Gangs and the Special Criminal Court

Darragh29

I've just heard Dermot Ahern on RTE saying that a new offence is being introduced that will prohibit membership of a criminal gang. I would have thought, given our current difficulties in dealing with this problem, that this would have been an offence long ago, but anyhow...

But what he said got me thinking... He said that suspects charged with this new offence and other gangland related offences, will be tried before the Special Criminal Court, which is non-jury... Basically you have a jury made up of three judges and they hear your case and issue a verdict and sentence you or release you whichever the case may be.

Now, I'm just wondering has anyone actually stopped to think that these gangs have become so out of control, that it is not outside the bounds of possibility that they could start murdering judges who could be trying them, or members of the government who introduce new legislation to try them???

LostinBlanch

I wouldn't be surprised if they do. Not that it would be a smart thing for them to do.

The only time the government will take any real action against these scum is if/when a judge/td/minister or member of their family is murdered as an act of intimidation or revenge. Ordinary civilians don't count.

mike65

Did the provos/INLA etc ever kill or try to kill a judge in the South? Can't remember any incidents, if thats the case I guess they thought it more trouble and it was worth.

old boy

on a thread on the limerick city form there is mention of a td (current minister) who gave a charachter reference for a leading gang member, which resulted in a reduced jail sentance, if this is true then well go on say it for me. some time back i said that the gang leaders should be convicted on the word of a chief superintendant, also recieve the dole if he oked it, and finally recieved free legal aid at his discression. who in limerick or elsewhere is going to give evidence against gang members after last week, the supt from roxboro was looking for the publics help and information in the apprension of the killer of ray collins, yeah go on will ya.

Denis Irwin

About time this was brought in. Although I see the human rights groups were on 6.1 news this evening complaining that the rights of those poor aul gangsters are going to be infringed :rolleyes:. God love them I wonder what those lawyers had to say after Roy Collins was gunned down by those gangsters last week all because his cousin stood up to them. Probably nothing much as they were more than likely too busy making sure that the gangsters were not getting there hair ruffled by the Gardai. :rolleyes:

gurramok

I've said this countless years on boards that the gangs hold power over communities in this land hence the genuine fear of witnesses coming forward to testify against the gangs.

About 11% of athe 171 gang related murders have lead to a conviction(most in Limerick, feck all in Dublin) and its about time the state recognised the serious threat from these gangs, 20 years too late imho.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0417/justice.html

realismpol

Darragh29 wrote: »

I've just heard Dermot Ahern on RTE saying that a new offence is being introduced that will prohibit membership of a criminal gang. I would have thought, given our current difficulties in dealing with this problem, that this would have been an offence long ago, but anyhow...

But what he said got me thinking... He said that suspects charged with this new offence and other gangland related offences, will be tried before the Special Criminal Court, which is non-jury... Basically you have a jury made up of three judges and they hear your case and issue a verdict and sentence you or release you whichever the case may be.

Now, I'm just wondering has anyone actually stopped to think that these gangs have become so out of control, that it is not outside the bounds of possibility that they could start murdering judges who could be trying them, or members of the government who introduce new legislation to try them???

Yes and then the government would send in the ERU or ARW against them and have internment without trial. Think they would dare do that?. Not a chance. These are people who like to hide in the shadows and pick on innocent victims not have an all out firefight in which they would get slaughtered. They aint suicidal. This isn't iraq or mexico. If they do attempt to intimidate or murder judges which they won't then the governemnt would bring in the army against them and the last thing they would want is a few armoured personel carriers with automatic 50 cal weapons or fully trained soldiers at your front doorstep. Think the gangsters could take on the army too? Quit the paranoi and have some faith in the justice system. Stop assigning mythical status to gangsters.

mikemac

Darragh29 wrote: »

Basically you have a jury made up of three judges and they hear your case and issue a verdict and sentence you or release you whichever the case may be.

It doesn't have to be three judges. There are other people who can sit in this court.
Can't remember them all but definitly army officers can be appointed to this court.
In practice it isn't done though

old boy wrote: »

. some time back i said that the gang leaders should be convicted on the word of a chief superintendant,

I think this is already in place.
What is happening here is you are using Offences against the State legislation which was drawn up to combat the IRA during the Emergency but now you are using it against gangs.

Darragh29

realismpol wrote: »

Yes and then the government would send in the ERU or ARW against them and have internment without trial. Think they would dare do that?. Not a chance. These are people who like to hide in the shadows and pick on innocent victims not have an all out firefight in which they would get slaughtered. They aint suicidal. This isn't iraq or mexico. If they do attempt to intimidate or murder judges which they won't then the governemnt would bring in the army against them and the last thing they would want is a few armoured personel carriers with automatic 50 cal weapons or fully trained soldiers at your front doorstep. Think the gangsters could take on the army too? Quit the paranoi and have some faith in the justice system. Stop assigning mythical status to gangsters.

