Scumbag dies...Solicitor sues State on his behalf..

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 8:56am #1

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0918/1224279172910.html

So a scumbag involved in the murder of an innocent mother is arrested. While in custody he lies to the Doctor about his drug abuse and is given a dose of methadone that kills him.

His solicitor is beginning a civil action against the state.

Pretty obvious what the outcome will be but will cost a couple of hundred grand in the process.

Should taxpayers really have to pay for this??

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 9:01am

ebixa82 wrote: »

Should taxpayers really have to pay for this??

What do we have to pay for ?

I'm willing to bet you don't know much about Legal Aid.

gurramok · 18-09-2010 9:04am

A respected solicitor Michael Finucane representing a scumbag, why oh why Michael.

El Weirdo · 18-09-2010 9:09am

Someone arrested for questioning about a crime is a scumbag now? Hope you never get called for jury duty.

gurramok · 18-09-2010 9:14am

El Weirdo wrote: »

Someone arrested for questioning about a crime is a scumbag now? Hope you never get called for jury duty.

To those who knew him, he was indeed a virulent scumbag.

stovelid · 18-09-2010 9:16am

gurramok wrote: »

To those who knew him, he was indeed a virulent scumbag.

People could catch the scumbag off him?

gurramok wrote: »

A respected solicitor Michael Finucane representing a scumbag, why oh why Michael.

Are you au fait with how legal representation works? It's not a prerequisite for your clients to be upstanding citizens.

Anybody else got a pain in their tits with these threads? I wouldn't mind so much if they were actually funny.

alwaysadub · 18-09-2010 9:18am

Why would anyone lie that they are a drug addict?
Surely he should've copped that a dose of methadone when he wasn't on drugs wouldn't exactly do him much good.

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 9:21am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

What do we have to pay for ?

I'm willing to bet you don't know much about Legal Aid.

I'm willing to bet you know nothing of legal aid.

Legal Aid means HE doesn't pay for his solicitor.

Reason being, the taxpayer does...

iPlop · 18-09-2010 9:24am

ebixa82 wrote: »

I'm willing to bet you're a little bit thick and no nothing of legal aid.

Legal Aid means HE doesn't pay for his solicitor.

Reason being, the taxpayer does...

Bye bye!

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 9:25am

alwaysadub wrote: »

Why would anyone lie that they are a drug addict?
Surely he should've copped that a dose of methadone when he wasn't on drugs wouldn't exactly do him much good.

He would have taken it to 1) deal with the withdrawl from his heroin addiction and 2) to get a buzz..

gurramok · 18-09-2010 9:28am

stovelid wrote: »

People could catch the scumbag off him?

Young easily lead teenagers did.

stovelid wrote: »

Are you au fait with how legal representation works? It's not a prerequisite for your clients to be upstanding citizens.

Yes, I take offence at a highly respected solicitor who fought for victims rights in the courts in the past ending up legally fighting for a scumbag.

stovelid · 18-09-2010 9:34am

gurramok wrote: »

Yes, I take offence at a highly respected solicitor who fought for victims rights in the courts in the past ending up legally fighting for a scumbag.

He obviously doesn't share your view?

gurramok · 18-09-2010 9:38am

stovelid wrote: »

He obviously doesn't share your view?

Why should he?

He doesn't know me nor does he know me.

His rep. as a fine upstanding solicitor who always fights for the victims(thats what he did for years) has taken a battering on this one.

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 9:48am

gurramok wrote: »

Yes, I take offence at a highly respected solicitor who fought for victims rights in the courts in the past ending up legally fighting for a scumbag.

Now this is just a shot in the dark, but maybe he's a solicitor and by definition, will represent anybody that will earn him some cash money?

gurramok · 18-09-2010 9:51am

ebixa82 wrote: »

Now this is just a shot in the dark, but maybe he's a solicitor and by definition, will represent anybody that will earn him some cash money?

True. Alot of solictors don't have morals at all, they'll take a good few quid in order to get the worst dregs in society off on a technicality even when they know themselves their clients are guilty of heinous crimes.

Everyone is entitled to legal representation, its those solicitors knowing that their client committed grave crimes and go to any length to get them off the hook on technicalities, they are just scum in my book.

Tender Hoop · 18-09-2010 9:52am

Is he the son of the murder solicitor from the North?

moonpurple · 18-09-2010 9:55am

The judge of the court will be noting that he misled a doctor and he caused the fatal dosage of methadoine

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 9:56am

ebixa82 wrote: »

I'm willing to bet you know nothing of legal aid.

Legal Aid means HE doesn't pay for his solicitor.

Reason being, the taxpayer does...

I just don't know where to start with this. You know that Criminal Legal Aid and Civil Legal Aid are completely different ? You know that this would be a civil matter ?

If you know that, then the following should be no problem to you

Firstly, no Legal Aid is ever granted for representation at an Inquest. It's a matter that is specifically excluded under the Civil Legal Aid Act and subsequent regulations. (This might change in future).

