We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE IRISH PENAL Reform Trust (IPRT) has criticised a court ruling after a woman, who caused criminal damage by opening a €1.50 tube of pringles at a Tesco supermarket, was sentenced to two months in prison by a judge in Cork.
Kathleen McDonagh (24) from Mahon, Co. Cork pleaded guilty to causing criminal damage to the tube of Pringles crisps on 27 December 2016.
Judge Brian O’Shea sentenced Mahon to four months in prison, with half of the sentence suspended, the Irish Examiner has reported.
The offence took place after McDonagh – who had 14 previous theft convictions – entered a Tesco store in Mahon Point and went to the self-scan area with the packet of Pringles and proceeded to open it.
Reacting to the judgement, Deputy Executive Director of IRPT Fiona Ní Chinnéide says that such prison sentences make “no social or economic sense.”
“It’s a poor use of taxpayer money when community service has proven to be a more cost effective response, particularly for women who offend.”
Since 2011, judges in Ireland have been obliged to consider community service “in lieu” of sentences of less than 12 months, says Ní Chinnéide. “What’s important is that it’s not about letting anyone off the hook. It’s about the most effective response to crime.”
Ní Chinnéide says that robust data and evidence underpinning any response to crime is what is needed.
In sentencing McDonagh, Judge O’Shea said that it’s difficult not to view her actions as anything other than “smart-alec behaviour”.
The judge proceeded to impose the partially suspended sentence, with recognisance pending an appeal set at €200.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Are you messing? People get suspended sentences for assault and sexual crimes and this gets 4 months? Ffs, the country really needs some standardised sentencing
@Sean Murphy: did you read the article? She had 14 previous theft convictions…..this might finally make her think twice
@Sean Murphy: 14 previous- nothing wrong with this sentence it was the proverbial straw.
I would agree most sentences are far to lenient from our judiciary.
@Ted Logan: and yet there’s articles on here about lads with 100+(literally) convictions still getting nothing but suspended sentences for more serious crimes
@Sean Murphy: yes there are lads with multiple convictions getting suspended sentences but that doesn’t make it right in all fairness. You could argue it’s inconsistent and few would disagree.
@Sean Murphy: anyone question what the previous 30 odd convictions were before complaining about this sentence!!!!
@Emilio Butler: where does it say that?
@Emilio Butler: She was previously barred from the store and was going to pay for the Pringles but was stopped by security. She then opened the Pringles so they’d have to let her buy them. Instead they called the gardai. Waste of tax payers money bringing it to court and a bigger waste of money jailing her.
The headline is real click bait. She was a repeat offender who was previously given suspended sentences for theft. Fourteen times. So she was given fair warning. Good luck to her in gaol.
Can we get a few chain gangs on the go? Maybe if these people were forced to work they’d soon buck up…
@Alan Walter Gallagher: not a bad idea prisoners could sort out roadside ditches rebuild stone walls on roads etc
This is not a sentence over a tube of Pringles …. From the article you see Its about a repeat shoplift offender who was previously barred from the shop. And on the date in question knowingly trespassed. She then opened the Pringles in the hope that staff would charge her the € cost of it and she could possibly later claim she had been served (un-barred).
Store detectives don’t need this blatant, in-your-face provocation or to have their time wasted following her around the shop, while others could be thieving while they’re distracted.
Culture?
@Niall Power: yup
Misleading story. She had loads of previous convictions and was already barred from store.
She won’t do that again for a while…..
@Dan: wouldn’t know about that now Dan. Once you pop you can’t stop…
@Dan: really??
@The Viking: 10/10
@The Viking: brilliant, haha. You could’ve been her defence
@The Viking: you won the internet today
Did this article get edited to remove the section where it clearly states her behaviour at the time and her 14 previous convictions? If so, this is an extraordinary abuse of editorial power and click bate attention seeking at its worst!
@Alan O’Brien: I was wondering the same, the more I am interact with the journal the more m realising it’s controlled by the radical left
I have become a bit cynical regarding these hard luck stories. So now I search for more details. All it took was a 2 minutes to find out about her 31 previous convictions, 14 for theft and 2 for criminal damage, and also convictions for handling stolen goods and that she was barred from Tesco as well.
Tough on Pringles. Light on murder.
Not one bit sorry for her.
Big However though.
How much am I paying for this prosecution and sentence? Both this woman and the courts are taking the mickey. She’ll appeal and win, (because, this time, she went to the till to pay) costing us more money and probably get a claim from it too (on the basis of Smart-Alec-ing not being a crime). Neither her, nor the judge and the legal professions give two fooks, they are all on the same gravy train.
A dirtys*%M bag just done for days after he got 8 months suspended and 25% remission off his 1 year sentence for abusing a child judges need to have a good hard look at themselves
Once you pop you can’t stop
An intercounty gaa player bit a guard and all he got was a fine
Should have 12 months breaking stones
Any offense concerning money, no matter how small the amount, seem to get you in jail, while some more serious crime gets you suspended sentences. Money is really important in Ireland.
This is great guerilla/viral marketing as I bought a tube of Pringles after hearing the story.
Sorry did she take them without paying or did she pay. Article is very thin in its discription.
Takes once you pop you can’t stop to a new level i guess :)
She got through to the second round of supermarket swipe
For a member of the judiciary to give such a sentence there is a guide book on such..
It’s a pity the idiot judges and I mean all of them look at the crime and the consequences of it on the effected people by that I mean the elderly getting robbed, beaten, abused and those that are subjected to the horrors of sexual abuse and not forgetting the murders that get away lightly but God forbid you don’t pay a tv licence or as this young Lady as the judge stated was being a smart Alec you get more than an abuser and repeat offenders but also the point Tesco taking it that far shame on them and the idiot judges.. community service should suffice..
@Sportmad: repeat offender. Got what she deserved.
WTAF!!!!!!!
have your say