How do you know what gang figures out of their head on coke may ro may not do??? They shot a journalist a few years ago for writing a newspaper article, they shot an innocent man this month because HIS COUSIN gave evidence against some scumbag. It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination by any means to say that they could start targetting judges or politicians, or Gardai, in fact I'd argue that it's the next logical step in their strategy. What do you think they are going to do in all seriousness, just decide to disband when they find they are being convicted before the Special Criminal Court!?!?!

I haev absolutely no faith in the justice system and rightly so. Anyone that does I'd suggest is gullible in the extreme. If the justice system worked, you wouldn't see innocent people being blown to bits by these criminals. You wouldn't be seeing a 10% conviction rate for gangland murders and you wouldn't be seeing the capital city of the country completely overrun by heroin junkes and I can tell you after being in there yesterday that this is most certainly the case now. You can't walk ten steps down O' Connell Street or any street off O' Connell Street or along the quays now without junkie wasters falling on top of you. Don't come on here and tell me to have faith in the justice system, you haven't a clue what you are talking about.

walrusgumble

mike65 wrote: »

Did the provos/INLA etc ever kill or try to kill a judge in the South? Can't remember any incidents, if thats the case I guess they thought it more trouble and it was worth.

i think the nearest was the very nasty scare former chief justice tom o'higgins, former fine gael td, former presidential candidate and nepew of kevin o'higgins got when presiding over the extradition case of dominic mcglinchey of inla fame.

he along with other judges allowed for his extradition to the north. a short time later McGlinchey came again before the southern courts and the judge was put under immediate 24 hour heavy protection from armed gardai. the stress of it all (naturally) forced him to resign and take a post in the european courts. i am not saying their were attempts to kill him, but as far as i am aware, nearest.

Carlow52

Denis Irwin wrote: »

.... Although I see the human rights groups were on 6.1 news this evening complaining that the rights of those poor aul gangsters are going to be infringed :rolleyes:....:

u may well have seen ... on the TV but u clearly did not listen.

the gripe is that the SCC will not stop intimidation: there was no mention of human rights infringement

walrusgumble

Darragh29 wrote: »

How do you know what gang figures out of their head on coke may ro may not do??? They shot a journalist a few years ago for writing a newspaper article, they shot an innocent man this month because HIS COUSIN gave evidence against some scumbag. It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination by any means to say that they could start targetting judges or politicians, or Gardai, in fact I'd argue that it's the next logical step in their strategy. What do you think they are going to do in all seriousness, just decide to disband when they find they are being convicted before the Special Criminal Court!?!?!

I haev absolutely no faith in the justice system and rightly so. Anyone that does I'd suggest is gullible in the extreme. If the justice system worked, you wouldn't see innocent people being blown to bits by these criminals. You wouldn't be seeing a 10% conviction rate for gangland murders and you wouldn't be seeing the capital city of the country completely overrun by heroin junkes and I can tell you after being in there yesterday that this is most certainly the case now. You can't walk ten steps down O' Connell Street or any street off O' Connell Street or along the quays now without junkie wasters falling on top of you. Don't come on here and tell me to have faith in the justice system, you haven't a clue what you are talking about.

the blame fails squarely on the politicans in the dail!!!!! they are the ones who write the legislation. they are the ones who are snapping and trying to censor any high court judge who dares to criticise the government in cases where resources etc are not available to treat the convict. the dailers are also the one who make provisions etc for the prisons. so when the next elections come up, i sincerely hope that is kept in mind

Darragh29

walrusgumble wrote: »

i think the nearest was the very nasty scare former chief justice tom o'higgins, former fine gael td, former presidential candidate and nepew of kevin o'higgins got when presiding over dominic mcglinchey of inla fame.

he along with other judges allowed for his extradition to the north. a short time later McGlinchey came before the courts and the judge was put under immediate 24 hour heavy protection from armed gardai. the stress of it all (naturally) forced him to resign and take a post in the european courts. i am not saying their were attempts to kill him, but as far as i am aware, nearest.

