Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Freeman Megamerge

1…4849515354…170

Comments

  • #2502
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Ben is on his feet now cross examining. Opens his examination again questioning the witness about how the affidavit was written. Accused the witness of being coached all week by Counsel for the plaintiff.

    Also a lovely moment where Ben said he was never told by the witness that he had a court order, that he heard him say it to Charlie Allen but the witness never told him.


  • #2503
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Gilroy throws out an ad hoc motion to strike out the witness' affidavit because he couldn't remember where he swore it.

    Motion rejected, plough on gents.

    Oh hang on! He's got more!

    He is flat out saying Eugene F Collins wrote the affidavits and they are full of lies.

    Ryan J setting him straight on how affidavits are sworn and drafted now


  • #2504
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Has now accused the receiver of committing a criminal offense by refusing to show him the documents appointing him as receiver.

    Ryan J starting to put a stop to his rambling questioning. Has told him there is only one question here: did Gilroy breach the Court order? was he served with it and did he breach it. That's it. Nothing else.
    This all came in the context of Gilroy saying that the receiver wouldn't give him documents so why did he get so upset when Charlie Allen didn't have the trust documents.

    The assembled Masses-of-the-family-nonsense have stopped guffawing pretty fast


  • #2505
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Unperturbed by Ryan Js earlier statement about the affidavit issues Ben proceeds to keep going about how they co-ordinated their evidence.

    Also a weird moment where apparently someone is recording the whole thing and Ryan J had to warn everyone about contempt of court...in the midst of a contempt hearing.

    Ben's ability to utterly miss the point is actually quite impressive


  • #2506
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Amazing stuff!


  • #2507
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Gilroy trying to say that the receiver wasn't validly appointed and therefore he has "no standing to bring this application".

    Ryan J just shut him down and said it's irrelevant, move on. Seems to be trying to keep this on track much more now.


  • #2508
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,242 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Gilroy trying to say that the receiver wasn't validly appointed and therefore he has "no standing to bring this application".

    Ryan J just shut him down and said it's irrelevant, move on. Seems to be trying to keep this on track much more now.

    By the sounds of it, Ben is done for and he knows that his number is up.

    How long do you reckon before it's all done?


  • #2509
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    By the sounds of it, Ben is done for and he knows that his number is up.

    How long do you reckon before it's all done?

    Then I'm giving a bad impression of it. He seems certain he's in the right (I disagree Obv) and that he's making lots of valid points.

    Ryan J keeps trying to bring him back and tell him what the issues are before the Court but he keeps missing the point totally and goes on with whatever point he wants to make.

    To be fair to Ben he's hacking away like a demon but he's not actually saying anything relevant is all. Submissions won't get done today. We could be putting this back again. Still cross examining the receiver about his deed of appointment.


  • #2510
    rameire
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,183 ✭✭✭rameire


    I can see how the updates on all the idiot feeds will go now.

    Ben the master has them on the back foot
    they are worried
    the judge cant handle Ben and his truth
    Ben is teaching the system how reality works

    can they not just tell him to sit down and shut up?

    🌞 3.8kwp, 🌞 Split 2.28S, 1.52E. 🌞 Clonee, Dub.🌞



  • #2511
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The Plaintiff has finished giving evidence now. Gilroy is making a sort of ad hoc discovery application.


  • Advertisement
  • #2512
    Pat Mustard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,554 ✭✭✭Pat Mustard


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Ryan J keeps trying to bring him back and tell him what the issues are before the Court but he keeps missing the point totally and goes on with whatever point he wants to make.

    To be fair to Ben he's hacking away like a demon but he's not actually saying anything relevant is all. Submissions won't get done today. We could be putting this back again. Still cross examining the receiver about his deed of appointment.

    It's about time that there should be a code of practice for courts dealing with lay litigants. Lack of representation should not be licence to cause long delays, which lead to increased costs.

    Lay litigants who drone on about every man and his dog should get warned and then hammered.


  • #2513
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,242 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Then I'm giving a bad impression of it. He seems certain he's in the right (I disagree Obv) and that he's making lots of valid points.

    Ryan J keeps trying to bring him back and tell him what the issues are before the Court but he keeps missing the point totally and goes on with whatever point he wants to make.

    To be fair to Ben he's hacking away like a demon but he's not actually saying anything relevant is all. Submissions won't get done today. We could be putting this back again. Still cross examining the receiver about his deed of appointment.

    No no, you have given a good impression and I appreciate the updates. I was considering the fact that the judge is trying to move him alone nicely in spite of his many irrelevant tangents.

    In your opinion, is Ben taking the piss with the court for the laugh, is he coming over as being genuine or is this an act of arrogance?


