If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on 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

ATTN MODS:Please lock Galway Forum

  • 20-10-2007 6:21am
    Registered Users Posts: 956 ✭✭✭

    Please Lock or delete the threads in the Galway forum regarding the naming of the accused murderer in the Swiss students death...apparently there is some legal aspect that the posts do not adhere to...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,793 ✭✭✭✭Hagar

    Request already in. Something will be done shortly. Thanks.

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,008 ✭✭✭rabbitinlights

    A 27yr old local has been charged and named.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,275 ✭✭✭Fionn MacCool

    But they print the name in all the newspapers so how is that any different?

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]

    They posted the name and the address on websites and newspapers

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,376 ✭✭✭gaeilgegrinds

    If anybody read the papers during the week they gave out more info than was here so I am really confused as to what is different.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,790 ✭✭✭cornbb

    If anybody read the papers during the week they gave out more info than was here so I am really confused as to what is different.

    It wasn't the facts that were the problem, it was the opinions.

  • Registered Users Posts: 890 ✭✭✭l3LoWnA

    Can no murder or other case (or accused) be discussed on before trial/verdict/sentence? Or is it just this one in particular?!

    Bit of a shame really! :mad:

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65

    No case which is in legal train can be discussed, it could be used as evidence in a future libel case!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 179 ✭✭nonamemark

    cornbb wrote: »
    It wasn't the facts that were the problem, it was the opinions.

    And as we all know, opnions are definatly NOT the point of boards like this one

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭SimpleSam06

    One particular poster mentioned very intimate details of the individual being charged, as well as further charges to do with his associates, that I honestly can't figure out how he knew about unless he is a Guard or on the other side of the fence, if you know what I mean.

    Or alternately, he's spouting shite.

    Much as I dislike heavy handed curtailment of discussions, I have to admit that there is a point in this case, and its not so much the libel aspect, but rather the prejuidicing of a jury element. Posting details like that could conceivably be used by an astute defence solicitor to claim bias - although if that is the full extent of his defence, he would probably lose the case anyway.

    Anyway its a risk that shouldn't be taken, especially in a case as abhorrent as this one. I think it would be more constructive if someone posted up a sticky to that effect until the case is over, rather than locking six threads a day.

  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob

    There is a chance that a reader of this board could be called up for jury duty ...although cases may be heard in Dublin instead where this board may also be read.

    Therefore any comments ( I did not see them ) after the defendant is charged are unhelpful, shall we say .

    Mike65 is referring to the sub judice rule which applies to everyone . Even verbal comments to friends or ye olde idle gossip technically fall under this rule once a defendant is formally charged.

    The rule is normally enforced on all Irish BBs and Discussion Fora .

  • Registered Users Posts: 14,163 ✭✭✭✭danniemcq

    according to have i got news for you (well ian hislop to be percise) all you need to say is allegedly

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob

    Well this explanation should deffo get the thread locked :D
    danniemcq wrote: »
    according to have i got news for you

    Yeah well thats a British issue not an Irish one . . Anyway from the wiki , NOTE.
    Hislop often suffixes potentially slanderous statements with "allegedly". This however provides no legal protection and he has joked in the past that he does this to try and trick other panellists less familiar with the law into making defamatory statements

    An outline of the "allegedly" addendum issue , in the legal context , is also here.

    It now has a minor standing in the UK by custom ....since HIGNFY started it a long time back ......and no standing here at all people ......and even then ONLY in a case of libel, eg: were to state outright against all the known the facts that Dannie were ghey ....irrespective of the addition of an allegedly here or there




    it is alleged that....ghey

    would be any different in law.

    Sub Judice , OTOH , would concern us were DanniemcQ actually being charged with being ghey and being remanded for trial for being ghey .

    Then we can say nothing about Dannie and gheyness until the judge or jury has finished with him . We could possibly discuss Dannie and Kiwi Fruits and we could probably discuss Dannie and Cloud Formations but not Dannie and the issue for which he was charged or anything close to it .

    Dannie could even stop us discussing gheyness by invoking the Frank Fahey attack. This , as we know, would have to involve Republican plots , Dannie and rumours of Gheyness in order for it to have an effect.

    He would have to inform the guards that there were people , (especially Republicans) spreading rumours that he was ghey.

    Once we knew the guards were investigating malicious rumours that Dannie were ghey then we would be well advised not to discuss these rumours until charges were brought...and then still not...or until we found out that the guards were not investigating the rumours any more . Even then we could only talk about the fact that the rumours were investigated by the guards....not whether Dannie was ghey

    This interval between charge and verdict ( or case dismissed which is a verdict anyway ) is generally called "due process" and the golden rule is that NOBODY may interfere with "due process" .

    Its a golden rule , be sure of that much Dannie.

  • Registered Users Posts: 15,815 ✭✭✭✭po0k

    die report post button, die

This discussion has been closed.