Protesters Filming Gardai Vs Garda right to protect their identity

Lilibet · 09-05-2008 8:43pm

Terrontress wrote: »

Would you feel so aggrieved if you were assaulted on the street and someone videoed that, which subsequently led to their arrest?

Would you feel aggrieved if you were stopped speeding and video evidence was bought to court and displayed in that most public of places? Or put on a tv show about police doing their job?

Thats a very different situation in that I would like to think that the person doing the recording of my being assaulted was doing so to help me and not for their own sinster reasons.I would also like to think that they would help to stop the assault if they could.
Your second example is again different in that if I break the law and the Gardai produce legally obtained video evidence of it,I go through due process and let the law take its course in any public courtroom.
My reply to your last example is that I would expect my permission to be sought before any film of me was put on any tv show.

ojewriej · 09-05-2008 8:52pm

Lilibet wrote: »

My reply to your last example is that I would expect my permission to be sought before any film of me was put on any tv show.

I agree with you on that. As a private person, you should be asked for permission to be put on telly, or even a website. Uniformed Gardai on duty are civil servants at work, so imo permission shouldn't be necessary. Of course, in certain situations, they should be able to stop the airing as well.

But as I mentioned before, there is a huge legal difference between just filming you, and then releasing the film to the wide audience.

Mind you though, I'm no expert, my opinion is based on some legal studies I did while studying journalism. This kind of issues were covered there from the journo perspective. So I agree with Verb, we are just speculating here, to sort it once and for all we would need someone with some solid legal background.

Terrontress · 09-05-2008 10:02pm

The point is that the right which allows people to film Gardai or any public happening is the same which allows the Gardai to film the public without suggestion of a crime. To insist otherwise would be like an unaccountable dictatorship.

The Gardai have an aversion to being filmed in general as they do not come across well on film, or even on the radio.

But that is the fault of the Gardai. Not the people filming them.

culabula88 · 10-05-2008 11:22am

ojewriej wrote: »

Karlito

Again, you are making awfull jumps here.

What I'm saying applies to uniformed gardai on the street only. While on duty. Not in the station, not plainclothes, just uniforms in public places.

As for Garda being identified off duty - can't they not be identified off duty without being recorded?

I work for th US company - explain to me how do you contribute to my wages?

Salary scales for all of the Public service jobs are available to public. You can check how much a nurse or a doctor in a public hospital can earn. Same goes for firemen, gardai, from the street sweeper all the way to taoiseach really. Why do you think is that? And why you won't find my salary scale anywhere?

Quite simply to say that somebody is a public or civil servant allows other members of the public to freely film them is a BS arguement. What i am speciifcally talking about is somebody who can seem to walk up to a garda shove it in their face and post it up on youtube. If it was a normal Joe soap or me they tried to film , Id take the camera off them fairly quick ( & id say that this would probably be the reaction of most people) , but because its a garda the guards either dont have laws to do it or are reluctant to do it in case their is complaints etc.

Oh and the US company bit, id say that everybody in this country is handsomly contributing to your wages with the amount of money the IDA has thrown at them for a start & tax breaks together with low corporation tax to keep you employed - ( not to mention the obligation we are under with army stopover flights in shannon from the US) so dont go down that road thinking that you have extra rights over public servants in some respects.

One question to you ojewriej & others - Will you allow your image to be posted on youtube?

Eru · 10-05-2008 7:42pm

Im going to give up on this one. Ori is just ignoring points and questions put to him while being incredible niave which I suspect is deliberate.

People simple cant get beyond having a superiority complex over Gardai and it would seem, state employees in general. Im just thankful most people are capable of human decency and respect of privacy regardless of percieved social status.

Thread closed as far as Im concerned

Gavin · 11-05-2008 11:19am

culabula88 wrote: »

One question to you ojewriej & others - Will you allow your image to be posted on youtube?

