Willie O'Dea - Jail?

Liam79

Should Wille be jailed?

Read this

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1019/behanr.html?rss

If that man in fear of his life went to jail for perjury....any reason why Willie O'Dea TD shouldnt?

gleep

From the article:

However, Judge Moran said that perjury and giving false evidence go to the very core of the criminal justice system and the rule of law. He imposed a one year sentence.

So yeah, O'Dea should be jailed. But no chance of that, if it wasn't for the Greens forcing Gormley to make them look like tough guys and not lapdogs, he'd still be a Minister! :eek:

RangeR

Of course he should. If it was me and not him in that exact situation, I'd probably be in jail already.

Liam Byrne

If it's the law, then he should.

I'm not saying that I'd gloat or cheer, but if what he did warrants it, then that was his decision and he should get the correct punishment.

Although apparently the "punishment" that he's getting is a €100,000 payoff, according to the politics thread.

Sickening!

He gets caught out, isn't fired - he "resigns" :rolleyes: - and gets €100,000 of OUR MONEY for the privilege.

Riskymove

RangeR wrote: »

Of course he should. If it was me and not him in that exact situation, I'd probably be in jail already.

not true really...as discussed over the last couple of days, affadavits are corrected regularly enough

while what WO'Dea did rightly lead to him resigning a memebr of the Cabinet, I dont think its the same as changing your story on the stand in a murder trial tbf

anymore

Its not like he did anything serious - like refusing to pay his RTE licence !

There is no guarantee that we wint see him again as a Minister assuming that FF get back into power after a FG Gov .. he might be made Minister for Justice next time with Beverly Cooper Flynn as Tanaiste.

yoshytoshy

Willy O'Dea can't go to jail ,who will wave to the people of limerick ?

Liam Byrne

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Willy O'Dea can't go to jail ,who will wave to the people of limerick ?

That's not a problem.....we'd gladly wave him goodbye after his non-representation of us re Shannon and other issues.

anymore

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Willy O'Dea can't go to jail ,who will wave to the people of limerick ?

They have a jail in Limerick !

pwd

You all miss the point.
If that article is not entirely misleading, Mr Behan shouldn't have been sent to prison at all.
Your attitudes disgust me.

yoshytoshy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That's not a problem.....we'd gladly wave him goodbye after his non-representation of us re Shannon and other issues.

I don't know anything about limerick ,just like I don't really know much about O'Dea:(
But the last few days ,people from limerick consistantly saying ,Willy O'Dea is a great guy ,he waves at you as he walks down the street

I can't really say I remember much about the chap ,I'm sure he was entertaining.

spids

almost every irish politican shud be thrown in with him

anymore

No doubt putting him on a Prison Visiting Committee will be one of the options considerd to compensate him for losing his Ministerial salary, others considered will be making him chairman of some dail Committee. probably not straight away but after a few months.

Red_Marauder

anymore wrote: »

No doubt putting him on a Prison Visiting Committee will be one of the options considerd to compensate him for losing his Ministerial salary

That would be considered a pretty menial appointment in fairness, for a former minister. As it happens, I think he would be more effective than many people on the current committees, particularly Limerick. Limerick's last report was a short, remissive typing exercise that totally failed to engage with the issue. I would love for someone like O'Dea to be on that committee actually.

In fact it would do most of our politicians well to visit the prisons in order to see for themselves how we supposedly "deal with" criminals.

But strictly on topic, no, I don't think he'll go to jail. Perjury is a difficult charge to prove and I don't see any demonstrable evidence that could be used to bring such an accusation to its most logical conslusion.

Liam Byrne

yoshytoshy wrote: »

But the last few days some people from limerick consistantly saying ,Willy O'Dea is a great guy ,he waves at you as he walks down the street

Ever hear a "contestant" in a reality show complaining that they were shown in a bad light ?

It's called selective editing/editorialising.

LookBehindYou

Politicians should have the highest standards to set an example to all of us.
Lead by example. They have no shame or scrouples in FF.
I think he should have been fired, with no generous pension.which is paid for by us.

sceptre

Riskymove wrote: »

not true really...as discussed over the last couple of days, affadavits are corrected regularly enough

1. No they aren't.
2. It wasn't.

IrishTonyO

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Ever hear a "contestant" in a reality show complaining that they were shown in a bad light ?

It's called selective editing/editorialising.

Suppose the fact that he has consistently topped the polls every election is selective editing as well???

yoshytoshy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Ever hear a "contestant" in a reality show complaining that they were shown in a bad light ?

It's called selective editing/editorialising.