Paul Williams said recently a Dublin City based detective had to move to another station after he came out of his house to go to work one morning and a criminal had put bullets on his car windscreen to threaten him.

gurramok

realismpol wrote: »

Yes and then the government would send in the ERU or ARW against them and have internment without trial. Think they would dare do that?. Not a chance. These are people who like to hide in the shadows and pick on innocent victims not have an all out firefight in which they would get slaughtered. They aint suicidal. This isn't iraq or mexico. If they do attempt to intimidate or murder judges which they won't then the governemnt would bring in the army against them and the last thing they would want is a few armoured personel carriers with automatic 50 cal weapons or fully trained soldiers at your front doorstep. Think the gangsters could take on the army too? Quit the paranoi and have some faith in the justice system. Stop assigning mythical status to gangsters.

Nice one, you want the country to be turned into a Colombian style state with the army on the streets in various housing estates hence acting as a recruiting ground for the gangs.

Can you explain this faith please?

About 11% of athe 171 gang related murders have lead to a conviction(most in Limerick, feck all in Dublin) and its about time the state recognised the serious threat from these gangs, 20 years too late imho.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0417/justice.html

Sand

Nice one, you want the country to be turned into a Colombian style state with the army on the streets in various housing estates hence acting as a recruiting ground for the gangs.

Whilst the amount of young wans with prams in these housing estates might give a misleading impression, the amount of scumbags is not infinite nor is their growth exponential. Id imagine the Army's ability to shoot/capture gang members would outstrip their ability to repopulate.

I am a little underwhelmed by this to be honest. Sounds like the usual babble the government comes out with in the aftermath of some fresh assault by gang member on law and order in this country. When the Gardai start picking up these guys en masse and jailing them indefinitly for gang membership based on their surveillance then perhaps it will be worth a second look.

Dr Galen

gurramok wrote: »

Nice one, you want the country to be turned into a Colombian style state with the army on the streets in various housing estates hence acting as a recruiting ground for the gangs.

Can you explain this faith please?

I'm not one for kneejerk reactions, especially to criminality. I'd feel that sending in ARW etc only ends up putting us on the same level as the gangs. If we start to compromise our democratic ideals in order to "lock people up" then thats a sad day.

Saying that though, I can have little faith also in the present justice system. What I really can't get my head around is that these gangs are named after the people who run them, we hear it on the news everyday. Is it a lack of PROPER resources that prevents the Gardai and the courts from taking action?

Do people feel that we need a special investigative wing of the Gardai/DPP to rot out this problem? Like a quasi-FBI? If we look to how the US tackled the mafia problem in the 80's and 90's this was more or less the approach they took.

Sand

If we start to compromise our democratic ideals in order to "lock people up" then thats a sad day.

Is it better to sacrifice our democratic ideals ( I believe the word here is misused but I "get" what you mean) than to compromise on them to preserve a society where citizens doing their duty in reporting crimes and assisting in achieving convictions in a court of law are not murdered or intimidated?

Dr Galen

Sand wrote: »

Is it better to sacrifice our democratic ideals ( I believe the word here is misused but I "get" what you mean) than to compromise on them to preserve a society where citizens doing their duty in reporting crimes and assisting in achieving convictions in a court of law are not murdered or intimidated?

I would just suggest that there is way to bring these people 9and i use that term loosely) to justice, without infringing on the freedoms that make up our society.

I can understand the feeling that the best way to solve the problem is to round these people up build a big prison and keep them there in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives. Certainly some compromise will be needed. Allowing covert phone taps etc is moving down this road. I'd just caution that we must be careful how far down said road we go.

Dave!

About time this is introduced, hopefully it'll have a real impact

ahara

Darragh29 wrote: »

How do you know what gang figures out of their head on coke may ro may not do??? They shot a journalist a few years ago for writing a newspaper article, they shot an innocent man this month because HIS COUSIN gave evidence against some scumbag. It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination by any means to say that they could start targetting judges or politicians, or Gardai, in fact I'd argue that it's the next logical step in their strategy. What do you think they are going to do in all seriousness, just decide to disband when they find they are being convicted before the Special Criminal Court!?!?!

I haev absolutely no faith in the justice system and rightly so. Anyone that does I'd suggest is gullible in the extreme. If the justice system worked, you wouldn't see innocent people being blown to bits by these criminals. You wouldn't be seeing a 10% conviction rate for gangland murders and you wouldn't be seeing the capital city of the country completely overrun by heroin junkes and I can tell you after being in there yesterday that this is most certainly the case now. You can't walk ten steps down O' Connell Street or any street off O' Connell Street or along the quays now without junkie wasters falling on top of you. Don't come on here and tell me to have faith in the justice system, you haven't a clue what you are talking about.

Nice diatribe,

Shooting judges and gardai is the next logical step in their strategy? Can't walk ten steps down O'Connell Street without falling over 'heroin junkies'? You must have really long legs or just be very, very awkward.