  • #2514
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    And we are done for today.

    Gilroy loses on all counts of discovery and legal subs to be done on Thursday


  • #2515
    Robbo
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,571 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    You're doing the lord's work, Kayroo.


  • #2516
    Calina
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    I've to wait until Thursday for the next installment? Why can't we Netflix it?


  • #2517
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    No no, you have given a good impression and I appreciate the updates. I was considering the fact that the judge is trying to move him alone nicely in spite of his many irrelevant tangents.

    In your opinion, is Ben taking the piss with the court for the laugh, is he coming over as being genuine or is this an act of arrogance?

    Honestly not sure. He seems really worried but the bull**** is strong with this one.

    His supporters may actually have trapped him in a way. He has to stick to his script in many ways. It was interesting when he lost the discovery application and Ryan J spoke about relevance and what the whole case was about and, particularly, the issue of law that even if the order of the court was completely void and was granted to a couple of total random chancers with no locus to take the case at all that he would STILL be in contempt for not following the order.

    It was as if just then he finally got it.


  • #2518
    littlemac1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,073 ✭✭✭littlemac1980


    Calina wrote: »
    I've to wait until Thursday for the next installment? Why can't we Netflix it?

    With that many of his "supporters" in Court there's bound to be a video or two that'll pop up.


  • #2519
    littlemac1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,073 ✭✭✭littlemac1980


    Deleted User wrote: »

    It was as if just then he finally got it.

    I actually hope he spent the week researching Legal Authority, Agency, Discovery etc. haha, "Damn, I should have checked the proofs for Contempt of Court!"


  • #2520
    Unshelved
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 865 ✭✭✭Unshelved


    Thanks for the updates - they're really fascinating!


  • Advertisement
  • #2521
    Robbo
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,571 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    A recent judgment, in which Hogan explains why "reckless lending" isn't a thing in Ireland.


  • #2522
    Statutes Apply!
    Registered Users Posts: 14 ✭Statutes Apply!


    "High Court was wrongly told activist had assaulted guard" - Irish Times http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court-was-wrongly-told-activist-had-assaulted-guard-1.1750952


  • #2523
    For Forks Sake
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,654 ✭✭✭✭For Forks Sake


    jd wrote: »
    Free Howth Mansions for everyone in the audience!

    http://www.thejournal.ie/tom-darcy-european-elections-1394701-Apr2014/


  • #2524
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,242 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    For Forks Sake wrote: »
    http://www.thejournal.ie/tom-darcy-european-elections-1394701-Apr2014/

    Represent himself, did he? This law firm may beg to differ.

    http://www.mchalemuldoon.ie/news/a-win-for-our-client-in-the-supreme-court/


  • #2525
    ooter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,251 ✭✭✭ooter


    http://awakenlongford.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/high-court-dublin-today-you-couldnt-make-this-stuff-up/


  • #2526
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    ooter wrote: »
    http://awakenlongford.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/high-court-dublin-today-you-couldnt-make-this-stuff-up/
    I think I just got stupider for having read that. My head hurts.


  • Advertisement
  • #2527
    flowers345
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭flowers345


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    Represent himself, did he? This law firm may beg to differ.

    http://www.mchalemuldoon.ie/news/a-win-for-our-client-in-the-supreme-court/

    'After his money ran out he started to represent himself.'


  • #2528
    Statutes Apply!
    Registered Users Posts: 14 ✭Statutes Apply!


    Seems there's been a verdict http://awakenlongford.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/ahead-of-the-last-day-of-ben-gilroys-contempt-trial-at-dublins-four-courts/[/url]

    Meanwhile DDI on facebook has determined "There have been so many failures untruths and misrepresentations in the prosecution of this case bordering on the criminal that should any other verdict than a striking out be made it will be a dark dark day for justice in Ireland"


  • #2529
    Robbo
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,571 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    Not strictly the Freemen, but I was reminded of the continued existence of Donegal men who don't like paying tax much and their long running assertion that VRT is illegal. For several years they've been trying to make out that VRT is a Customs Charge and "against Article 25 of the Treaty of Rome". Unfortunately, their expertise on EU law appears to start and stop somewhere about 1959, because they still think that the Treaty of Rome is a thing and that no subsequent Treaties, renumberings or case law in relation to exceptions to Article 30 TFEU (ex 25) have occurred.


    Also, they appear to be questioning the very basis of the Oireachtas and support the Attack the Tax mail order scam. Much like Attack the Tax, they've been talking for years about a legal challenge, even collecting money to do so, yet nothing appears to be happening...