So either Michael Finucane is working for free or the Family are paying him.

If the family were to take a case over the death of their son, it would again be a Civil matter. They could apply to the Legal Aid Board for representation. Since Michael Finucane is their solicitor rather than a Legal Aid Board solicitor it's fair to presume they haven't gone to the Legal Aid Board.

So next time you have a rant over the cost of something to the state at least make it accurate.

And finally I have no issue of the family following up this case even if the fella was a scumbag. Nobody should be dying in Garda station cells, and giving someone methadone without actually knowing their prescription is a mugs game. The family are right to follow it up.

peasant · 18-09-2010 10:01am

Look at it the other way:

Basically this guy died by a state sponsored lethal injection (of methadone)
That shouldn't happen and it certainly shouldn't happen again. So an inquiry why and how it happend is a good thing and the proposed methadone protocol for garda stations certainly sounds like a good thing.

It can't be that they inject drugs into someone in custody just on their say so.

El Weirdo · 18-09-2010 10:06am

peasant wrote: »

Look at it the other way:

Basically this guy died by a state sponsored lethal injection (of methadone)
That shouldn't happen and it certainly shouldn't happen again. So an inquiry why and how it happend is a good thing and the proposed methadone protocol for garda stations certainly sounds like a good thing.

It can't be that they inject drugs into someone in custody just on their say so.

I'm pretty sure they don't inject methadone. But yes, the proposed protocol is a good thing.

gurramok · 18-09-2010 10:08am

Tender Hoop wrote: »

Is he the son of the murder solicitor from the North?

Yes he is.

Sure as Peasant said, find out the truth so there is no Garda brutality, thats grand to me.

It's this suing nonsense on his behalf(deceased) that is really insulting to the victims of that degenerate.

moonpurple · 18-09-2010 10:15am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I just don't know where to start with this. You know that Criminal Legal Aid and Civil Legal Aid are completely different ? You know that this would be a civil matter ?

If you know that, then the following should be no problem to you

Firstly, no Legal Aid is ever granted for representation at an Inquest. It's a matter that is specifically excluded under the Civil Legal Aid Act and subsequent regulations. (This might change in future).

So either Michael Finucane is working for free or the Family are paying him.

If the family were to take a case over the death of their son, it would again be a Civil matter. They could apply to the Legal Aid Board for representation. Since Michael Finucane is their solicitor rather than a Legal Aid Board solicitor it's fair to presume they haven't gone to the Legal Aid Board.

So next time you have a rant over the cost of something to the state at least make it accurate.

And finally I have no issue of the family following up this case even if the fella was a scumbag. Nobody should be dying in Garda station cells, and giving someone methadone without actually knowing their prescription is a mugs game. The family are right to follow it up.

Michael Finucane may be working on the 'no foal no fee' basis

stovelid · 18-09-2010 10:30am

gurramok wrote: »

its those solicitors knowing that their client committed grave crimes and go to any length to get them off the hook on technicalities

Legal representation, in other words.

John2002 · 18-09-2010 10:33am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I just don't know where to start with this. You know that Criminal Legal Aid and Civil Legal Aid are completely different ? You know that this would be a civil matter ?

If you know that, then the following should be no problem to you

Firstly, no Legal Aid is ever granted for representation at an Inquest. It's a matter that is specifically excluded under the Civil Legal Aid Act and subsequent regulations. (This might change in future).

So either Michael Finucane is working for free or the Family are paying him.

If the family were to take a case over the death of their son, it would again be a Civil matter. They could apply to the Legal Aid Board for representation. Since Michael Finucane is their solicitor rather than a Legal Aid Board solicitor it's fair to presume they haven't gone to the Legal Aid Board.

So next time you have a rant over the cost of something to the state at least make it accurate.

And finally I have no issue of the family following up this case even if the fella was a scumbag. Nobody should be dying in Garda station cells, and giving someone methadone without actually knowing their prescription is a mugs game. The family are right to follow it up.

Who pays the wages of the judge and all the court staff? I would imagine that it is the state?

gurramok · 18-09-2010 10:39am

stovelid wrote: »

Legal representation, in other words.

Beyond morals in my book.

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 10:42am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I just don't know where to start with this. You know that Criminal Legal Aid and Civil Legal Aid are completely different ? You know that this would be a civil matter ?

If you know that, then the following should be no problem to you

Firstly, no Legal Aid is ever granted for representation at an Inquest. It's a matter that is specifically excluded under the Civil Legal Aid Act and subsequent regulations. (This might change in future).

So either Michael Finucane is working for free or the Family are paying him.

If the family were to take a case over the death of their son, it would again be a Civil matter. They could apply to the Legal Aid Board for representation. Since Michael Finucane is their solicitor rather than a Legal Aid Board solicitor it's fair to presume they haven't gone to the Legal Aid Board.

So next time you have a rant over the cost of something to the state at least make it accurate.