This threads Joe Duffy award for ridiculously over the top ranting goes to......

walrusgumble

Darragh29 wrote: »

Paul Williams said recently a Dublin City based detective had to move to another station after he came out of his house to go to work one morning and a criminal had put bullets on his car windscreen to threaten him.

the scary thing about stories like this is that this kind of thing has being going on in dublin from the days of the troubles to right up to now, and often we never know about it as the press are told to stay quiete, for genuine security reasons (so that, as you will note, not give publicity to those responsible)

realismpol

gurramok wrote: »

Nice one, you want the country to be turned into a Colombian style state with the army on the streets in various housing estates hence acting as a recruiting ground for the gangs.

Can you explain this faith please?

Sure i can its called i've had enough of scumbags running around killing innocent people for no reason and then getting out of prison in less then 10 years on good behaviour or overcrowding etc. I've witnessed people literally laughing their way out of courts and at the gardai. Good enough for you?

Judges out of touch with reality, pathetic sentencing and ineffecient police tactics on crime is what has allowed this problem to manifest itself and create the ugly monster of crime we find ourselves faced with. We are at least 10 years too late with this proposed legislation. But its a step in the right direction and we'll see what becomes of it.


The army on the streets? Your misinterpreting the context of the why i was suggesting their presence was to be used.

I said if they attempted to murder or did murder judges they would bring the army in not just bring them in to tackle them for no reason willy nilly.

Criminals don't generally care for the law and they certainly don't care for our weak justice system which is a joke even by liberal countries standards i.e the u.k, netherlands etc. Armed criminals/gangs like to intimidate people by picking on innocent people who can't defend themselves. Thats why this country is in the mess its in. People are too busy worrying about the rights of poor little johnny scumbag who just killed an innocent victim and not the general publics right to live in peace.

You may not like it but a tough response to crime is the only way to control it and its proven. In saudi arabia the consequences of losing one's limbs from commiting a crime seems to have a strange effect on even the most determined criminal mind. I can just picture some of the scumbags transported over there. Lets gooooo wild sonnnn....next thing chop. What if they do this, what if they do that, what if, what if, what if. What if we stand up and do what we know is right then we won't be having this problem. If they want to take out judges, police etc (highly unlikely given their cowardly nature) then thats what they do. But in this country they won't because they know damn well what the reaction would be.


We need tough armed action and new laws brought in such as in the states 3 strikes and your out for minor crimes, in the case of proven murder it should be life automatically no deals on anything. Its tough but its the only way to teach these people who's boss much like you treat an unruly child or dog. If you let your a spoilt child run your affairs, or your dog run wild you can imagine the consequences. And thats what we've been doing for too long. Its simple and its the thing most law abiding citizens live by, go out get a job, live in peace with your fellow man, act like a civillised human being like the rest of us in public, maybe even become contributing members to society. Its not too much to ask for. If not and you want to stir trouble and murder innocent people, say hello to the soapy prison shower or the morgue.

How do you know what gang figures out of their head on coke may ro may not do??? They shot a journalist a few years ago for writing a newspaper article, they shot an innocent man this month because HIS COUSIN gave evidence against some scumbag. It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination by any means to say that they could start targetting judges or politicians, or Gardai, in fact I'd argue that it's the next logical step in their strategy. What do you think they are going to do in all seriousness, just decide to disband when they find they are being convicted before the Special Criminal Court!?!?!

Don't come on here and tell me to have faith in the justice system, you haven't a clue what you are talking about.

Yeah i know i heard failing all of the above they may be interested in acquiring nuclear technology and using it against us next.. So whats your solution? Just sit there and make these outlandish ideas in your head about how criminals i.e petty thugs with access to firearms have suddenly acquired superhuman powers and cunning intelligence to outwit every aspect of the states resources. Wait, wait.. I think i see your point...now i get it.. the crack cocaine gives them superhuman powers of speed and strength. Yeah, yeah that's it, now they can face down an entire squad of heavily armed police with this new found power.

According to you shooting judges and gardai is the next step in their logical strategy. In what way is that a logical strategy? And remember the important word here is 'logical'. That would be a strategy alright, one which would see the army called in, some 'ghetto cleansing' carried and their bodies dumped in a large heap somewhere to be identified by their next of kin. Not much of a strategy is it?, even for those hemmed out on coke. i think your understimating by a long shot the intelligence of these people. If you choose to stand and fight against highly trained eru or arw members you are either (a) extremely stupid (B) extremely stupid (c) extremely stupid. These people aren't starring in death wish starring charles bronson my friend, this is real life, warts and all. They people aren't suicide bombers ready to martyr themselves for a bag of coke. Get realistic will you. Its all about money. Show me your brave supervillian criminals willing to take on the police and army and i'll show you a body full of bullet hole's.