Now that limerick's regeneration is not going ahead ,he probably would be loosing votes now.

I doubt the people of limerick are stupid if they elected him more than once ,surely he has done things for the county.

Liam Byrne

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Suppose the fact that he has consistently topped the polls every election is selective editing as well???

I've no answer to that, tbh. You could apply that to Ahern and a whole host of con-men (and women) across the country.

All I'm saying is that if I'd been interviewed you'd have heard a "good riddance - I've no tolerance for lies and bull****, or 'party before ethics'", and quite a few people that I've spoken to would have answered similarly.

Unfortunately, if most people thought the same way, O'Dea wouldn't have had a ministry to resign from, or an FF government to overlook and condone his cock-up.

mattblacktiger

here's a direct quote from willie boy
he only cares about himself


Quote



"I didn't disgrace any office. I made a small mistake. Everyone makes them."

"I paid a very heavy financial penalty for that and I have paid the ultimate political penalty as well.

"I can think of other situations where ministers did far worse and they survived."


it's always about the money willie right?
while thousands of your fellow citizens are suffering through hardships you only care about yourself
Typical FF
Does he keep his ministerial pension? I'd love a slice of that
He should be brought to justice and if found guilty stripped of all pensions but thats wishful thinking as that lot make their own rules

jonsnow

doesn,t seem like the gardai are going to be in any great rush to investigate.according to the commissioner "This is one for cool consideration of the facts".How many times have you seen this in irish public life.Some VIP is caught bang to rights and there is a media furor.You wait for the machinery of state to swing into action the way it does so remorselessly when it is anybody else and......nothing happens.Cool consideration all right I,d say this one will be a cold case.Willies demeanour certainly suggests someone who thinks that the worst is over and he has no fear of jail.

Oh and guards leaking classified information is just "garda gossip" and shouldn,t be investigated.(Unless its a whistelblower like robert mcnulty showing up garda incompetence then the wheels of justice will turn very quickly indeed)

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0220/1224264880870.html

CONOR LALLY Crime Correspondent in Templemore

GARDA RESPONSE: GARDA COMMISSIONER Fachtna Murphy has said his officers are examining the facts around the resignation from Cabinet of Willie O’Dea to determine if any criminal investigations should be opened.

The examination relates to an allegation of perjury on the part of Mr O’Dea and the suggestion that a garda leaked him confidential information about a criminal investigation. Mr Murphy said the debate of the past week had been “considerably heated” and that the full facts needed to be looked at “in the cold light of day”.

He was aware Green Party activist Gary Fitzgerald had made a complaint to gardaí suggesting possible perjury on the part of Willie O’Dea, who swore a version of a conversation in an affidavit that later proved to be wrong.

“This is one for cool consideration of the facts, to see if there is prima facie evidence of criminality,” Mr Murphy said of Mr Fitzgerald’s complaint. “An Garda Síochána . . . deals in facts. It’s normal practice to see, when a complaint is made, if there are grounds for an investigation.”

Mr Murphy was also aware of suggestions by Mr O’Dea that it was a garda who had incorrectly told him Cllr Maurice Quinlivan was linked to a brothel in a Limerick apartment. However, Mr Murphy said he did not want to be drawn into answering questions relating to “garda gossip”.

Mr Murphy was speaking to the media at a graduation ceremony for members of the Garda Reserve at the Garda Training College in Templemore, Co Tipperary.

Speaking at the same event, Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern said it was not his role to direct the Garda on the controversy surrounding Mr O’Dea.

He believed Mr O’Dea had made an “incorrect affidavit” rather than a “false” one.

When asked if he was concerned that a garda had apparently passed on confidential information, albeit incorrect, about a criminal investigation to Mr O’Dea, Mr Ahern said: “We’re all politicians who work on the ground. We hear gossip . . . it’s a matter for each individual as to what they do with that gossip.”

AARRRGH

Riskymove wrote: »

not true really...as discussed over the last couple of days, affadavits are corrected regularly enough

I read a newspaper article by a solicitor who said affadavits cannot be corrected... so... I dunno.

hallelujajordan

Willie O'Dea made two really stupid mistakes. . . First when he made allegations against Quinlivan and again when he denied it in an affidavit. However, he did not commit perjury . .

