DPP/Do we have the worst judicial system in the world?

Ardent

I was listening to Gerry Ryan this morning on the way into work and this story made me so angry. They were discussing the number of non-national fatalities on our roads and this woman rang into tell her horrific story which involved a Latvian driver.

Without going into to much detail, he has been reported earlier in the day by another driver for dangerous driving on the dual carriagway before he crashed into this lady's car. His car CROSSED the median at high speed on the dual carriageway and landed ON TOP of her car. Her daughter was killed and she herself ended up in hospital with her son. Truly awful stuff.

Anyway, the Latvian guy was to be charged with death by dangerous driving but the DPP later decided to reduce the charge to just dangerous driving, taking into account the road-worthiness of his old car (WTF?). On the day he was to be charged, the guy skipped the country and hasn't been seen since.

Now, the DPP has come in for some criticism recently, the particular cases I don't want to bring up here, but for me this story takes the biscuit in terms of how perpetrators of crime in this country are not punished in manner fitting the crime and how the family of victims always seem to get royally screwed over.

My questions, what do other people think:

1) In any other country, would this guy still have his passport and be allowed to leave the country before sentence was passed? (What a f**king joke this country is.)

2) Why would the DPP reduce the charge to mere dangerous driving because of his car? Someone was killed. It doesn't make any real world sense.

3) Is the DPP/judicial system as it currently operates in this county a flawed process? Who has confidence in it?

4) Would a change of government help improve the judicial system?

BendiBus

How many other systems did you study before suggesting ours might be the worst in the world?

DPPs the world over regularly reduce charges as their task is to decide what charges are likely to secure a conviction.

Without having all the details that the DPP had it's impossible to second guess their decision.

There are loopholes in every system. The best anyone can do is close them. And this must be done carefully to avoid legal challenges and new loopholes.

Screw-ups happen in every jurisdiction the world over.

So, no, I don't think we have the worst judicial system in the world. Ours is a flawed system. Just like all the others.

Thirdfox

Here is the law on the situation as far as I know (there may be subsequent amendments to this act that I haven't found):

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, 1961

53.—(1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place at a speed or in a manner which, having regard to all the circumstances of the case (including the nature, condition and use of the place and the amount of traffic which then actually is or might reasonably be expected then to be therein) is dangerous to the public.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence and—

( a ) in case the contravention causes death or serious bodily harm to another person, he shall be liable on conviction on indictment to penal servitude for any term not exceeding five years or, at the discretion of the court, to a fine not exceeding five hundred pounds or to both such penal servitude and such fine and

( b ) in any other case, he shall be liable on such conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.


...taken from http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/front.html

So it seems that there is no real separate offence for dangerous driving causing death... only if death can be proven then will s. 53.2 (a) come into effect.

My answer to your questions:

1. In this country we have bail laws that allow people who are awaiting trial to remain free (to an extent). They do get abused and there has been controversy over the bail rules - but it is not to tighten them but rather to loosen the restrictions on granting bail.



2. Reading the law above it would seem that one does not need to be charged specifically with dangerous driving resulting in death merely if death or serious injury had occurred then the crime is aggravated.

Also if his car was badly repaired etc. then the blame would rest on the repairer for doing a negligent job. For example if your brakes don't work because a mechanic drained the fluid should you be held liable if you run over a child at a traffic light?



3. I do believe in the DPP has tried to ensure justice is achieved... it goes back to the age old question: is it better to come down hard on the accused and miscarriages of justice happening or to ensure no miscarriages of justice happens but some bad apples get through. Think of the scandal there would be if someone charged with dangerous driving was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and turned out that s/he was innocent... now you understand the reluctance of the DPP to proceed recklessly with prosecutions.

We only really hear of the mishaps... the DPP has to prosecute in thousands of cases each year. Their successes are unknown but their failures are made infamous.

However that is not to say that there couldn't be improvements.



4. Change in government? In Ireland the judicial process isn't as politicised as say in America, usually the people who are qualified get the job so in my opinion a change in government would not result in any changes made to the system (unless it was an explicit manifesto of the candidates that they would change the system.)

If you do want to change the system then I would suggest to write to your local representative explaining your grievances. Hopefully they will be able to raise your concern to others.

dermot_sheehan

Ardent wrote:

Anyway, the Latvian guy was to be charged with death by dangerous driving but the DPP later decided to reduce the charge to just dangerous driving, taking into account the road-worthiness of his old car (WTF?). On the day he was to be charged, the guy skipped the country and hasn't been seen since.


My questions, what do other people think:

1) In any other country, would this guy still have his passport and be allowed to leave the country before sentence was passed? (What a f**king joke this country is.)

2) Why would the DPP reduce the charge to mere dangerous driving because of his car? Someone was killed. It doesn't make any real world sense.

3) Is the DPP/judicial system as it currently operates in this county a flawed process? Who has confidence in it?

4) Would a change of government help improve the judicial system?

Ok no idea why DPP would seek Dangerous driving instead of dangerous driving causing death since the only differance between the two is that in one case a person was killed by the dangerous driving. Only logical reason would be if DPP was uncertain as to whether it was provable beyond reasonable doubt that the person's death resulted by the dangerous driving.