    Apropos of nothing, if something has mildly peeved you, I will happily vindicate your rights under the Treaty of Utrecht and Second Vatican Council for just a small donation. Cash only please.


  • #2530
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,535 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Robbo wrote: »
    Not strictly the Freemen, but I was reminded of the continued existence of Donegal men who don't like paying tax much and their long running assertion that VRT is illegal. For several years they've been trying to make out that VRT is a Customs Charge and "against Article 25 of the Treaty of Rome". Unfortunately, their expertise on EU law appears to start and stop somewhere about 1959, because they still think that the Treaty of Rome is a thing and that no subsequent Treaties, renumberings or case law in relation to exceptions to Article 30 TFEU (ex 25) have occurred.


    Also, they appear to be questioning the very basis of the Oireachtas and support the Attack the Tax mail order scam. Much like Attack the Tax, they've been talking for years about a legal challenge, even collecting money to do so, yet nothing appears to be happening...

    Apropos of nothing, if something has mildly peeved you, I will happily vindicate your rights under the Treaty of Utrecht and Second Vatican Council for just a small donation. Cash only please.

    Didn't someone already challenge that and it was found that so long as the tax would apply to domestically produced cars (if such existed) as well as imported cars, then it was fine?


  • #2531
    LordNorbury
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭LordNorbury


    Just thought I'd throw this out there for a general discussion, I'm not a legal professional although as a business owner I am familiar with the areas that I need to be familiar with...

    http://www.donegaldaily.com/2014/04/07/gardai-breaking-the-law-by-seizing-untaxed-cars-campaigner/
    MOTORISTS should take legal action against Gardaí or Revenue officials who seize their vehicles as officers are breaking European laws, a campaigner has claimed.
    And John Doherty from the Irish Drivers Association says motorists would WIN any legal challenge.
    He says it’s the Irish Government which is breaking the law and the seizure of vehicles for unpaid taxes – like road tax or vehicle registration tax (VRT) – actually breaches European legislation.
    Referring to the seizure of six more vehicles near Ballybofey on Monday – and one in which a man says he suffered a suspected heart attack – Mr Doherty said Gardaí are breaking the law.
    “The Gardaí and customs are acting under instruction from Michael Noonan to seize vehicles under the 1992 Finance Act which is contrary to Article 15 of the constitution for unpaid road tax and Customs Duty which is prohibited under article 25 of the Treaty of Rome,” said Mr Doherty.
    “Once again this proves that Garda resources are been dedicated to extorting revenue from an already hard pressed motorist while so many crimes go unsolved.”
    He has once again urged anyone who has had their car seized to take immediate legal steps.
    Mr Doherty added: “European law supersedes Irish law.”

    I personally don't find the argument very convincing at all, what "constitution" he may be referring to is unclear, maybe the EU Constitution, but does the EU Constitution hardly has a specific article on unpaid road tax? Article 25 of the Treaty of Rome doesn't seem to mention anything about road tax and the absence thereof either...

    Just thought I'd put it out for discussion, stranger things have turned out to be true! ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #2532
    cobhguy28
    Registered Users Posts: 301 ✭✭cobhguy28


    flowers345 wrote: »
    'After his money ran out he started to represent himself.'

    It was the other way around. He represented himself first and lost twice, and then he got a solicitor and had one small victory because the court summons was not served correctly and this was only related to his home. The bank has now reissued new summons and Mr darcy will be back in court soon.


  • #2533
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    Have a look at the last page of this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=89863373#post89863373


  • #2534
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    ken wrote: »
    I think I just got stupider for having read that. My head hurts.
    I only made it as far as the statement in bold before my concentration wavered and then fled. On a positive note, I think that if anywhere should be awakened, Longford is a strong contender.


  • #2535
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    Sorry, you lost me at Donegal.

    However, I have nothing but admiration for the man who was so shocked to discover his tax non-compliance that his heart ceased to function correctly.


  • #2536
    littlemac1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,073 ✭✭✭littlemac1980


    I sure hope the Gilroy case finishes to today - it seems to have been going on as Long as the Pistorius Trial.


  • #2537
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    littlemac1980 wrote: »
    I sure hope the Gilroy case finishes to today - it seems to have been going on as Long as the Pistorius Trial.

    Except Gilroy has less of a leg to stand on.





    ...


  • #2538
    Thargor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,964 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    http://instantrimshot.com/


  • #2539
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Ding ding! Seconds out and we are back on. Howard SC opening the submissions for the Plaintiff now. Will report anything interesting. Imagine that'll be more during Ben's submissions.

    Oh and it didn't take long! Ben is up already giving it an Art 6 argument about equality of arms etc. He is trying to say the entire process of this contempt hearing is flawed and "tainted with illegality".