Just thinking... to be honest maybe its not that you haven't got faith in our justice system or laws being introduced, maybe its just a case of paranoid schizophrenia

Lockstep

Special criminal courts are pretty divisive for people.

On the one hand, it does appear to address the problem that intimidation of witnesses. On the other, it is fairly strange to have a special criminal court used on civilians.

IRRC, their use was heavily criticised by the UN.

THeir use to try paramilitaries or terrorists is a bit more understandable but I'm reluctant of the state removing someone's right to a trial by jury.

gurramok

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Special criminal courts are pretty divisive for people.

On the one hand, it does appear to address the problem that intimidation of witnesses. On the other, it is fairly strange to have a special criminal court used on civilians.

IRRC, their use was heavily criticised by the UN.

THeir use to try paramilitaries or terrorists is a bit more understandable but I'm reluctant of the state removing someone's right to a trial by jury.

Then how do you propose to safeguard juries and witnesses from gunmen who live in their communities?

Maybe bring back the witness protection programme en masse?

Bottle_of_Smoke

mike65 wrote: »

Did the provos/INLA etc ever kill or try to kill a judge in the South? Can't remember any incidents, if thats the case I guess they thought it more trouble and it was worth.

The IRA would never kill a judge because it was against their rules of operation. They weren't allowed to attack any member of the Republic's security forces, assumedly would include judges.

Turner

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

The IRA would never kill a judge because it was against their rules of operation. They weren't allowed to attack any member of the Republic's security forces, assumedly would include judges.

Tell that to Mrs Jerry Mc Cabe and the family of Recruit Garda gary Sheehan.

Criminals have no morals. They would shoot their own mother to escape.

Lockstep

gurramok wrote: »

Then how do you propose to safeguard juries and witnesses from gunmen who live in their communities?

Maybe bring back the witness protection programme en masse?

Bog standard answer there. Although I fail to see how a lack of juries stop intimidation of witnesses.
How about ways which don't erode our rights?

The Special Criminal Court was established to deal with the situation in Northern Ireland. These groups were a threat to the State. We don't have that situation anymore.

We're not the only country in the world with gang problems, and yet how many of them have juryless trials? We could adopt what they do such as video links from juries in remote locations.

Would you be happy with the opinion of the Chief Superintendant being enough for conviction?

gurramok

Thats a very simplistic approach, it does not address the question of getting convictions.

They could start by not giving the defence the jurys details.

And what about the vital witnesses, how do we ensure their safety in the communities for when they testify?

Victims have rights too.

Lockstep

A video-linked/remote location trial takes away from convictions.....how?

I fail to see how the Special Criminal Court protects witnesses.


Yes victims have rights too, however, establishing a State with such powers runs the risk of leading to many more victims.

gurramok

So you are thinking of the juries there. How do we make them anonymous and i dont mean video screening? I mean, how do we protect their personal details?

Afaik, the defence has a right to know who are on juries, that ain't much protection for the witness.

Lockstep

gurramok wrote: »

So you are thinking of the juries there. How do we make them anonymous and i dont mean video screening? I mean, how do we protect their personal details?

As you say, not releasing their details is a step in the right direction.

We could adopt anonymous juries, as in the States for exceptional circumstances.

[QUOTE=gurramok;59892481
Afaik, the defence has a right to know who are on juries, that ain't much protection for the witness.[/QUOTE]
Yes, and the SPC doesn't protect the witnesses any more than that.

gurramok

So anonymous juries is the jury fix.

What about witnesses, how should they be protected?

They are usually the ones who have to live back into the community where the jailed gangster came from.

Maybe expand the witness protection program massively?

But then again, that costs lots of money!

Lockstep

gurramok wrote: »

So anonymous juries is the jury fix.

What about witnesses, how should they be protected?

They are usually the ones who have to live back into the community where the jailed gangster came from.

Maybe expand the witness protection program massively?

But then again, that costs lots of money!

Once again;
the SPC does not protect the witnesses. The rationality behind it was for where terrorist groups would intimidate the jury.

THe WPP isn;t much use anyway as it involves complete severance from your previous life. Not too many people take the state up on it.

gurramok

So, this new legislation regarding the SCC is usless as it will be still impossible to get witnesses to testify.

The only plus as i can see is this new surveillance legislation to catch the crims in the act so there would be no need for witnesses from the general public in the first place.

