God either way I'd say this guy is in trouble. If he does time they (the deceased family and friends) might accept that, but if not they'll probably go get him. Condolences to the family of the man who died. I really dont think this was done on purpose, just my opinion. I think the guy was stressed to the max and probably terrified. They provoked him and unfortunately this was how he reacted. What a nightmare to be in.
When Mr Phelan left his home to confront these ' trespassers ' - He was the most HEAVILY ARMED MAN in Ireland . He carried a high powered WINCHESTER rifle - as well as a CONCEALED revolver - containing ' DUM DUM ' BULLETS. No ARMY in the World allows its Soldiers to carry ' DUM DUM ' Bullets - as soldiers who are captured by their enemy - would be immediately executed - if found in possession of these - Due to the CATASTROPHIC effect if fired at HUMANS. In 1899 - the Hague Convention banned these bullets - by use of all armies .
Always challenge trespassers when you see them. Otherwise you’ll have them again and again and again. Always be prepared to defend yourself against them with whatever force necessary. Trespassers are breaking the law so don’t be soft
So, not explicitly depending on self defence, as that would call into question was this reasonable force, why the defendant was carrying a revolver and possibly questions about retreating. As it’s a murder case does the verdict have to be unanimous? We have no read on the jury, but the defence almost definitely would, perhaps the reference to Joyce was done deliberately to flatter some members intellect.
I stand with Diarmuid Phelan. You can never know the terror of being cornered by three aggressive men intent on malice. Why Kallum Coleman disappeared is anyone's guess.
Public Liability Act 1996 would apply here would it ?..Stand your ground law is firearm etiquette and Phelan had just used a Winchester rifle to kill the mans pet prior to killing the man himself...He wasnt standing his ground but in fact was retreating uo the incline It looks like he armed himself and shot an unarmed man in the back when he was walking away from him ...and claimed the gun went off.! If he didn't pick up a gun the intent might be easier to disprove....The intrusions were central yes...but the man was a lawyer and why didn't he apply for a barring order ?... Notwithstanding firearm protocol and law requires s firearm to be pointed at the ground unless you intend to shoot it ...Old guns can go off by themselves if the tempeture in the barrel reachs 327 degrees Faremheit....With only two rounds discharged only a badly maintained weapon would be susceptible... Smith and Weston are designed with many safety features and unlike Sig pistols and are very reliable....The movie set of Rust shooting covered alot of these bases ..there is no such thing as a warning shot beyond military codes of engagement....just denial by tbe shooter of their actions ergo if the threat is so bad that deadly force is an acceptable option… then SHOOTING THE THREAT is the reasonable option of choice. Therefore… WARNING SHOTS are NOT acceptable. If it’s not bad enough to SHOOT your assailant lawfully… Then it’s not bad enough to discharge the firearm AT ALL. In my initial training as a Marine, for the purposes of armed guard duty… it was DRIVEN HOME, that WARNING SHOTS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED for ‘exactly’ the reason I just stated.
He should have been convicted of manslaughter , why shoot so close to his head knowing these men are unarmed, I would have no reasonable doubt of his intentions but it’s all terribly sad
Now lets just say that the defendant in this case had not been a Barrister/Law Lecturer but say a guy from a "working class" area, first off, he'd never had gotten bail and there'd be no chance of him getting a not guilty verdict as he was carrying a loaded weapon at the time. Ah but justice is just for those who can afford the legal fees and have the "right" background.
I think the very opposite, and I could quote cases if you wish. I think the Judge was very harsh on Mr Phelan with regards to bail. Any bail hearing would involve the accused past and means. This was no different and Mr Phelan had to fight tooth and nail to get bail. It's only a class issue in the sense Mr Phelan was treated more harshly.