    Saying the Court has a duty to protect him and is insisting the court abandon this hearing and refer the deponents to the DPP.


  • #2540
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,242 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    LordNorbury wrote: »
    Just thought I'd throw this out there for a general discussion, I'm not a legal professional although as a business owner I am familiar with the areas that I need to be familiar with...

    http://www.donegaldaily.com/2014/04/07/gardai-breaking-the-law-by-seizing-untaxed-cars-campaigner/


    I'd trust content in the Donegal Dollop more than that in the Donegal Daily.


  • #2541
    Pat Mustard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,554 ✭✭✭Pat Mustard


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Ben is up already giving it an Art 6 argument about equality of arms etc. He is trying to say the entire process of this contempt hearing is flawed and "tainted with illegality".

    Maybe he'll try to argue that it's unfair that he doesn't have a lawyer. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #2542
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    We broke for lunch. Gilroy needed "time to get [his] head together".

    Back at 2 for the show.

    Ryan J has indicated he won't give an ex tempore judgment today.

    In a funny moment at the end Ryan J noted that Hogan J was giving a lecture on the constitution and said he didn't want the throng walking out but maybe Mr Gilroy might like to attend


  • #2543
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    An issue was raised about my live reporting apparently. I only got in near the end of the afternoon session but in deference to Ryan J I'm not going to do it anymore.

    Will give end of day reports.

    Judgment to be delivered on April 29th


  • #2544
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    Deleted User wrote: »
    An issue was raised about my live reporting apparently. I only got in near the end of the afternoon session but in deference to Ryan J I'm not going to do it anymore.

    Will give end of day reports.

    Judgment to be delivered on April 29th


    Im surprised it took so long for that to be brought up.


  • #2545
    Robbo
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,571 Mod ✭✭✭✭Robbo


    Deleted User wrote: »
    An issue was raised about my live reporting apparently. I only got in near the end of the afternoon session but in deference to Ryan J I'm not going to do it anymore.

    Will give end of day reports.

    Judgment to be delivered on April 29th
    Is this thread going to be cited along side such masterpieces as the Meads -v- Meads judgment?


  • #2546
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »
    Im surprised it took so long for that to be brought up.

    I don't think this would come anywhere close to constituting a contempt but regardless it was apparently quite clear Ryan J didn't want anyone doing anything of the sort so I think it's best I discontinue the practice anyway.

    In any event there's only one day left in all likelihood


  • #2547
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I don't think this would come anywhere close to constituting a contempt but regardless it was apparently quite clear Ryan J didn't want anyone doing anything of the sort so I think it's best I discontinue the practice anyway.

    In any event there's only one day left in all likelihood


    I agree that its more than likely not contempt, (as no photos) in reality it is reporting, the only issue is reporting direct from the court ok. My belief is yes its fine, but I would not like the argument. As I said I was just surprised it was not brought up before. Judge does not want any issue to derail this now.


  • #2548
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,750 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »
    I agree that its more than likely not contempt, (as no photos) in reality it is reporting, the only issue is reporting direct from the court ok. My belief is yes its fine, but I would not like the argument. As I said I was just surprised it was not brought up before. Judge does not want any issue to derail this now.
    I fail to see how it's any different from the half-hourly news bulletins on the radio but again, if the Court has made the direction, it's best to abide by that.


  • #2549
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    I fail to see how it's any different from the half-hourly news bulletins on the radio but again, if the Court has made the direction, it's best to abide by that.

    News report do not deliver their report from inside the court room, it has been done on a few occasions with express permission of a judge. But to use a computer to deliver communications to the outside world from the court could be an issue. To take a note of proceedings and then go outside to Inns Quay and give blow by blow account from outside would more than likely be ok. It's the perception that the reports are coming from inside could be an issue.

    http://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/dec/15/tweeting-court-reporters-julian-assange


  • #2550
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »
    News report do not deliver their report from inside the court room, it has been done on a few occasions with express permission of a judge. But to use a computer to deliver communications to the outside world from the court could be an issue. To take a note of proceedings and then go outside to Inns Quay and give blow by blow account from outside would more than likely be ok. It's the perception that the reports are coming from inside could be an issue.

    http://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/dec/15/tweeting-court-reporters-julian-assange

    Is this because - in your opinion - people feel that justice will be perverted by real time reportage or what?

    I know this is pretty common worldwide, but never really understood the mindset behind it...


  • Advertisement
  • #2551
    Whatintheworld
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭Whatintheworld


    Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »
    Im surprised it took so long for that to be brought up.

    Maybe they are not as interested in you as you are in them;)


Advertisement