Have you actually read up on this in the slightest ?? If a video is made of me in public, in a non-harassing manner, where I am in a position of not expecting privacy. e.g walking down the street, there is nothing I can do to stop the publication. I don't particularly have a problem with that either. When one is in public.. it is PUBLIC !!!

sunnyjim · 11-05-2008 12:45pm

Sorry Verb, but we're talking about the lives of Gardai being interfered with here.

It would be ok if it's a glimpse of a garda on RTE during coverage of an All Ireland, but the incidents we're talking about here are the Rossport type videos being seen on Youtube and Indymedia.ie - where someone is pushing cameras into a Gardas face and mouthing off about all and sundry, knowing the Garda can't retaliate.

This **** wouldn't fly if it was someone walking down a street, because it would be harrassment.... And even at that, what has a random punter to lose? A garda has a lot more to lose.

Edit: Hey, I'll tell ya what, I have some pictures that I just happened to take of an ERU member. Maybe I should publish them? Because ya know, what went down was on an open street. Fair enough?

metman · 11-05-2008 5:08pm

I've had this a couple of times when I've been on duty. Idiots sticking a mobile phone in your face while you're dealing with something.

The last time it happened to me I was dealing with a drunken loud mouth when his mate thought it'd be funny to film me dealing with him on Camera. Strangely enough the camera-phone was removed when I told the mate I'd be seizing his phone as evidence of a criminal offence (his mate gobbing off at me), which we have a power to do.

Ordinarily I couldn't care less if people want to film me working in uniform on a public street. If they get close enough that it starts to interfere with my job then I'd be looking at giving them a warning to move off, then I'd be looking at obstruction.

I don't see what the issue is here, and why its being made out to be so on this thread. The police service isn't a 'secret police' we perform our role in the public eye and rightly so. When the public overstep the mark in filming we have powers to intervene.

jetsonx · 11-05-2008 5:28pm

metman wrote: »

told the mate I'd be seizing his phone as evidence of a criminal offence .

Do you really think he was comitting a criminal offence with his phone ?

What was the rationale behind this intent to confiscate his phone?

civdef · 11-05-2008 5:55pm

Jetsonx, the statement you are querying seems fairly clear to me. Can I suggest you might just need to read it again?

metman · 11-05-2008 6:33pm

jetsonx wrote: »

Do you really think he was comitting a criminal offence with his phone ?

What was the rationale behind this intent to confiscate his phone?

As CD says if you re-read what I posted I think it was fairly clear.

However, without getting into a class on the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, no I didn't think the other person was committing an offence with his phone; he was videoing one. This then makes his phone of evidential value to any investigation (me dealing with his friend's public order offence) and I have a power to seize anything of evidential value pertinent to an investigation in which I'm involved.

That was the rationale and I'd have quite happily taken the phone had his friend persisted and would have been acting legally in doing so.

vote4pedro · 12-05-2008 12:49am

Some of the policing at eircom League games is unbelievably, incredibly poor and so I can't see how any Garda could complain about being photographed in public going about there business, when they're happy to videotape, not just protests/marches, but crowds of innocent football fans at Dalymount Park, Tolka Park etc.

Would it have anything to do with the events that resulted in Gardai being charged with assault? I suspect so but then again, Im fuzzy on the whole thing. Wasnt 'Robocop' found innocent on all charges by a jury of citizens of the state?

Sounds like a case of a man being wrongly accused to me considering we do believe in innocent until proven guilty dont we? Maybe we should have a tribunal and see if certain people on the day perjured themselves in court and contaminated video evidence? the juries decision would seem to indicate that this may have happened.

Good heavens

ojewriej · 12-05-2008 10:03am

Ok, this is getting ridiculus, so just to clarify my position again:

karlito:
I am pretty sure I addressed all the points you made, you ignored few of mine though. But if you feel differently - what questions did I ignore?

I agree with metman - I don't see why this thread became so agitated. Again, all I'm saying is that it should be ok to film Gardai on the street. You are the ones talking about shoving the camera in guard's face. Obviously, if the filming is becoming a nuissance or it's obstructing a guard from doing his job, it should be dealt with.

