31 1 min 10 yrs

The Irish Presidential race is entertaining albeit for all the wrong reasons;

Idndependent presidential candidate David Norris received a disability payment for 16 years while out of work as a Trinity College lecturer — even though he was a “full-time” senator for the entire period. Mr Norris confirmed to the Irish Independent last night he received the payment, but could not specify exactly how much it was worth. He also refused to say what his disability is. He said the payment was around a quarter of his annual salary, but said he “wasn’t getting anything like they get now”.

So, this Senator felt obliged to accept disability benefit even though no one knows what his disability was? He has also refused to discuss this mysterious disability.

Ireland’s finest? Here is is in action….he’s the one in the suit on the back of the bike..

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

31 thoughts on “ON THE MAKE..

  1. If you are able to conduct full time work as a Senator or indeed any other job why do you need benefits. The only possible justfication for such a payment would be if there were genuine additional costs incurred in dealing with a disabilty for which the payment was made. In which case why not be open and state what they were ?

  2. Disabilities can be disabling, alright.

    Some could cause you to stand stooped over.

    Like he had a large foreign growth on his posterior?

    Like an Israeli boyfriend.

  3. He was unable to be honest. I had hoped his prior man-boy love interview and intercession on behalf of a rapist would doom his candidacy. Maybe this will now.

  4. So poor Chester felt played the fiddle a wee bit.

    Has he received the NAMBLA endorsement yet?

  5. “I had hoped his prior man-boy love interview and intercession on behalf of a rapist ”

    Mahons, This is all totally over the top.

    First, I don’t think a matter of months in age should really be the difference between a perfectly legal act and your melodramatic “rape.
    Besides, his Israeli friend was – a friend. Nobody would, or should, fail to support a friend in need. The Israeli was receiving support from people of high and no importance all over the world (including from his very willing “victim”). It would be very bad form if a former lover left him in the lurch.
    It’s certainly not the Irish way of doing things, as you will know, and this solidarity will certainly not hurt him in the eyes of the Irish electorate.

    The trial in Israel was also severely criticised at the time, and following complaints his sentence was reduced to – I think – three months. Hardly a sentence one would expect for a “rapist”.

    (you can listen to a certain radio interview he did some time ago if you really want to have something to attack him about)

  6. Noel – Nonsense. Norris’s pal was in his forties when he was convicted of statutory rape of a 15 year old boy. Consent of an underage child is NOT a defense to statutory rape. So lets put the facts on the table that Norris intervened on behalf of a rapist.

    Norris did not merely “support a friend”, he misused his government office stationary to try to gain maximum influence. In other words, he misued his elected status for a private concern.

    Full disclosure, the convicted person is an activist and had a built-in support group to complain about his trial and sentence. By the way, I believe the man pled guilty.

  7. Few – I would say he had nerve. He had a medical condition which was clearly not disabling, but he apparently pursued a disability status and payment while he worked (and traveled and lectured) elsewhere. The fact that Trinity didn’t seem to contest it seems to me to be the type of golden handshake that has plagued Ireland.

  8. Mahons, the word you used “rapist” means more or less the same thing to all of us, and that’s something quite different to what happened in this case. You are quite obviously using the happy fuzziness of the word for emotive effect. As I said, if the boy had been a few months older, no crime would have been committed, a few miles to the west and no crime woud have been committed either. That’s the problem with sticking to legal technicalities; somewhere else, and you’re left high and dry without ammo.

    As I said, Norris has said a few things that are much more incriminating than this support for a friend in need. Anybody who would not support a friend in such circumstances, especially someone so close, may be a more perfect citizen from a legal point of view but is a much worse human being.

  9. Do you or do you not believe in the principle of ” statutory rape “?

    It’s either a crime or it’s not, and if it’s to mean anything as law it has to apply if the incident takes place ” a few months earlier ”

    Or should it be a negotiable matter, or left to a judge’s discretion, or should it not apply if the accused has friends who can write letters saying how great they are.

  10. Noel – I see no happy fuzziness in the word rape. There is a reason for statutory rape statutes. It is to protect the underaged from predators like Mr. Norris’ friend.

    And support of someone is not the same as attacking the verdict, the complaintant or assisting in the legal defense. All of which Norris did in an effort to undermine the prosecution and conviction of his “friend”. Norris was not merely writing to say what a great guy he was or requesting clemency.

    In fact the defense of this friend was consistent with the equally troubling interview Norris has given on the subject of men and boys. I sense a pattern, perhaps that he wishes had not seen the light of day, but which has.

  11. “Or should it be a negotiable matter, or left to a judge’s discretion, ”

    Yes, it should. And it is. A judge will always have to take into account a number of different factors: the differences in ages, whether there was full and willing consent, the relationship between the two individuals, how much below the age of consent the younger party was (as – if it was just a few months – the culprit could claim he thought both were of legal age, which Norris’ lover, Nawi, did claim in this case), maybe even the nationality of the two parties.

    All of these must be considered in judging the severity or otherwise of the case. In the Nawi case, the “judge’s discretion” was such that Nawi was sentenced to a mere 6 months, and released after 3.

  12. Leaving great discretion to the judge makes a mockery of the principle and will enable the well heeled an even greater advantage than they already do have.

    There should be bright lines of age – we can agree or disagree as to where they should be- , etc where a transgression is not subject negotiation.

  13. Leaving great discretion to the judge makes a mockery of the principle and will enable the well heeled an even greater advantage than they already do have.

    There should be bright lines of age – we can agree or disagree as to where they should be- , etc where a transgression is not subject to negotiation.

  14. -Sorry for the accidental double comment. DV, can you delete the first 246 if you see this-

  15. The whole purpose of statutory rape laws would be undermined by such discretion (likley exercised here in the sentencing phase in favor of a well known connected person). And I am uncertain that Nawi didn’t know the boy’s age since I’ve only seen the claim that another friend said he didn’t know. Nawi pled guilty by the way.

  16. Mahons, the word you used “rapist” means more or less the same thing to all of us, and that’s something quite different to what happened in this case.

    His lover was convicted in Italy of statutory rape and the senator tried to get him leniency, this is why he is now a very controversial figure. Now he is dishonest by claiming benefits while a senator, he’s finished. And before you come back at me about mcguinness, if they’d something to hang on that guy that would stand up in court it would be a done deal, as it is there is nothing but assumptions, strong assumptions but nothing concrete all the same. Norris’ won’t publish the letters, 7 in all was it? His controversy is concrete and then theres that conversation on radio about paedophilia…..

    ugh, I wouldn’t vote for him I’d stay well clear….

  17. kateyo – He was convicted in Israel, which probably adds to Noel’s distain of the conviction.

  18. This guy should have been seen as radioactive before this revelation.

    Could he please relocate to a remote uninhabited island?

  19. kateyo – He was convicted in Israel, which probably adds to Noel’s distain of the conviction

    O I know he was, and then theres trying to get in a former lover was it who was an asylum seeker and norris intervened on his behalf too…

    this guy is seriously dodgy.

  20. Kateyo, I think you’re confusing Norris with Amanda Knox.

    You probably think you’d get HIV from voting for him.

  21. Noel he’s not as good looking as Amanda thats how I tell the difference:) I’m far from worried about HIV its dirty oul gits I’m allergic too, and he gives me the creeps. If I had a vote he would not get it, though I hear that there was a seanad debate to extend the aras vote to northerners?

  22. “its dirty oul gits I’m allergic too”

    I think that’s it.

    Why do people think an older man taking his chances with, say, a minor is more guilty than a handsome 40-year-old doing exactly the same thing.
    Well, simply becasue he’s so old, and slimy and ….yeuch!

    A lot of the venom directed against Norris here is, I imagine, based on emotion and certain aesthetic sensitivities rather than on objective revulsion for his dastardly crimes of writing letters.

    I mean, the famous letters were written over 25 years ago, for God’s sake. The lad in question is now probably older than mahons and Phantom. It was also merely part of a general international letter-writing campaign to help a certain celebrity activist, nothing more. There is no way people would get so hot under the collar about letters trying to keep a friend from jail written over a generation ago if they were written by anyone elese. This is absurd.

    Perhaps also his strident criticism of the US and Israel, and the even more strident views of his lover, have more to do with it.

  23. Noel – Michael D. Higgins is at least as strident on the subject of Israel as Norris and I have no objection to his candidacy on that ground.

  24. I imagine, based on emotion and certain aesthetic sensitivities rather than on objective revulsion for his dastardly crimes of writing letters

    I don’t think so. This guy has had fourteen years to prepare for this. I’m of the opinion it’s something he’s wanted for a very long time. He’s traded on his homosexuality, his protestant religion, his diverse views. Flogged himself as something he’s not, in reality all he did was come out of the closet in Ireland when it simply wasn’t popular to do so. That may have took some guts then but he’s been creaming it ever since. He just thought the letter issue was well and truly buried and he’d get away with it. He bet wrong. Especially in todays Ireland when scandals of sex with children from paedo priests have hit the headlines and there is an outrage against such behaviour.

    Bad timing for his letters to come out, and a guy with his sort of background where he isn’t short of a penny or two to be drawing benefit while working…just goes to show it’s not those in Ballymun or Darndale that are all the benefit cheats.

    And that accent of his, truly anal….

    shiver shiver..

  25. Mahons michael D is ready for the knackers yard, he’s simply too old to bring vision to the presidency. I don’t think he’ll get in, but Gallagher has a good chance I think.

Comments are closed.