Lockstep

Criminal law isn't an area I have experience in but IIRC, one of the primary functions of the original SCC was to prevent jury tampering.
I don;t see how they will affect witnesses.

alegrabaroque

I would be extremely sceptical of anything the government dangles on front of us to distract us. They and the judges have manufactured this problem in the first place. The sentence has not match the crime for a long time now. I reckon, just my own theory mind, that if these threats are the ones we've heard off I'd bet there's a lot more we've never heard anything about. We're only seeing a tiny portion of the puzzle maybe the people at the top tier of our society are pulling the strings in the first place who knows.

johnnyskeleton

Darragh29 wrote: »

I've just heard Dermot Ahern on RTE saying that a new offence is being introduced that will prohibit membership of a criminal gang. I would have thought, given our current difficulties in dealing with this problem, that this would have been an offence long ago, but anyhow...

But what he said got me thinking... He said that suspects charged with this new offence and other gangland related offences, will be tried before the Special Criminal Court, which is non-jury... Basically you have a jury made up of three judges and they hear your case and issue a verdict and sentence you or release you whichever the case may be.

1. Juror intimidation in gangland cases has never been a big issue in Ireland. To be honest, it should be at the discretion of the DPP such as it currently is for certain firearms offences, whereby he can certify a case as not fit for jury trial.

2. I have no problem with an offence of membership of a criminal gang per se, but what I do have a problem with is the manner in which this is proved. In Offences Against the State trials for membership of an unlawful organisation, there is often no more proof than the chief super's word that he believes someone is a member of an unlawful organisation based on confidential information. What do you do if you are falsely accused of such. What if you are not part of the gang, take no part in its dealings but are connected to some of the members by family/friendship ties? If your cousin is so-and-so gang member, anyone with a grudge against you could tell the gardai that you are involved in that gang and you're toast. All you can do is take the oath and say "I swear I'm not in that gang" and hope the judge believes you.

Darragh29 wrote: »

Now, I'm just wondering has anyone actually stopped to think that these gangs have become so out of control, that it is not outside the bounds of possibility that they could start murdering judges who could be trying them, or members of the government who introduce new legislation to try them???

They haven't done so to date; it's possible, but many things are possible. Judges can get garda escorts. Cross each bridge as we come to it.

johnnyskeleton

Darragh29 wrote: »

I haev absolutely no faith in the justice system and rightly so. Anyone that does I'd suggest is gullible in the extreme. If the justice system worked, you wouldn't see innocent people being blown to bits by these criminals. You wouldn't be seeing a 10% conviction rate for gangland murders and you wouldn't be seeing the capital city of the country completely overrun by heroin junkes and I can tell you after being in there yesterday that this is most certainly the case now. You can't walk ten steps down O' Connell Street or any street off O' Connell Street or along the quays now without junkie wasters falling on top of you. Don't come on here and tell me to have faith in the justice system, you haven't a clue what you are talking about.

Expecting people not to be killed or for people to stop using drugs is utopian, as unfortunatly the only way to absolutely stop humans committing crimes is either to kill or humans or else to repeal all criminal laws. In practical terms, the best we can hope for is that most crimes are detected and prosecuted, most of those that are guilty are found to be guilty when prosecuted, and those that pose the greatest danger of reoffending are sentenced to a term of imprisonment sufficient to deter them from offending again. I think it's misleading to say that the conviction rate for gangland murder is 10%; most murder prosecutions result in a conviction, so it seems to be the case more that very few of the gangland murders actually get prosecuted.

The gardai are going to have to move away from the traditional policing mentallity of getting witnesses to rat out their co-conspirators. The new surveylance powers are welcome in that regard, but more traditional methods e.g. murder weapons, fingerprints, dna samples, cctv should take on greater importance. If the gardai know who these gangland figures are, then they should have no problem finding some real evidence of this kind. IMO, most juries would convict someone found with the murder weapon spotted on cctv near to the scene.

Sand

If criminals can be convicted of gang membership based on Garda intelligence (Provos were convicted of membership of a terrorist organisation based on Garda surveillance - no witnesses required) then witnesses are not required. The Gardai simply provide the judge with their evidence ( which defence does not see, as it would compromise the Gardais surveillance or informers) and the judge decides if he is convinced.

If witnesses can be allowed to give evidence without revealing their own identity then they can be protected - if the accused doesnt know who the witness is, he cant have them attacked. If the defence lawyer doesnt know, he cant inform his clients "colleagues". Obviously, there is still cause for a witness protection programme but I doubt it will be popular to act as a witness and then have to leave your home and avoid associating with your friends and family for years, or even decades.

Criminal gangs are directly attacking the states justice system by attacking witnesses, discouraging people from providing evidence. The state needs to ensure that witnesses are protected or else it might as well give up and surrender to these scumbags. If some gang members civil rights are infringed, so be it. It might seem harsh, but gang members have made their choices, and they should always be considered less important than the public at large.