@@davidbamford1971 Utter rubbish. The legal system is classed based and does take the defendant's background into account when deciding on bail. If Phelan had come from Finglas and had shot a man who had come into his front garden, he'd be held on remand pending trial. Similarly, if the deceased had shot Phelan in the back of the head, do you honestly think he'd be out on bail??? Being a Barrister and law lecturer, not to mention a landed gentry, allowed this individual who shot a man in the back of the head (and therefore was not approaching him in a threatening manner) to get bail. Even if Phelan did have a permit for the handgun (why?, a handgun is only of use at close range and not the typical weapon of choice for farmers who may have to shoot foxes or stray dogs coming after livestock), the fact that he was carrying the gun meant that he was already prepared to shoot and then to shoot the man in the back of the head compounds his guilty. A "warning shot" is fired into the air, not at the back of someone's head who is retreating.
I agree. This guy seemed obsessed with his own importance. He's a " landowner ". I was hill walking in Kerry, set upon by a pack of dogs the farmer in attendance,who allowed the animals to harass me. Apparently, I was on his patch of bog or something. Damned self important Culchies with notions of superiority or something.
@@pmartin7397you were on his land if you didn’t like being harassed on someone property then GTFO. Unlike the UK there’s no right to roam in Republic of Ireland u clown. If he was walking in your garden would you be classed as self entitled if you confronted him?
Myself and my son attended the highcourt the day a ballistic expert was giving evidence about the type of bullets in the Gun. The senior council for the defence is on the ball, very confident and clearly researched about firearms as he quizzed the expert. He explained how there was a rim on one bullet but not on the other, the rim holds the bullet in the chamber ready for firing, but the rimless bullet could sit lower in the chamber. He asked the expert how this would affect the trajectory of the bullet, and it was concluded that that alone could throw the bullet off course. For me, it was enough to plant the seed of doubt in anyone's mind. I will say the accused comes across very odd and has a grumpy demeanor or resting bitch face. I don't think he would connect with the jury in any way, but saying that I hope they rule in his favour
What about the fact he should not of been carrying a revolver its not an authorised range for starters the gun should not of been on him and is not required by law to be used ect its all there black and white the man killed a man with handgun there multiplie counts there for charges to lead to 10 years in prison alone for the gun been used hes a barrister anybone else be away for murder
walking in hilly areas of forest in Ireland it's easy to trespass unintentionally on land hitherto deemed public where nobody objected. Today, new landowners are obsessed with " privacy" and this gentleman farmer is obviously one of these people.He shot their dog, then he shot the owner of the dog. How was the trespasser a " threat" when he was walking away ? Absurd. Guilty of murder.
You mention "He's accused of killing . . ." By murder or manslaughter or does it matter in this defendants case? He's certainly guilty of killing but is it with acceptable reasonable cause?? Meanwhile we can wonder if the outcome goes to 'set a precedent'? Perhaps the future Trespassers/Burglars/Thugs of Ireland will come to realise that the 'easy pickings' are over, as the landowner/farmers get appropriately tooled up (as is their right) for the times we live in.
@@pmartin7397 Let's discuss this a little if you wish? Please do give us some context. I remember walking the bothar na breena road and playing P&P golf by the banks of the dodder. Back then there used to be small B&W metal signs attached to barbed wire fencing for many fields to be seen in the region, all clearly stating "Game Preserved" Which means Do Not Hunt On This Land, No Game Shooting. So there is forewarning for those who would trespass with firearms. Will 'Hillwalkers' disregard the owners wishes and break the law at the same time? What's next? Surely the way to go hunting for rabbits, is to gain permission of landowner's who are in agreement? Not unusual for landowners to call and ask for a hunters services to dispatch troublesome foxes. There are other issues . . . But it's your turn now?
Thanks Terry 🙏🐴
Good afternoon Terry, thank you for another fantastic update 👍
Thank you for another interesting video
I will be interested to hear what the judge instructs the jury regarding whether they can return a manslaughter verdict.
Always wear an apron and a hair net when your preparing food, that's what Granny told me..
I think him wearing a hairnet my be redundant.
He's not bald it's a solar panel for his court appeal.
I was actually wondering what he was cooking
@@Bluebuthappy182 The cookbook is coming soon "Just Tasty Nutrition"
God either way I'd say this guy is in trouble. If he does time they (the deceased family and friends) might accept that, but if not they'll probably go get him. Condolences to the family of the man who died. I really dont think this was done on purpose, just my opinion. I think the guy was stressed to the max and probably terrified. They provoked him and unfortunately this was how he reacted. What a nightmare to be in.