Most of the time people are required to surrender passport for bail but remember EU nationals can leave the country on their ID card. Plus travelling from Ireland to the continent (by ferry) checks are routinely not carried out and once in France you're in schengen and basically home free to latvia.

Since however Latvia is in the EU it's very easy to extradite, all the guards would have to do is put the guys details into the Schengen information system (SIS) and next time he's checked by police/crosses a border/registers residency) anywhere in the EU a hit would come up, he would be detained and extradited within 90 days.



The prosecutorial/justice system in ireland is not the best in the world, nor is it the worst.

Amazotheamazing

Hmm, worst legal system in the world, I agree completely. That's why North Korea and Burma regulary ask the UN to intervene with our treatment of suspects. I heard Angola is petitioning France to have us thrown out of the EU, and didn't Mugabe recently speak out on our treatment of journalists? Our system is by no means perfect but I can think of many, many country with worse systems.

hullaballoo

^^^ :v:

TheVan

I know, its such a terrible system....one time i got thrown in jail and beaten with waffles repeatedly....it's unjust and discriminatory!


Come on! This forum is better than this!

hullaballoo

I don't think the OP intended to be taken quite so literally. To be fair, there are real unjustices in the Irish system. It's just a matter of making a trade-off between lawlessness and martial law.

Ardent

Amazotheamazing wrote:

Hmm, worst legal system in the world, I agree completely. That's why North Korea and Burma regulary ask the UN to intervene with our treatment of suspects. I heard Angola is petitioning France to have us thrown out of the EU, and didn't Mugabe recently speak out on our treatment of journalists? Our system is by no means perfect but I can think of many, many country with worse systems.

Did you really think I meant "worst in the world" as literally as that?!

TheVan

Ok well on a serious note then, it was reported today that the DPP is considering publishing reasons for decisions for the first time. This is obviously in response to criticism.

It should be said that the DPP has to make trade-offs. They can take a higher charge with the risk that they have insufficient evidence or a lesser charge which they know they can prove. Sometimes they make the choice of the higher charge and sometimes the lower. It's just a fact of life, as offensive to pc ears as it may be, this is the legal reality in all western states.

Amazotheamazing

Ardent wrote:

Did you really think I meant "worst in the world" as literally as that?!

No offence Ardent (and I know this will come across as very arrogant) but in a legal context you have to mean the words you use. In college I was regularly warned against playing "fast and loose" with words, meanings, context, etc.

NUTLEY BOY

As far as I know the DPP's decision turns on the question of the prospect of securing a conviction in a particular case. Obviously, this takes account of the burden of proof and the available evidence.

I don't know what the point was about the state of the car. If there was some defect that could not have been reasonably discerned by the driver and that was a major causative factor then the driver is not going to be nailed for death by dangerous driving. If the car was free of defect then the accused would have some explaining to do.

As far as the original question goes my answer is in the negative.

The award for worst system has to go to the criminal law system of the USA. Over there, you can end up up on capital charges with woefully inept legal representation with no difficulty. If you are really unlucky you get the needle after about ten years in appeals. You will even get executed if you are a 76 year old man as happened recently.

Nope, imperfect as our system is we are grand, relatively speaking.........

Victor

Amazotheamazing wrote:

Hmm, worst legal system in the world, I agree completely. That's why North Korea and Burma regulary ask the UN to intervene with our treatment of suspects. I heard Angola is petitioning France to have us thrown out of the EU, and didn't Mugabe recently speak out on our treatment of journalists? Our system is by no means perfect but I can think of many, many country with worse systems.

Actually Zimbabwe has a good legal system, the political system on the other hand ....

Eru

Nothing else to add to whats been said but theres a few flaws in a posters comments.

gabhain7 wrote:

Most of the time people are required to surrender passport for bail

No actually thats very rare as it implies you are at risk of not appearing and if you are at risk you should not be granted bail to begin with.

gabhain7 wrote:

Since however Latvia is in the EU it's very easy to extradite, all the guards would have to do is put the guys details into the Schengen information system (SIS) and next time he's checked by police/crosses a border/registers residency) anywhere in the EU a hit would come up, he would be detained and extradited within 90 days.

Hmmm, you seem to be confused, Schengen agreement is the absense of borders so there is no border control within these nations.
The SIS does not have a feature for immigration and is not designed to track people. It is designed to circulate warrants and stolen property information and intelligence however a hit would only result if the person is arrested in a state that operates the system.

In addition, Ireland is not in the Schengen agreement so how pray tell could we access SIS???? We can access europol but its not the super machine you seem to think it is.

besty

If the OP, or anybody else reading this thread believes we have the worst or one of the worst legal systems in the world, they should read Colin Martin's "Welcome to the Bangkok Hilton."

It's an utterly terrifying account of his wrongful imprisonment in Thailand and dismay with the "judicial" system.

Eru

besty wrote:

If the OP, or anybody else reading this thread believes we have the worst or one of the worst legal systems in the world, they should read Colin Martin's "Welcome to the Bangkok Hilton."

It's an utterly terrifying account of his wrongful imprisonment in Thailand and dismay with the "judicial" system.

Is that 'Welcome to Hell' or another book? Welcome to hell is a gripping read.

besty

Karlitosway1978 wrote:

Is that 'Welcome to Hell' or another book? Welcome to hell is a gripping read.

I think that's it. It's a real eye opener to how corrupt the system over there is. Scary stuff.