If the gardai know who these gangland figures are, then they should have no problem finding some real evidence of this kind. IMO, most juries would convict someone found with the murder weapon spotted on cctv near to the scene.

"Gangland figures" will never actually pull the trigger themselves. Like our friends to the north. They have *very* expendable footsoldiers for that. Essentially, dogs on the street can know who these guys are, but if the burden of evidence is to catch them on camera, carrying the murder weapon, with their DNA at the crime scene....then they are as innocent as you or I. Who knows, they might even wind up running the county on a crime fighting ticket.

dresden8

I don't know about you lot but I was shocked to hear that the Gardai couldn't bug criminals and use that sort of stuff as evidence. From the horse's mouth as such.

WTF? Anybody who watched a mafia movie from the 1970's on knew the Feds were bugging everybody.

How the fnck is this new? Is this the last indignaty CJH left to the state in his aftermath?

If accountants solicitors and barristers are corrupt bug their asses too. How difficult is this?

johnnyskeleton

realismpol wrote: »

Judges out of touch with reality, pathetic sentencing

Most Judges have a much better grasp of reality than most as they deal with offenders on a daily basis. Sentences for serious offences can be quite steep but don't attract media attention. It's just that occasionally the media will latch onto a lenient sentence or two and hold it up as systemic. It's no good simply asking judges to increase sentences when we have no prisons to hold them in - that leads to a system like the us where a sentence of 20 years is remitted to 3 or 4 (judges get elected in some states so like to "throw them to the lions" and then the prisons have no choice but to release them due to lack of funding).

realismpol wrote:

Criminals don't generally care for the law and they certainly don't care for our weak justice system which is a joke even by liberal countries standards i.e the u.k, netherlands etc.

Yet the UK & netherlands don't have to resort to extreme measures. Why do you think that is? It's not because they have well funded police, courts and prison facilities, is it?

realismpol wrote:

You may not like it but a tough response to crime is the only way to control it and its proven.

Actually it's not - there are statistics to support both sides of that debate but generally speaking tougher sentences (including the death penalty) do not deter crimes as offenders often don't believe they will be caught and in any event do not consider the potential punishment.

realismpol wrote:

We need tough armed action and new laws brought in such as in the states 3 strikes and your out for minor crimes,

3 careless driving convictions and its jail for life?

realismpol wrote:

in the case of proven murder it should be life automatically no deals on anything.

It's already automatic life for murder, and the only deals done are in cases of clear manslaughter/insanity.

realismpol wrote:

Its tough but its the only way to teach these people who's boss much like you treat an unruly child or dog.

These people? You might want to rephrase that as it sounds like social darwinism.

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Special criminal courts are pretty divisive for people.

On the one hand, it does appear to address the problem that intimidation of witnesses. On the other, it is fairly strange to have a special criminal court used on civilians.

Special Criminal Courts and the power under the OAS acts for Garda Chief Superintendents to give uncorroborated belief evidence are two separate things. Trial without jury should only take place where there is a risk of juror intimidation.

Also, many of our fellow EU member-states don't have juries at all, and see nothing wrong with it.

gurramok wrote: »

Then how do you propose to safeguard juries and witnesses from gunmen who live in their communities?

Do you have any links which suggest that jury intimidation from gangland figures is a big problem in Ireland? Don't forget there have been a number of convictions by jury in gang related cases.

gurramok wrote: »

Maybe bring back the witness protection programme en masse?

I'd agree with that, but it's a question of funding.

gurramok wrote: »

They could start by not giving the defence the jurys details.

Again, is there any evidence that jury intimidation (as opposed to witness intimidation) is prevalent?

gurramok wrote: »

Maybe expand the witness protection program massively?

But then again, that costs lots of money!

Now you're getting it, but it's just a tip of the iceberg. The DPP, Prison service and gardai are all underfunded, and bar a small (and largely ignored) plea by the DPP for extra funding, no one is saying that there is anything wrong. The government thinks that by bringing in all sorts of exotic legislation that they can get rid of crime, but it doesn't work. It's coming to a point where gardai don't even use their new powers (I'm sure you're average garda isn't even aware of them). There are so few circuit court judges in Dublin(i.e. the ones who deal with the majority of serious offences bar rape, murder, OAS etc), that it takes about a year wait for a trial date to come up. Where the hell is that new prison that was promised all those years ago (and for which we bought an overpriced site)? The €50m or so it costs to run the DPP & CPS service is a drop in the ocean compared to some of the government's excesses (I'm sure there are useless quangoes costing just as much) yet the DPP's budget is slashed instead of increased due to the increase in crime. Most of all though, why can't we have the same standard of recruitment and training that the UK, US etc have for their police? That is not a criticism of individual gardai, but rather a comment on how the Garda organisation, despite some notable improvements, has not adapted to new technology and circumstances in the way that other police forces have.

johnnyskeleton

Sand wrote: »

Criminal gangs are directly attacking the states justice system by attacking witnesses, discouraging people from providing evidence. The state needs to ensure that witnesses are protected or else it might as well give up and surrender to these scumbags. If some gang members civil rights are infringed, so be it. It might seem harsh, but gang members have made their choices, and they should always be considered less important than the public at large.