By definition, to commit perjury you must wilfully give false evidence in an attempt to wrongly influence a judicial process and this must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. When Willie O'Dea gave his interview in which the comments were made, Mike Dwane had a microphone under his nose and recorded the entire interview (Mike Dwane himself has said this week that there is no doubt that O'Dea knew at the time he was being recorded) . . So when he signed his affidavit he really could not have recalled the interview, or the recording, or what he said . . If he had recalled the episode he would not have denied it in an affidavit since he would have known that a tape would surface. . . It is far more likely that he forgot the entire episode as opposed to wilfully trying to mislead the court. . . either way, he would be entitled to the benefit of the doubt . . .

He made mistakes, and paid the price but he did not commit perjury.

sparkling sea

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Willie O'Dea made two really stupid mistakes. . . First when he made allegations against Quinlivan and again when he denied it in an affidavit. However, he did not commit perjury . .

By definition, to commit perjury you must wilfully give false evidence in an attempt to wrongly influence a judicial process and this must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. When Willie O'Dea gave his interview in which the comments were made, Mike Dwane had a microphone under his nose and recorded the entire interview (Mike Dwane himself has said this week that there is no doubt that O'Dea knew at the time he was being recorded) . . So when he signed his affidavit he really could not have recalled the interview, or the recording, or what he said . . If he had recalled the episode he would not have denied it in an affidavit since he would have known that a tape would surface. . . It is far more likely that he forgot the entire episode as opposed to wilfully trying to mislead the court. . . either way, he would be entitled to the benefit of the doubt . . .

He made mistakes, and paid the price but he did not commit perjury.

Looking at this objectively it would seem strange that someone would utter the comments that Mr O Dea did and then forget that it happened. (Unless he makes false alegations on a regular basis)

But it also seems strange that he would have claimed not to have said these things if he remembered that the comments were taped. (Maybe he forgot that he was being taped)

Either way even if this case ever got to court the law states that where to equally reasonable explanations of a situation are given - the one that most favours the defendant should be adopted by the jury.
Its likely then that Mr O Dea would not be found guilty and more tax payers money would have been wasted.

juuge

'Little Willie' o'dea is a silly little man and we should treat him as such.
He looks funny, speaks funny, and when I see or hear him I just laugh. That's what we should do - just laugh. Having seen Fianna Fáil's disgraceful antics in the Dáil during the week and particularly Dermot Aherns contribution, all of them should be laughed and sneered at and fcuked out asap.

coldwood92

maybe

Red_Marauder

hallelujajordan wrote: »

When Willie O'Dea gave his interview in which the comments were made, Mike Dwane had a microphone under his nose and recorded the entire interview

That's true, but doesn't prove that O'Dea didn't commit perjury.

It seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that O'Dea believed what he said to be true at the the time, but later forgot that his mistake had been recorded. He may or may not then have lied in his affadavit, having forgotten the recording.
Why didn't he demand the recording before swearing the affadavit, if he had remembered it existed?

I'm not saying he definitely committed perjury. Either way, he made two politically unforgivable mistakes

1. He swore a statement to the High Court which has turned out to be untrue

2. He defamed the character of a fellow politician in a very serious way on the basis of what he himself called "chit chat"

hallelujajordan

Red_Marauder wrote: »

That's true, but doesn't prove that O'Dea didn't commit perjury.

It seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that O'Dea believed what he said to be true at the the time, but later forgot that his mistake had been recorded. He may or may not then have lied in his affadavit, having forgotten the recording.
Why didn't he demand the recording before swearing the affadavit, if he had remembered it existed?

I'm not saying he definitely committed perjury. Either way, he made two politically unforgivable mistakes

1. He swore a statement to the High Court which has turned out to be untrue

2. He defamed the character of a fellow politician in a very serious way on the basis of what he himself called "chit chat"

Agree on both of the mistakes . . and your analysis is perfectly correct however as with anyone else who is accused of a crime he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt . . personally, I think it is far more likely that he had forgotten the allegations completely . . I mean, even if he did simply forget the tape but remembered the comments then by signing his affidavit he was taking the chance that Dwane would stand up in court and testify against him . . he may have won the case but I doubt he would have risked that exposure as minister for defence. .

Stupidity maybe, perjury unlikely . .

juuge wrote:

He looks funny, speaks funny, and when I see or hear him I just laugh. That's what we should do - just laugh

By all means laugh at his policies, opinions or behaviours but for gods sake don't laugh at him because of how he looks and speaks !:(

DublinWriter

hallelujajordan wrote: »

So when he signed his affidavit he really could not have recalled the interview, or the recording, or what he said

Last time I checked, ignorance was not a legal defence strategy.

Or maybe we now have legal precedence in this country for politicians citing 'mature recollection' as an excuse?

In the UK, both Jonathan Aiken and Jeffery Archer had penal sentances imposed on them for perjury.