In my opinion, when it comes to airing this kind of footage, members of the public should give their permission, whereas it shouldn't be a requrement when it comes to the policemen on duty - because if you are on duty you are not a Joe Soap, but a policeman. This gives you certain privileges, but also some responsibilities.

I'm struggling to see why do you keep twisting and blowing my words out of proportion, making it out as I'm attacking the organisation as a whole and every Garda. Implying a superiority on my part is quite laughable to be honest - all my grandparents, and both my parents are or were civil servants (teachers, policemen, firemen), and I'm trying to become one as well. To be honest some kind of insecurities come to mind here rather than superiority complex.

I repeat: civil servants are no better or worse than anyone else - they just have certain privileges and responsibilities others don't.

At culabulla - I don't necessary have to like being filmed. But being in a public place, I can be, there is nothing i can do about it.

As for taxes: What is the final balance though? Tax breaks are just an incentive to set up the shop here, the company might pay less, but it still pays taxes. And the amounts are not small either. Without a tax break, it would pay them in some other country, so it was in the governmet's interest to attract the business here.

Bottom line is - do we get the money from the revenue, or do we contribute to it?

Satan Polaroid · 12-05-2008 1:08pm

Whatever the legal ramifications, it is not nice to have a camera shove in front of your face and some tw@t asking you stupid questions.

In fact, it is down right rude!

ojewriej · 12-05-2008 1:13pm

Satan Polaroid wrote: »

Whatever the legal ramifications, it is not nice to have a camera shove in front of your face and some tw@t asking you stupid questions.

In fact, it is down right rude!

I agree. But it's a completely different issue.

vote4pedro · 12-05-2008 1:23pm

Satan Polaroid wrote: »

Whatever the legal ramifications, it is not nice to have a camera shove in front of your face and some tw@t asking you stupid questions.

In fact, it is down right rude!

Of course it is, but I find it rude when the police do the same to me at football matches, and I'd imagine peaceful protesters do too.

Turner · 12-05-2008 4:29pm

What the Gards are up against.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw7iZXty8uY

Presumably the staff of the petrol station called them but the video shows Detectives monitoring a protest. Obviously in case any breach of the peace or damage to property occurs.

All the well educated protester was short of saying was "Yes Gauuurd you should be out rounding up rapists and drug dealers not hassling us who have been educated in private schools in dublin 4 and have chosen an alternative lifestyle" :mad::mad:

The video was filmed in Finglas as far as i know and you can be sure the detective branch in finglas would be one of the most active in the country with regard to arrests and convictions. Considering the amount of serious crime committed in their district. But on this day they had to babysit some long haired sandle wearing anti establishment presumably unemployed dogooders.

Fyr.Fytr · 12-05-2008 6:28pm

Permission to say "Damn D4 wannabe crustys"

Fair play to the guard gave a good as he got

Turner · 12-05-2008 6:30pm

Fyr.Fytr wrote: »

Permission to say "Damn D4 wannabe crustys"

Fair play to the guard gave a good as he got

"wha wha wha wha what"

Quality from the detective

:D:D

Fyr.Fytr · 12-05-2008 6:39pm

"Go on Tagth go over there and be a good little boy"

"by loik roish who are you to say i cant film you loik roish"

tmulcahy365 · 12-05-2008 6:57pm

I'd like to have seen the start of the clip as it doesn't show how the Guard dealt with it initially, and he may have been provoked.

But overall the Guard dealt with that very poorly. Surely he should have known that in this situation, someone pointing a camera at him is expecting a reaction.. and thats exactly what was given..

He should have been a bit more relaxed about it and simply informed them that they were making sure it was a peaceful protest and then closing his window and ignoring the guy rather than acting like a branch of the secret police.

Fyr.Fytr · 12-05-2008 7:03pm

Apart from the fact as chief said detective in finglas have 101 better things to do with their time then babysit a protest, so needless to say he wasnt too pleased to begin with

Turner · 12-05-2008 7:07pm

If the garage called the gards because they were in fear the gardai have to respond.

The Gardai do not have to be happy about being there.

Especially when they could be out hassling serious criminals who they know on a first name basis. Things they do on a daily basis.

Eru · 12-05-2008 7:09pm

tmulcahy365 wrote: »

I'd like to have seen the start of the clip as it doesn't show how the Guard dealt with it initially, and he may have been provoked.

But overall the Guard dealt with that very poorly. Surely he should have known that in this situation, someone pointing a camera at him is expecting a reaction.. and thats exactly what was given..

He should have been a bit more relaxed about it and simply informed them that they were making sure it was a peaceful protest and then closing his window and ignoring the guy rather than acting like a branch of the secret police.

should have simple ignored him full stop in my opinion but he was probable annoyed to begin with and decided too at least have some input for when the footage was put online as he surely knew it would.

The sad thing is a lot of times a protest can be carried out peacefully, with minimum fuss and bother for passersby and with mutual co-operation but these guys are so aggressive to begin with and treat everyone as an enemy.

Fyr.Fytr · 12-05-2008 7:17pm

Chief--- wrote: »

If the garage called the gards because they were in fear the gardai have to respond.

The Gardai do not have to be happy about being there.

Especially when they could be out hassling serious criminals who they know on a first name basis. Things they do on a daily basis.

Exactly my point, they have a duty to respond and as a result have to focus their attention away from the bigger fish they have to fry.

afatbollix · 12-05-2008 7:23pm

can a gardai tell me what teh story would be if they seen RTE filming them? also i dont agree to the type of filming above.. its just stupid...

Turner · 12-05-2008 8:33pm

RTE reporters dont antagonise the gardai into arresting them so they can file complaints and civil suits.

RTE reporters dont follow gardai home and approach their wives and children off duty questioning them about their work.

Some of these hardhard protesters are the worst kind of people you would ever meet.

cushtac · 12-05-2008 8:42pm

Chief--- wrote: »

RTE reporters dont follow gardai home and approach their wives and children off duty questioning them about their work.

Or worse...

vote4pedro · 12-05-2008 9:44pm

cushtac wrote: »

Or worse...

Have these protestors really been following Gardai home? And what do you mean by or worse? Not having a go like, just hadn't heard of anything and I'd have thought Gardai being stalked...and worse I'd have heard about?

Hard to tell who'se the biggest eejit in the above posted video. The protestor is acting like a spa, trying to provoke a reaction and being a smartarse, but then the Garda starts acting like a kid with his G G G Garda schtik and threatening to take the camera away without reason. Doesn't exactly seem like a great meeting of minds.

cushtac · 12-05-2008 9:58pm

vote4pedro wrote: »

Have these protestors really been following Gardai home? And what do you mean by or worse? Not having a go like, just hadn't heard of anything and I'd have thought Gardai being stalked...and worse I'd have heard about?

Yes they have, as have other scumbags. By worse I mean threats, intimidation and attacks on people's property.

afatbollix · 12-05-2008 10:15pm

a mate of mine wont go to his car in uniform incase they slash his tires... heard that its happened to a few gardai in his station...

lostexpectation · 13-05-2008 3:16am

Chief--- wrote: »

RTE reporters dont antagonise the gardai into arresting them so they can file complaints and civil suits.

RTE reporters dont follow gardai home and approach their wives and children off duty questioning them about their work.

Some of these hardhard protesters are the worst kind of people you would ever meet.

when has that ever happened (in ireland)?

lostexpectation · 13-05-2008 3:19am

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Sounds like a case of a man being wrongly accused to me considering we do believe in innocent until proven guilty dont we? Maybe we should have a tribunal and see if certain people on the day perjured themselves in court and contaminated video evidence? the juries decision would seem to indicate that this may have happened.

some people can watch someone being beaten while already prone on the ground and still acquit a guard, they think guards can do no wrong, there biased, that's entirely the problem.

lostexpectation · 13-05-2008 3:23am

if the guy in the petrol station video, would just admitted he was a guard there be no story.

Eru · 13-05-2008 11:55am

lostexpectation wrote: »

some people can watch someone being beaten while already prone on the ground and still acquit a guard, they think guards can do no wrong, there biased, that's entirely the problem.

So what your saying is you dont believe in innocent until proven guilty? Tell me, in kangaroo courts do you carry our the exacution as well?

lostexpectation wrote: »

when has that ever happened (in ireland)?

Are you ****ing kidding me? Are you that niave and arrogant that you think such things A, dont happen and B, that you would automatically know everytime it does happen? How would the press even know unless it results in a trial big enough on the day to merit a story?

vote4pedro · 13-05-2008 12:42pm

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

So what your saying is you dont believe in innocent until proven guilty? Tell me, in kangaroo courts do you carry our the exacution as well?

Are you ****ing kidding me? Are you that niave and arrogant that you think such things A, dont happen and B, that you would automatically know everytime it does happen? How would the press even know unless it results in a trial big enough on the day to merit a story?

No Garda on here refers anecdotaly to a person they've arrested as a criminal, despite the fact they're innocent? I've only had a quick read through a few threads in here but could have sworn I've seen people who presumably have not (perhaps yet) been found guilty of a crime being referred to as louts, scumbags etc. And quite rightly too if they were acting that way. How can you actually say what the way that Garda acted in a way anything other than as an absolute knacker.

As for naive, hearsay about how Gardai are victimised off duty, what would you say if in another forum someone (perhaps one of the protestors we're talking about) said it was naive to deny that Gardaí were threatening them, beating them or causing them problems in some other way, or acting in an inappropriate way. Would you not then say that some sort of proof would be handy to back up any such claims?

Turner · 13-05-2008 5:46pm

vote4pedro wrote: »

No Garda on here refers anecdotaly to a person they've arrested as a criminal, despite the fact they're innocent?

The Gardai who arrested somebody will know if they committed the crime or not and if they are truly guilty.

Whether they are convicted of it or not is a different story and that is down to the circus that is the district or circuit courts.

vote4pedro · 13-05-2008 6:15pm

Chief--- wrote: »

The Gardai who arrested somebody will know if they committed the crime or not and if they are truly guilty.

Whether they are convicted of it or not is a different story and that is down to the circus that is the district or circuit courts.

So a Garda is the only true judge of innocence or guilt? :eek: Not taking in to account the huge intricacies of law?
And the court are a circus, except for when they acquit the likes of Robocop, in which case their decision should be respected?

Turner · 13-05-2008 6:59pm

vote4pedro wrote: »

So a Garda is the only true judge of innocence or guilt? :

No. In ireland a judge and jury is.

However a Garda can say to an injured party - listen i know yer man stabbed you because i saw him, thats why i arrested him and sure you saw me - but he is getting off because of a minute piece of evidnece was lost or left out or the judge directed the jury to find him innocent.

vote4pedro · 13-05-2008 7:02pm

But a protestor who saw Robocop in action that day could say the exact same thing?

Turner · 13-05-2008 7:10pm

vote4pedro wrote: »

But a protestor who saw Robocop in action that day could say the exact same thing?

Dont know much about the court case and how it finished up, but found this here

http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2004/1115/ireland/kfqlgbaukfsn/

Gardai are allowed use force and that includes batons if they feel they are going to be over powered. This force can be up to and including lethal force.

There are guidelines about not hitting people on the head but i presume in a riot situation its not always easy to aim when you are trying to protect yourself, your colleagues, the public and property from damage.

vote4pedro · 13-05-2008 7:28pm

But is that not part of the "circus" of the courts which you described, that a man acting in such a repugnant, animalistic and dangerous way can escape punishment by the way you said an ordinary person can also sometimes sadly escape justice.
Or is it one rule for some....

civdef · 13-05-2008 8:08pm

Thread has diverged well off original topic of filming, and has turned into an oft repeated slugging match about reclaim the streets etc , so - it's closed.

Protesters Filming Gardai Vs Garda right to protect their identity

Comments