When Mr Phelan left his home to confront these ' trespassers ' -
He was the most HEAVILY ARMED MAN in Ireland .
He carried a high powered WINCHESTER rifle - as well as a CONCEALED
revolver - containing ' DUM DUM ' BULLETS.
No ARMY in the World allows its Soldiers to carry ' DUM DUM ' Bullets -
as soldiers who are captured by their enemy - would be immediately executed -
if found in possession of these - Due to the CATASTROPHIC effect if fired
at HUMANS. In 1899 - the Hague Convention banned these bullets -
by use of all armies .
Always challenge trespassers when you see them. Otherwise you’ll have them again and again and again. Always be prepared to defend yourself against them with whatever force necessary. Trespassers are breaking the law so don’t be soft
they always play the victim, cowards
He cannot produce a reasonable doubt .
The problem is ...
But i won't go into that
Ah he be let off a non runner for jail 😮
So, not explicitly depending on self defence, as that would call into question was this reasonable force, why the defendant was carrying a revolver and possibly questions about retreating. As it’s a murder case does the verdict have to be unanimous? We have no read on the jury, but the defence almost definitely would, perhaps the reference to Joyce was done deliberately to flatter some members intellect.
Great point
I stand with Diarmuid Phelan. You can never know the terror of being cornered by three aggressive men intent on malice. Why Kallum Coleman disappeared is anyone's guess.
And the dog was also aggressive? Because you were there? Or does that speak for itself about the character of the man that kills a trespassing dog.
Public Liability Act 1996 would apply here would it ?..Stand your ground law is firearm etiquette and Phelan had just used a Winchester rifle to kill the mans pet prior to killing the man himself...He wasnt standing his ground but in fact was retreating uo the incline
It looks like he armed himself and shot an unarmed man in the back when he was walking away from him ...and claimed the gun went off.!
If he didn't pick up a gun the intent might be easier to disprove....The intrusions were central yes...but the man was a lawyer and why didn't he apply for a barring order ?... Notwithstanding firearm protocol and law requires s firearm to be pointed at the ground unless you intend to shoot it ...Old guns can go off by themselves if the tempeture in the barrel reachs 327 degrees Faremheit....With only two rounds discharged only a badly maintained weapon would be susceptible... Smith and Weston are designed with many safety features and unlike Sig pistols and are very reliable....The movie set of Rust shooting covered alot of these bases ..there is no such thing as a warning shot beyond military codes of engagement....just denial by tbe shooter of their actions ergo
if the threat is so bad that deadly force is an acceptable option… then SHOOTING THE THREAT is the reasonable option of choice.
Therefore… WARNING SHOTS are NOT acceptable.
If it’s not bad enough to SHOOT your assailant lawfully…
Then it’s not bad enough to discharge the firearm AT ALL.
In my initial training as a Marine, for the purposes of armed guard duty… it was DRIVEN HOME, that WARNING SHOTS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED for ‘exactly’ the reason I just stated.
I think you're in the wrong jurisdiction.
@@gitser2003 I absolutely have jurisdiction.
So you're saying he just had to let them keep coming onto his land threatening his life freely..? Some yank you are.
He should have been convicted of manslaughter , why shoot so close to his head knowing these men are unarmed, I would have no reasonable doubt of his intentions but it’s all terribly sad
😊😊
Now lets just say that the defendant in this case had not been a Barrister/Law Lecturer but say a guy from a "working class" area, first off, he'd never had gotten bail and there'd be no chance of him getting a not guilty verdict as he was carrying a loaded weapon at the time. Ah but justice is just for those who can afford the legal fees and have the "right" background.
I think the very opposite, and I could quote cases if you wish.
I think the Judge was very harsh on Mr Phelan with regards to bail.
Any bail hearing would involve the accused past and means.
This was no different and Mr Phelan had to fight tooth and nail to get bail.
It's only a class issue in the sense Mr Phelan was treated more harshly.
@@davidbamford1971 Utter rubbish. The legal system is classed based and does take the defendant's background into account when deciding on bail. If Phelan had come from Finglas and had shot a man who had come into his front garden, he'd be held on remand pending trial. Similarly, if the deceased had shot Phelan in the back of the head, do you honestly think he'd be out on bail??? Being a Barrister and law lecturer, not to mention a landed gentry, allowed this individual who shot a man in the back of the head (and therefore was not approaching him in a threatening manner) to get bail. Even if Phelan did have a permit for the handgun (why?, a handgun is only of use at close range and not the typical weapon of choice for farmers who may have to shoot foxes or stray dogs coming after livestock), the fact that he was carrying the gun meant that he was already prepared to shoot and then to shoot the man in the back of the head compounds his guilty. A "warning shot" is fired into the air, not at the back of someone's head who is retreating.
I agree. This guy seemed obsessed with his own importance. He's a " landowner ". I was hill walking in Kerry, set upon by a pack of dogs the farmer in attendance,who allowed the animals to harass me. Apparently, I was on his patch of bog or something. Damned self important Culchies with notions of superiority or something.
@@pmartin7397you were on his land if you didn’t like being harassed on someone property then GTFO. Unlike the UK there’s no right to roam in Republic of Ireland u clown. If he was walking in your garden would you be classed as self entitled if you confronted him?
May you never have scumbags come on your land year after year threatening your life...Culchie...? He was far from a culchie. @pmartin7397
Myself and my son attended the highcourt the day a ballistic expert was giving evidence about the type of bullets in the Gun.
The senior council for the defence is on the ball, very confident and clearly researched about firearms as he quizzed the expert. He explained how there was a rim on one bullet but not on the other, the rim holds the bullet in the chamber ready for firing, but the rimless bullet could sit lower in the chamber. He asked the expert how this would affect the trajectory of the bullet, and it was concluded that that alone could throw the bullet off course. For me, it was enough to plant the seed of doubt in anyone's mind.
I will say the accused comes across very odd and has a grumpy demeanor or resting bitch face. I don't think he would connect with the jury in any way, but saying that I hope they rule in his favour
Sean Guerin SC is at the top of his game. Diarmuid Phelan, being a SC himself, should have a good idea of picking one.
@terrygorry my son wants to become a barrister, he really enjoyed watching Sean Guerin SC
What about the fact he should not of been carrying a revolver its not an authorised range for starters the gun should not of been on him and is not required by law to be used ect its all there black and white the man killed a man with handgun there multiplie counts there for charges to lead to 10 years in prison alone for the gun been used hes a barrister anybone else be away for murder
Absolutely. The grip on the gun has everything to say when shooting. Stress on the grip will most likely make the shot go sideways or under not over.
walking in hilly areas of forest in Ireland it's easy to trespass unintentionally on land hitherto deemed public where nobody objected. Today, new landowners are obsessed with " privacy" and this gentleman farmer is obviously one of these people.He shot their dog, then he shot the owner of the dog. How was the trespasser a " threat" when he was walking away ? Absurd. Guilty of murder.
You mention "He's accused of killing . . ." By murder or manslaughter or does it matter in this defendants case? He's certainly guilty of killing but is it with acceptable reasonable cause??
Meanwhile we can wonder if the outcome goes to 'set a precedent'?
Perhaps the future Trespassers/Burglars/Thugs of Ireland will come to realise that the 'easy pickings' are over, as the landowner/farmers get appropriately tooled up (as is their right) for the times we live in.
There's a huge difference between hillwalkers hunting rabbits and a burglar. If you want to conflate the two, I hope you're never on a jury.
@@pmartin7397 Let's discuss this a little if you wish? Please do give us some context.
I remember walking the bothar na breena road and playing P&P golf by the banks of the dodder. Back then there used to be small B&W metal signs attached to barbed wire fencing for many fields to be seen in the region, all clearly stating "Game Preserved" Which means Do Not Hunt On This Land, No Game Shooting. So there is forewarning for those who would trespass with firearms.
Will 'Hillwalkers' disregard the owners wishes and break the law at the same time? What's next?
Surely the way to go hunting for rabbits, is to gain permission of landowner's who are in agreement? Not unusual for landowners to call and ask for a hunters services to dispatch troublesome foxes.
There are other issues . . . But it's your turn now?