In this country, Willie O'Dea will get €100K goodbye money plus he will still retain a minister's salary for the remainder of this Dàil.

hallelujajordan

DublinWriter wrote: »

Last time I checked, ignorance was not a legal defence strategy.

Actually, in the case of perjury it is for the reasons I outlined above. . If he can demonstrate that it is at least equally likely that he forgot that he had made the comments, then he can not be proven to have wilfully perjured himself . . He is entitled to the benefit of the doubt and on that basis he could never be found guilty of perjury.

IrishTonyO

ignorance in this case is a valid defence

sparkling sea

The issue for the court would be was it really perjury or just an honest mistake about what happened.

As the reporter had a tape recorder, it would be impossible to establish beyond a resonable doubt that it Mr O Dea committed a deliberate act of perjury. A jury woud have no choice but to acquit.

Well I suppose it would never get to court in the first place because of this.

LookBehindYou

People seem to be missing out on the most important thing, O,Dea was a Minister and also very qualified in the art of twisting facts.
As a member of the government, we are supposed to expect the highest standards to be set as an example.
He knew he done wrong, and he tried all the tricks in the book to slither his way out of the mess he got himself in.
How can anyone be expected to take these type of people in FF seriously if they have no morals. It is just a case of 1 rule for them and another rule for everyone else. (Do as I say, but not as I do.)
If he were a minister in any other country, he would have been fired.

hallelujajordan

LookBehindYou wrote: »

People seem to be missing out on the most important thing, O,Dea was a Minister and also very qualified in the art of twisting facts.
As a member of the government, we are supposed to expect the highest standards to be set as an example.
He knew he done wrong, and he tried all the tricks in the book to slither his way out of the mess he got himself in.
How can anyone be expected to take these type of people in FF seriously if they have no morals. It is just a case of 1 rule for them and another rule for everyone else. (Do as I say, but not as I do.)
If he were a minister in any other country, he would have been fired.

That isn't the most important thing with respect to this thread . . . this thread is not about whether he did wrong or ought to have been fired . . . its about whether he committed perjury and ought to have gone to prison.

billy the squid

The perjury claim is not the issue people should be looking at.

The claim is that the false information was imparted to O'Dea by a Garda and he then relayed it to a reporter. This is the more serious issue here.

P. Breathnach

billy the squid wrote: »

... The claim is that the false information was imparted to O'Dea by a Garda and he then relayed it to a reporter. This is the more serious issue here.

What? I don't think anybody has claimed that a Garda imparted false information to O'Dea. The issue seems to be that O'Dea constructed a falsehood on the basis of something that actually happened, and then swore an affidavit denying that he had done so.

gizmo555

P. Breathnach wrote: »

What? I don't think anybody has claimed that a Garda imparted false information to O'Dea.

On the contrary, O'Dea himself did, on the Dáil record:

Deputy Enda Kenny: First he stated this was a mistake. If the Minister is so used to making allegations like this that he cannot remember one specific instance then the Cabinet and the Government really have a bigger problem. If the Minister, Deputy O’Dea believed what he told that journalist then he should have gone to the Garda Síochána and reported it in the first instance.

Deputy Willie O’Dea: They reported it to me.

.......

Deputy Brian Hayes: Between yesterday’s statement by the Minister for Defence and today’s statement’s by the Taoiseach, an important intervention was made. The Official Report will show that the Minister, Deputy Willie O’Dea, intervened while the leader of my party, Deputy Enda Kenny, was speaking. He indicated in the course of the debate that the Garda informed him about the alleged incident and the owners of the property concerned. The Official Report will show that. If he obtained this information from the Garda, the question that inevitably follows is why exactly he settled. Why did he not put it in his statement or affidavit? Why did he not inform the House of that fact yesterday?

Deputy Paul Connaughton: He forgot that too.

Deputy Brian Hayes: Did the Minister forget that as well?

Deputy Willie O’Dea: The information was wrong.

Deputy Brian Hayes: Is he now denying that in an intervention to the leader of my party, Deputy Kenny, he suggested that the information came from the Garda Síochána? Is that a fact?

Deputy Willie O’Dea: Indeed it is.

Deputy Brian Hayes: Why exactly did he not put that in his affidavit?

Deputy Willie O’Dea: It turned out to be wrong.

P. Breathnach

gizmo555 wrote: »

On the contrary, O'Dea himself did, on the Dáil record:
...

