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,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Solicitor quits over 'corruption in judiciary'

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    jakdelad wrote: »
    so you dont find it rather strange that since the existance of the state
    not one judge has been offically sacked??? what does that tell you ?
    all judges are perfect. while some gards, prison officers solicitors have been sacked.
    there is no judge ombudsman these guys can basically do law wise what they want.......
    where or how would you go to complain about a judge??
    the whole system needs reform
    when a garda can single handledy pick an inquest jury

    without any process , that tells you something is wrong
    by the way kayroo your not in court here
    no need for grandstanding
    i would remind you its called an opinion you dont have to agree with it.
    ref to the muck at the judge come on step into the real world
    the edvidence on disk was there the paperwork was the only thing wrong

    Every time a judge has had cause to be sacked he has resigned instead. There is no defined procedure for removing a judge within the Constitution and rather than trigger a Constitutional crisis (separation of powers issue) the judges just step down if needs be. What that tells me is that judges are not perfect, they are human and make errors just as we all do but when it comes to protecting the Constitution they do the right thing.

    If you want to complain about a judge you go to a higher Court. There are very good examples of cases where judges have been criticised over bias and despite their stringent objections that they were not the Superior Courts have ruled that, regardless of whether they are biased or not, the mere appearance of a possibility of bias to a reasonable person in the position of the party alleging bias will be enough to render a judge unable to hear a case. (Particularly I refer you to the empassioned decision of Carroll J in Dublin Wellwoman Centre and the Supreme Court judgment of Denham J). Judges are immensely careful not only to remain unbiased but to ensure that they are beyond even the appearance of a possibility of bias.

    The sentence about the Garda is just another example of you using throw away comments that have nothing to do with the preceding point to muddy the waters.

    I am not grandstanding and I am aware I am not in Court. However an opinion is a statement backed up by points of fact. I believe you are entitled to your opinion, so show me the facts upon which it is based. Just one example, that's all I have asked for and it is what you have continually refused to provide. Weaker and weaker your words become when the proof of them is not forthcoming.


    I think what happened with the judge down in Kerry was a disgrace and should never have happened, the Gardaí should have ensured they got that information. I have never said otherwise. Now tell me how that shows corruption on the part of any member of the judiciary. You can't because it doesn't. Simple as that.


  • Options
    #63
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,465 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Our man in Havana wrote: »
    Look in any district court in the land. Gardas word is always taken over that of a member of the public.

    That's what the circuit court is for.


  • Options
    #64
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,485 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Our man in Havana wrote: »
    Look in any district court in the land. Gardas word is always taken over that of a member of the public.

    It is clear to me that some posters have history with the gardai and judges and try to get even on threads like this BUT lads after all your posts i still do not see one shred of proof to back up your claims. Plenty of supposition and innuendo but NO proof at all.
    Your case would be thrown out lads.


  • Options
    #65
    jakdelad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 452 ✭✭jakdelad


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Every time a judge has had cause to be sacked he has resigned instead. There is no defined procedure for removing a judge within the Constitution and rather than trigger a Constitutional crisis (separation of powers issue) the judges just step down if needs be. What that tells me is that judges are not perfect, they are human and make errors just as we all do but when it comes to protecting the Constitution they do the right thing.

    If you want to complain about a judge you go to a higher Court. There are very good examples of cases where judges have been criticised over bias and despite their stringent objections that they were not the Superior Courts have ruled that, regardless of whether they are biased or not, the mere appearance of a possibility of bias to a reasonable person in the position of the party alleging bias will be enough to render a judge unable to hear a case. (Particularly I refer you to the empassioned decision of Carroll J in Dublin Wellwoman Centre and the Supreme Court judgment of Denham J). Judges are immensely careful not only to remain unbiased but to ensure that they are beyond even the appearance of a possibility of bias.

    The sentence about the Garda is just another example of you using throw away comments that have nothing to do with the preceding point to muddy the waters.

    I am not grandstanding and I am aware I am not in Court. However an opinion is a statement backed up by points of fact. I believe you are entitled to your opinion, so show me the facts upon which it is based. Just one example, that's all I have asked for and it is what you have continually refused to provide. Weaker and weaker your words become when the proof of them is not forthcoming.


