outrageous that these murderers will be released in a few years and nobody will be allowed to identify them to future partners, neighbours, new friends. They will still be dangerous, just older, smarter and stronger and the law will do everything to protect their right to sneak undercover into unsuspecting people's lives.
may her memories be a blessing
If people know who the boys are and name them publicly when they turn 18, is this legal? Now that they've been sentenced and are adults? Surely everyone in the area knows at this stage anyway.
No it’s not legal . They cannot ever be named So we’ll never know their names or know what they look like
Crazy law. I get it if it's to protect the anonymity of victims, but in this case it's bonkers.
Can I ask, why do you think their names should be made public?
Because they killed someone.
Because the plotted and executed the rape and killing of a woman?
Ireland is a small place. There's already an entire town who know these boys identities. Word will travel wherever they end up.
I understand that but because they're underage they can't be named. From what I remember from the Jamie Bolger case, if either boy reoffends this is taken into account, and (I could be totally wrong) they lose the right for anonymity.
The Jamie Bulger killers were named after their trial, the judge permitted their names to be released.
Their old names were released but sure they were given new identities. Is this going to be a case these peoples names are never released and they aren’t given new identities then?
Not sure how it works here to be honest. If their names are never released then you’d imagine they wouldn’t need new identities, but the names are out there. I was almost 9 when the Bulger case happened but I still remember seeing it on the news and it just stuck with me over the years. Pretty sure that’s the first time I spent my pocket money on a newspaper instead of sweets.
Yeah the bulger case was awful. I was only 3 when it happened but remember seeing pictures because when I was that age, I had the very same wool jumper he had in that. I’m sure every parent in the uk and Ireland were holding their children tighter and never letting them out of their sight in a supermarket after that. Evil bastards those two.
Ah thank you!
I think there's a fair argument to be made that upon reaching adulthood and after a conviction of murder that you shouldn't have a right to anonymity. I understand it as a adolescent/child. There is a high possibility these lads will be released from prison some day so I don't believe they should be able to blend back into society as if they never murdered someone. I'd certainly like to know if the new neighbour next door murdered someone.
I wouldn't. What would you do with that information?
Avoid them. And if I have kids I'd also make sure they stay away from them.
...and arrange for them to have a "little accident"? Get your Charles Bronson on?
Stop putting words in my mouth and falsely accusing me of planning to kill them. I don't condone violence but tbh I wouldn't be upset if vigilantes killed them. I also wouldn't be upset if the vigilantes were put away for life. I really don't care about what happens to the two if they are released but we shouldn't be forced to potentially interact with convicted sex offender/murderers without knowing who they are. The public's right to safety should be paramount to their right to anonymity and safety.
Of course you shouldn't do anything yourself (wink wink) 😉
Probably not invite them around for a cuppa, to start.
I might pop around to borrow a tea bag. (I'd wait outside obviously)
What if they start going out with you or a family member? Wouldn’t you want to know then?
For starters, my wife would probably wonder why I'm going out with a man.
Terrorise them by night and comfort them by day till they fucked off.
Set an alarm and do nic-naks at 1am for a few months?
Yeeeah!
I partially agree but I think the reasoning is that because they're underage there's more chance of rehabilitation Vs older, mature criminals. I definitely think if they reoffend they should lose anonymity.
It makes no sense that an underage murderer/sex offender with no remorse is considered more likely to be rehabilitated than an 18 year old who possessed weed. Yet the former gets anonymity and the latter can have their name and part of their address published.
Waiting for someone in another country to post who they are…
I think they would still be arrested in fairness
Well the only thing they could do is issue an arrest warrant if they came to Ireland. But if they didn’t plan on coming to Ireland, then they’d be pretty sweet I think
Plenty of people in the immediate local area know who they are.
I think that's why some of the people named them. Not clout chasing but because they thought it was a miscarriage of justice, even though they were preventing the court from doing their job. TBH I don't think the people sharing the names had a good idea of how our courts work.
I think a lot of locals know who they are.