I interpret that in a more limited sense: that a member of the Gárdaí told Willie O'Dea that they had found prostitutes operating in a property owned by Nessan Quinlivan (or, perhaps, "the Quinlivans"), and that the rest of the story was Willie O'Dea building on shaky foundations.

Liam Byrne

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I interpret that in a more limited sense: that a member of the Gárdaí told Willie O'Dea that they had found prostitutes operating in a property owned by Nessan Quinlivan (or, perhaps, "the Quinlivans"), and that the rest of the story was Willie O'Dea building on shaky foundations.

It doesn't seem like it, from that transcript.

"They reported it to me"

"Is he now denying that in an intervention to the leader of my party, Deputy Kenny, he suggested that the information came from the Garda Síochána? Is that a fact?"

"Indeed it is."

It would have helped if the question was more direct; i.e. if Hayes had left out the "is that a fact", then the lie would have been more apparent.

P. Breathnach

Liam Byrne wrote: »

It doesn't seem like it, from that transcript.

"They reported it to me"

"Is he now denying that in an intervention to the leader of my party, Deputy Kenny, he suggested that the information came from the Garda Síochána? Is that a fact?"

"Indeed it is."

It would have helped if the question was more direct; i.e. if Hayes had left out the "is that a fact", then the lie would have been more apparent.

I think you are doing the same sort of thing that I think Willie O'Dea did: building on shaky foundations. One of the bits you emphasise, for example, is obviously shaky: "They reported it to me" cannot be quite right, because the Garda force has no reporting line to the Minsiter for Defence or to a constituency TD.

gizmo555

P. Breathnach wrote: »

What? I don't think anybody has claimed that a Garda imparted false information to O'Dea.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I interpret that in a more limited sense: that a member of the Gárdaí told Willie O'Dea that they had found prostitutes operating in a property owned by Nessan Quinlivan (or, perhaps, "the Quinlivans"), and that the rest of the story was Willie O'Dea building on shaky foundations.

Interpret it whatever way you like - the fact is O'Dea did claim on the Dáil record that the source of his information was the Gardaí. Whether it was information he was given officially in his capacity as minister or just gossip retailed by an individual Garda, it does him no credit either way and his attempt in the Dáil to spread the blame for his actions to the Gardaí is contemptible.

P. Breathnach

gizmo555 wrote: »

Interpret it whatever way you like - the fact is O'Dea did claim on the Dáil record that the source of his information was the Gardaí. Whether it was information he was given officially in his capacity as minister or just gossip retailed by an individual Garda, it does him no credit either way and his attempt in the Dáil to spread the blame for his actions to the Gardaí is contemptible.

I agree that it is contemptible.

All I am trying to say is that I don't think we can conclude that the untruthful part of the allegations he made came from a Garda source.

Eliot Rosewater

P. Breathnach wrote: »

All I am trying to say is that I don't think we can conclude that the untruthful part of the allegations he made came from a Garda source.

In fact, if we're calling for O'Dea to be convicted of perjury, surely the most sensible thing to do would be to presume everything he has said is a lie. It seems that people are building a case against against a supposed lier on things that lier has said. A little bit paradoxical, I think.

Liam Byrne

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I think you are doing the same sort of thing that I think Willie O'Dea did

Oh my God please do not insult me like that.

I'm not building on any shaky foundations. His own phrase was that "they reported it to me".

The second denied that he'd said that.

It's perfectly possible that both were lies (i.e. not just the second one).

But regardless of any official-or-otherwise reporting structure, the fact is that he said that a Garda had told/reported him, and then told a two faced lie that he'd never said any such thing.

So I'm not misinterpreting, because to be honest I wouldn't believe a word out of his - or any - FF mouth at this stage. Was the first a lie ? I don't know. Was the second ? Obviously.

I'm simply viewing the facts as given.

anymore

Red_Marauder wrote: »

That would be considered a pretty menial appointment in fairness, for a former minister. As it happens, I think he would be more effective than many people on the current committees, particularly Limerick. Limerick's last report was a short, remissive typing exercise that totally failed to engage with the issue. I would love for someone like O'Dea to be on that committee actually.

In fact it would do most of our politicians well to visit the prisons in order to see for themselves how we supposedly "deal with" criminals.

But strictly on topic, no, I don't think he'll go to jail. Perjury is a difficult charge to prove and I don't see any demonstrable evidence that could be used to bring such an accusation to its most logical conslusion.

If O Dea was put on a prison visiting committee, it would not be for Limerick prison, it would be on a physically distant one from Limerck to clock up the expenses. That is the whole point of it. If O Dea was interested in Limerick prison, he has had twenty years to do something about it.