“Dovrei pensarci” – Catherine Connolly risponde alla domanda se impiegherebbe uno stupratore condannato ad Áras
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/id-have-to-think-about-it-catherine-connolly-responds-to-question-on-whether-she-would-employ-convicted-rapist-in-aras/a2022226817.html
di Ulml
31 commenti
In all seriousness what is the point of releasing someone from prison if hiring them afterwards is some grave sin that must be condemned.
The smear campaign is out in force
I’m not Connolly’s biggest fan, but that’s a fucking stupid question to have to be answering.
I guess it’s a difficult question to answer, because “yes” feels wrong but “no” implies that rapists can’t be rehabilitated.
Would you employ a paedophile? Eh? Eh?
https://preview.redd.it/ho098mjq12uf1.png?width=906&format=png&auto=webp&s=21029365e542ea2ae77330751c9b09039389063e
Odd hypothetical by Kieran Cuddihy. “I know you hired someone who had a gun conviction, served their time and re-entered society but what if if they were a rapist? Would you be so moral and just then, huh?”
Weird question. Who could possibly hope to come up with an answer to that?
The media are just getting desperate at this point.
What should happen when someone convicted of rape (or manslaughter, or a serious assault, or anything really) leaves prison?
One of the purposes of prison is rehabilitation. We spend money on that, indeed there’s a programme for government commitment to “Implement an employment strategy for former offenders and support increased access to education and training workshops through the Prison Education Taskforce”.
Is there meant to be an actually meaningful commitment to rehabilitation for offenders, or are we just talking shite and wasting money on something we don’t believe in?
I thought the general consensus was that you were supposed to serve your time, learn to be a better person, and then come out and become a fully contributing member of society. If that’s the case then what is the problem with taking up a job where there is no perception of increased risk due to your history of offending?
If that’s not the case then why are we letting people out of prison at all?
I actually had to eyeball whether or not this was Waterford Whispers with that headline.
Honestly I’m more concerned that she would need to consider if she would sign a law removing the triple lock. The role of the president is to sign bills into law unless they believe it’s unconstitutional, then they can refer it to their council of state for review. Reversing a law that was introduced without a constitutional change would not be unconstitutional so she’s essentially stated that she would not do her job because of her personal beliefs.
The media are actually encouraging me to vote for Connolly due to the way they are treating her. Was very reluctant about her at first but fuck all the FG/FF mouthpieces tbh
What an utterly bizarre question regardless of who that’s put to.
“Catherine, would you pull the lever in the trolley problem! Would you still be anti-death penalty if the killer killed your mam! Catherine, would you free the Omelas child!” These are extremely convoluted philosophical hypotheticals that have no bearing on the reality of this situation. Ridiculous question honestly
Things aren’t black and white like that. Things require nuance, and you can’t just answer such a loaded question like that off the cuff. I respect her for saying she’d have to think about it before answering, as that is a question that requires thought being put into, rather than quickly rushing out whatever answer you think will be popular. What a silly question, it’s just asking for the sake of a gotcha moment, not for genuine reasons
I mean I think for all of us, the answer has to be that it depends. The circumstances of the crime, the work towards rehabilitation, the person they are now, and why you’d want to employ them in the first place are all variables. Would I personally hire an appropriately qualified convicted rapist to help draft a program/policy to rehabilitate sex offenders? Yeah, probably.
And here’s the thing – given the extremely low charge/conviction rate of rapists, we’ve all worked with rapists. If you do hiring, chances are you’ve hired a rapist. Just the ones that didn’t get charged/convicted.
I know men who have definitely committed sexual assaults. They are employed. In most cases, there was never a complaint made and the reasons for this are varied. The combined lifetime sexual violence rate in Ireland is 40%. There are a lot of rapists out there. They don’t wear badges.
I know everyone wants to pull out the extreme examples of pedos and rapists to make their point on this, but they aren’t equivalent. And even if they were – at the end of the day, it’s down to the actual person, the work they’ve done since the conviction, and the work they’re being engaged to do.
Overheard this on the radio when I was browsing around some shop. I was shook at the question. It felt very sensationalist and clearly wanted to catch her out or get a sensationalist answer.
You could tell she was caught off guard and didn’t get her answer how she wanted but still dealt with it well. Basically said she’d have to think about it and as a woman that would be very difficult.
It’s a nuanced situation that requires a nuanced answer. I really don’t like how sensationalist our media is becoming
Sort of a question you would ask your ma
And tune in later folks when we put the fuck/marry/kill question to our presidential candidates!
Would Heather Humphreys still support fox hunting if the man hunting the fox was a paedophile? Really makes you think.
Yes, of course you’d have to think about it. You or I, as private citizens, might disagree with the justice system and say that a sentence was overly lenient, or we might disagree with the prison service that a particular person is fit to rejoin society, but it’s much more problematic for a head of state to make that claim.
What an absolutely stupid question.
“Connolly, would you still love Ireland if it was a worm???”
completely out of the blue, yes, it’s a daft question. but given that she hired someone into LH straight out of prison for serious gun offences, from which she said the offender was ‘absolutely rehabilitated’ upon release, no it’s not a daft question.
And to be fair it is a pretty obvious one which she should have a prepared answered. Because of the Shannon story it is absolutely relevant who Connolly will hire if she gets to the Aras.
The average worker is down €500 from the budget this week in the middle of a cost of living crisis and these are the questions the media are asking? Tired of this nonsense every day.
This is such a dumb response. No. Of course you wouldn’t, whatever about rehabilitation do you think people would be comfortable working around such an individual?
Would they be allowed in rooms with just another person? It’s so obvious the answer is no.
You’re rehabilitated but there are life long consequences as there are to the victim. It’s not up to us to have to bring people back into the fold especially for such a heinous crime.
“Would you rather find out your brother was also your dad or your dog was also your uncle” type question
She’s smart enough to spot a “gotcha” when she sees one.
Nice of Jennifer C-Mac to be right out of the traps denouncing this. There’s no way they can get blow back on this, right? Right?
Correct answer is “it depends”, which is basically what she said.
There are criminals who serve their time, change, try to make amends and go on to live productive and largely blameless lives. And there are evil people who repeatedly demonstrate society would be better off without them. And pretty much everything in between. To treat them all the same is pretty moronic in my view.
Is this where Irish journalism is at? Framing an entire article about a random hypothetical thrown at her
“Would you hire OJ Simpson if he served his prison term?”
Journalism is a joke at this stage, gutter press