You seem to think that there is some way of proving someone is a gang member other than by a criminal trial. Everyone is innocent and a member of the public of large until they have been convicted in a fair trial. It is only then that you know that they are a gang member, before that it is just speculation.

Sand wrote: »

"Gangland figures" will never actually pull the trigger themselves. Like our friends to the north. They have *very* expendable footsoldiers for that. Essentially, dogs on the street can know who these guys are, but if the burden of evidence is to catch them on camera, carrying the murder weapon, with their DNA at the crime scene....then they are as innocent as you or I. Who knows, they might even wind up running the county on a crime fighting ticket.

Which is why you catch the gunmen and charge their bosses with conspiracy and related offences, using the information gathered through surveillance. The dogs in the street think they know who these guys are, but then again the dogs in the street knew that the best way to make money was to invest in property, so I won't put much faith in public knowledge and rumour if its all the same with you.

Bob Z

this is a good idea in theory but how do you prove that someone is a member of a criminal gang. And how does someone who is accused of being in a criminal gang offer a defence?

ilkhanid

"It's already automatic life for murder,...."

No, its not. There is a sentence for murder which is given the title of "life sentence" but it bears no relationship to what most people consider the phrase to mean. Most people sentenced to life don't serve 20 years,most don't even serve 15 years.

marcsignal

internment, end of :cool:

Bottle_of_Smoke

Chief--- wrote: »

Tell that to Mrs Jerry Mc Cabe and the family of Recruit Garda gary Sheehan.

Criminals have no morals. They would shoot their own mother to escape.

They weren't planned murders. THe operatives broke the rules. I was responding to the other posters question, and guess what, no judges have been killed by provos.

OhNoYouDidn't

Bob Z wrote: »

this is a good idea in theory but how do you prove that someone is a member of a criminal gang. And how does someone who is accused of being in a criminal gang offer a defence?

Welcome to the argument Republicans made about the SCC 30 years ago. How do you prove the absence of something in your defence?

The problem I have is that the special criminal court has a conviction rate of over 100% (thats actually true). We know innocent people have been given long sentences due to the incorrect sayso of Gardai.

I want the state to come down harder on the gangs, even if the actual power and proliferation of them is grossly over exaggerated, but I simply do not trust the Gardai with this power. The Louth drug dealer 'sting' recently is a prime example of one branch of the Gardai protecting a dealer for their own ends.

The SCC offers no protection to witnessess and there is no evidence of intimidation of judges, so its simply jingoisim from the politicians.

oscarBravo

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

The problem I have is that the special criminal court has a conviction rate of over 100% (thats actually true). We know innocent people have been given long sentences due to the incorrect sayso of Gardai.

Source for both of these?

OhNoYouDidn't

oscarBravo wrote: »

Source for both of these?

I'll dig out the conviction rate in a bit, but its over 100% due to the fact that more people have been found guilty in absentia than acquitted.

Nicky Kelly and the rest of the "Sallins Gang" is an obvious example of a frame up in the SCC.

oscarBravo

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I'll dig out the conviction rate in a bit, but its over 100% due to the fact that more people have been found guilty in absentia than acquitted.

That's a strange definition of "conviction rate".

Nicky Kelly and the rest of the "Sallins Gang" is an obvious example of a frame up in the SCC.

That's one example - not a compelling case for the SCC being more prone to miscarriages of justice than any other court.

OhNoYouDidn't

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a strange definition of "conviction rate".

The SCC has a dramatically higher conviction rate than any other court. Thats not in dispute. You can count on the finger of one hand the acquittals in the court in 40 years. To me that is not healthy and heavily skewed in favour of evidence of a corrupt police force.

There is a legitimate question as to why we still have this court as I have not heard of any jury tampering or intimidation of judges.

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's one example - not a compelling case for the SCC being more prone to miscarriages of justice than any other court.

Conviction rate in the Criminal Courts is in the 60 percentile range.

Conviction rate in the Special Criminal Court is over 99%.

Draw your own conclusion as they say.