    I think what happened with the judge down in Kerry was a disgrace and should never have happened, the Gardaí should have ensured they got that information. I have never said otherwise. Now tell me how that shows corruption on the part of any member of the judiciary. You can't because it doesn't. Simple as that.
    well well so your not a machine cloned from the kings inn
    there is understandiing under that robe n wig
    you want everything copperfastened..
    tell me this o learned one
    how is it a gard can pick a jury for an inquest? without a process or any training in the subject.....]]
    give you an example of where it might slip up
    a man found dead in the garda station
    after all the investigations the inquest jury is handpicked by the garda,,
    not good my friend


  • Options
    #66
    234
    Registered Users Posts: 1,529 ✭✭✭234


    jakdelad wrote: »
    well well so your not a machine cloned from the kings inn
    there is understandiing under that robe n wig
    you want everything copperfastened..
    tell me this o learned one
    how is it a gard can pick a jury for an inquest? without a process or any training in the subject.....]]
    give you an example of where it might slip up
    a man found dead in the garda station
    after all the investigations the inquest jury is handpicked by the garda,,
    not good my friend

    That is completely irrelevant. Can you show proof on even one example of systemic judicial corruption?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    jakdelad wrote: »
    well well so your not a machine cloned from the kings inn
    there is understandiing under that robe n wig
    you want everything copperfastened..
    tell me this o learned one
    how is it a gard can pick a jury for an inquest? without a process or any training in the subject.....]]
    give you an example of where it might slip up
    a man found dead in the garda station
    after all the investigations the inquest jury is handpicked by the garda,,
    not good my friend

    Well well my question dodging friend, I am happy to see you are still totally incapable of showing one single example of judicial corruption.

    Come on now, let's stick to the point. Or shall you finally admit defeat?


  • Options
    #68
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,485 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    An inquest jury is nearly always picked by the gardai. It is not the same as a jury in a court. It is just there to rubber stamp the decision of the coroner as far as i am aware. They have really no decisions to make on their own.


  • Options
    #69
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    tayto lover wrote: »
    An inquest jury is nearly always picked by the gardai. It is not the same as a jury in a court. It is just there to rubber stamp the decision of the coroner as far as i am aware. They have really no decisions to make on their own.

    Also in the cases of death or serious injury in custody the ombudsman always conducts and inquiry separate of the Gardaí.


  • Options
    #70
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,485 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Also in the cases of death or serious injury in custody the ombudsman always conducts and inquiry separate of the Gardaí.

    Yes Kayroo, we will educate them yet !!


  • Options
    #71
    Tom Young
    Legal Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 4,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tom Young


    I'm tempted to close this thread.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Fred Cohen
    Registered Users Posts: 189 ✭✭Fred Cohen


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Well well my question dodging friend, I am happy to see you are still totally incapable of showing one single example of judicial corruption.

    Come on now, let's stick to the point. Or shall you finally admit defeat?
    Does abuse of power count as corruption?


  • Options
    #73
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Tom Young wrote: »
    I'm tempted to close this thread.

    Just do it Tom. I'm sorry I ever got involved.
    Fred Cohen wrote: »
    Does abuse of power count as corruption?

    No, it counts as abuse of power.


  • Options
    #74
    Tom Young
    Legal Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 4,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tom Young


    I agree with Kayroo. Malfeasance in public office might have been the expression you were looking for Fred Cohen. There is a difference.


  • Options
    #75
    Fred Cohen
    Registered Users Posts: 189 ✭✭Fred Cohen


    Tom Young wrote: »
    I agree with Kayroo. Malfeasance in public office might have been the expression you were looking for Fred Cohen. There is a difference.
    Thanks for your reply. Could you explain in layman's terms (or point me to where I can learn) what the difference is?


  • Options
    #76
    Tom Young
    Legal Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 4,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tom Young


    Malfeasance in office is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. Malfeasance in office is often grounds for a for cause removal of an elected official by statute or recall election.

    Corruption can be defined as the misuse of public office for private gain. This involves putting personal interests above those of the people and ideals he or she is pledged to serve. It comes in many forms, is often subjective and can range in severity. Corruption can involve promises, threats or both.


  • Options
    #77
    Fred Cohen
    Registered Users Posts: 189 ✭✭Fred Cohen


    Tom Young wrote: »
    Malfeasance in office is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. Malfeasance in office is often grounds for a for cause removal of an elected official by statute or recall election.

    Corruption can be defined as the misuse of public office for private gain. This involves putting personal interests above those of the people and ideals he or she is pledged to serve. It comes in many forms, is often subjective and can range in severity. Corruption can involve promises, threats or both.
    Thank you for that, it agrees with what I thought it to be.

    Can I ask everybody's opinion on these reports of my local district court Judge?

    SNIP

    Also does boosting ones personnel ego amount to a gain?


  • Options
    #78
    Tom Young
    Legal Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 4,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tom Young


    No you can't. This forum is not to bash any judge, person or otherwise. It is not a Court of law and perhaps we could allow opinions be published.

    I don't think that what has happened above on this thread has been constructive or played fairly.

    We have seen the usual suspects arrive and scatter gun their baseless opinions (mostly) with a few other known to be sane and constructive contributors try and deal with their rants.

    Time up. Thread closed. I will deal accordingly with any other thread that seeks to do the same.

    Thanks,

    Tom


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement