Crime and criminals

[DaveR]

A shame that the bench in Happy Valley with one of the best views in Llandudno has been removed:

[Ian]

I think you missed the part about him masturbating in front of the two young boys, Ian? One would hope that you would not consider that acceptable behaviour in front of young children? 

Curiously I couldn't find the original story, although there are references to it on your own blog going back to March 2012. Perhaps a link?  Just to establish the facts, you understand...

[Yorkie]

I think the decision in this case revolved around the fact that no actual assault took place.  If there had been any interference, a custodial sentence would probably have been applied. 

[DaveR]

I think you missed the part about him masturbating in front of the two young boys, Ian? One would hope that you would not consider that acceptable behaviour in front of young children? 

Curiously I couldn't find the original story, although there are references to it on your own blog going back to March 2012. Perhaps a link?  Just to establish the facts, you understand...

Unless I have mysteriously developed a time travelling blog, I think you're mistaken Ian, as the offence took place in January 2013, according to the paper. The article is on Page 5 of the July 16th edition of the Daily Post.

I'm sure you're aware that the Daily Post now only public a small selection stories free of charge online, but it is on both the print and ipad edition, here's a screenshot of the Ipad story from yesterday's edition:

[Jack]

Notice that a couple of rowing boats have appeared in the Deganwy area.  One on the grass verge at the junction of Deganwy Road and Maesdu Avenue and a second by the level crossing at the entrance to the Deganwy Quays.  I assume they are to be filled with soil and planted up rather than been stranded there on an incredibly high tide!

[Fester]

B2R, to be fair mate, only most of your postings are rubbish, not all. 

Your new tattoo on the other hand.....   L0L L0L

[Fester]

There was a strange chap called John Tunney,
Who offered two children some money,
To 'relieve' in his car,
Wearing only a bra,
I hope no one thinks that is funny?   

 WWW WWW WWW

[Linda]

I think you missed the part about him masturbating in front of the two young boys, Ian? One would hope that you would not consider that acceptable behaviour in front of young children? 

Curiously I couldn't find the original story, although there are references to it on your own blog going back to March 2012. Perhaps a link?  Just to establish the facts, you understand...

Unless I have mysteriously developed a time travelling blog, I think you're mistaken Ian, as the offence took place in January 2013, according to the paper. The article is on Page 5 of the July 16th edition of the Daily Post.

I'm sure you're aware that the Daily Post now only public a small selection stories free of charge online, but it is on both the print and ipad edition, here's a screenshot of the Ipad story from yesterday's edition:

Any kind of behavior like this is totally unacceptable and could have led to something a lot more serious if say a child had been alone.
I am not an armchair jury, I in fact experienced an assault as a 13yr child after just going to the local shop for my mum. Youngish man dragged me down a side street, so fortunate for me was another man passing the top of the street, he shouted out and i managed to get away. The passerby could have unknowingly saved me from something really bad. I went home shaken and with bloody knees. My attacker was never found. You cant allow this kind of thing to just go on. Slightly deranged can and quite likely can become a lot more serious, anyone thinking of behaving that way in front of anyone let alone a child shouldnt be on the loose!

[Ian]

Unless I have mysteriously developed a time travelling blog, I think you're mistaken Ian, as the offence took place in January 2013, according to the paper. The article is on Page 5 of the July 16th edition of the Daily Post.

[smg id=3233]

The dating might be a function of the blog software, but you can see why I was curious. That;s how it appears on Google, and I could find no trace of the original DP story on there.

[Ian]

Slightly deranged can and quite likely can become a lot more serious, anyone thinking of behaving that way in front of anyone let alone a child shouldnt be on the loose!

So what would you suggest, Linda? The article states 'It was only Tunney's poor health which had stopped him from going immediately to Jail" and there's no mention of exactly what that 'poor health' was.  We know he was an 'ex-soldier' so it's possible that the 'poor health' referred to was occasioned by his Military service.  Just suppose he'd occasioned brain or mental damage when involved in some heroic acts, such as saving the lives of innocent civilians? MOD figures released last week reveal that more soldiers take their own lives than are killed by enemy combatants. 

What I'm saying is we don't know and - while it's the easiest thing in the world to pontificate on the inadequacies of Judges - unless we are privy to all the relevant information the fact is we can't possibly know the full situation.

Matthew Parris wrote an excellent piece in the Times, yesterday, which illustrated that extremely well.  His main point was that the news media like stories that are black and white:  they don't like stories which are more complex, with multiple facets and shades of grey because they don't sell newspapers. In most Newspapers the journalists are expected to 'create' an angle by presenting only the bare bones of a story in such a way that it arouses an emotional response. The reader, however, rarely - if ever - gets to know the full story and background.

[DaveR]

Unless I have mysteriously developed a time travelling blog, I think you're mistaken Ian, as the offence took place in January 2013, according to the paper. The article is on Page 5 of the July 16th edition of the Daily Post.

[smg id=3233]

The dating might be a function of the blog software, but you can see why I was curious. That;s how it appears on Google, and I could find no trace of the original DP story on there.

That date is the date of the original blog post, which is correct. However, Google is pulling in the recent posts from the Forum on that page as well, when it crawls the page to update it.

[DaveR]

Slightly deranged can and quite likely can become a lot more serious, anyone thinking of behaving that way in front of anyone let alone a child shouldnt be on the loose!

So what would you suggest, Linda? The article states 'It was only Tunney's poor health which had stopped him from going immediately to Jail" and there's no mention of exactly what that 'poor health' was.  We know he was an 'ex-soldier' so it's possible that the 'poor health' referred to was occasioned by his Military service.  Just suppose he'd occasioned brain or mental damage when involved in some heroic acts, such as saving the lives of innocent civilians? MOD figures released last week reveal that more soldiers take their own lives than are killed by enemy combatants. 

What I'm saying is we don't know and - while it's the easiest thing in the world to pontificate on the inadequacies of Judges - unless we are privy to all the relevant information the fact is we can't possibly know the full situation.

Matthew Parris wrote an excellent piece in the Times, yesterday, which illustrated that extremely well.  His main point was that the news media like stories that are black and white:  they don't like stories which are more complex, with multiple facets and shades of grey because they don't sell newspapers. In most Newspapers the journalists are expected to 'create' an angle by presenting only the bare bones of a story in such a way that it arouses an emotional response. The reader, however, rarely - if ever - gets to know the full story and background.

Irrespective of the story behind the man, what he did was unacceptable and he should not be allowed to be in a position to carry out similar or worse offences again. That's the crux of the matter. It's sad that you're more interested in the criminal than the victims, Ian. 

[Ian]

But we know so little about his 'victims', other than the fact they were 'teenagers'.  They might have been two 17 year olds. Would they have been 'victims'?

Irrespective of the story behind the man, what he did was unacceptable and he should not be allowed to be in a position to carry out similar or worse offences again. That's the crux of the matter.

So we deal with all incidents judged purely on the act and not take into account any reasons or motives?  Is that what you're saying?

[DaveR]

But we know so little about his 'victims', other than the fact they were 'teenagers'.  They might have been two 17 year olds. Would they have been 'victims'?

The Law says that they are. I doubt Tunney asked their age before masturbating in front of them?

So we deal with all incidents judged purely on the act and not take into account any reasons or motives?  Is that what you're saying?

The focus should be on protecting innocent people (especially children) from people like Tunney, who obviously cannot control his actions.

[Yorkie]

If Tunney was also under the impression that he had won the Lottery and bought a new Car perhaps he needs some treatment rather than encarceration!