And finally I have no issue of the family following up this case even if the fella was a scumbag. Nobody should be dying in Garda station cells, and giving someone methadone without actually knowing their prescription is a mugs game. The family are right to follow it up.

Innocent 22 year old mothers should not be shot dead at parties just because someone was refused entry. But hey, that's life!

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 10:46am

John2002 wrote: »

Who pays the wages of the judge and all the court staff? I would imagine that it is the state?

They get paid regardless of whether this case goes ahead or not.

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 10:47am

ebixa82 wrote: »

Innocent 22 year old mothers should not be shot dead at parties just because someone was refused entry. But hey, that's life!

Agreed.

So you don't know anything about Legal Aid then ?

Sanjuro · 18-09-2010 10:47am

So, let's get this straight. Idiot scumbag lies about his drug history. Poor procedure in custody leads to him getting a lethal injection by accident. And morality-free solicitor sues state in a lawsuit that should never go to trial. Wow. There are no winners in this. Everybody's a loser.

stovelid · 18-09-2010 10:47am

gurramok wrote: »

Beyond morals in my book.

Lord Diplock just called: he wants his views back.

MagicSean · 18-09-2010 10:51am

Surely if he sued the state the state would have to pay someone to defend them. Wouldn't that be the cost to the taxpayer?

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 10:54am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

They get paid regardless of whether this case goes ahead or not.

Yes but their resources and time would be better spent elsewhere.

And I think you're kidding yourself if you think the family are going to pay for this civil action out of their own pocket.

Sardonicat · 18-09-2010 10:55am

"The coroner’s examination had demonstrated beyond doubt that serious questions arose from the death."(The Irish Times)

So, the fact that some idiot could lie to a Dr. means that the state should be responsible for maintaining a register that can be accessed out of ours by guards and Dr.s on the off chance that a detainee is telling porkies about his heroin intake?

Yes, prescribing methadone without access to the full facts is a mug's game, but what was the Dr. meant to do? If he had refused treatment that would be seen as denying this charming fella his rights. Dr.s have to make alot of decisions based solely on the information given to them by patients.

I would suggest lying to a Dr to get a buzz is the mug's game.

dotsman · 18-09-2010 10:59am

peasant wrote: »

Look at it the other way:

Basically this guy died by a state sponsored lethal injection (of methadone)

lol. Much of an imagination do we? How the hell did you read this and come to the conclusion that it was akin to an execution.

The dumb fcuk lied to his doctor and was given the wrong treatment. He died as a result.

If I go into a doctor tomorrow and tell her a whole load of bull**** and she prescribes something that ends up harming me, who's fault is it? mine or hers?

peasant wrote: »

That shouldn't happen and it certainly shouldn't happen again. So an inquiry why and how it happend is a good thing and the proposed methadone protocol for garda stations certainly sounds like a good thing.

It can't be that they inject drugs into someone in custody just on their say so.

Brilliant. Waste more taxpayers money on even more bureaucratic bull**** and have even less guards on the street.

There's already a massive issue with guards ignoring junkies due to the amount of man hours it takes to process them (with little consequence for the criminal) and you want to make that situation even worse? WTF?

18-09-2010 11:02am

start cherry pickin who can go to court and who cant and the whole system falls apart . Maybe their son was a scumbag ??? whose to say does that deny them as a family to take a case against the state ? imo no they have every right to .

arybvtcw0eolkf · 18-09-2010 11:05am

ebixa82 wrote: »

Innocent 22 year old mothers should not be shot dead at parties just because someone was refused entry. But hey, that's life!

Innocent of what?.

You know her, was she accused of something?.

And the guy who died hadn't been found guilty of anything, no one should die in garda custody - makes the guards look bad!.

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 11:13am

Larry Gigantic Permit wrote: »

Innocent of what?.

You know her, was she accused of something?.

And the guy who died hadn't been found guilty of anything, no one should die in garda custody - makes the guards look bad!.

I'm sorry, are you saying that this girl was guilty of something?

By innocent I mean she should not have been shot dead by a scumbag.

No one should die in Garda custody, but equallu no one should lie about their drug use in an attempt to get a fix of methadone. You play with fire, you get burnt. He got burnt. Badly.

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 11:13am

Sardonicat wrote: »

"The coroner’s examination had demonstrated beyond doubt that serious questions arose from the death."(The Irish Times)

So, the fact that some idiot could lie to a Dr. means that the state should be responsible for maintaining a register that can be accessed out of ours by guards and Dr.s on the off chance that a detainee is telling porkies about his heroin intake?

Yes, prescribing methadone without access to the full facts is a mug's game, but what was the Dr. meant to do? If he had refused treatment that would be seen as denying this charming fella his rights. Dr.s have to make alot of decisions based solely on the information given to them by patients.

I would suggest lying to a Dr to get a buzz is the mug's game.

I would imagine the lesser of the two evils is to refuse to prescribe, at least that way you won't kill anyone.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 18-09-2010 11:15am

ebixa82 wrote: »

I'm sorry, are you saying that this girl was guilty of something?

By innocent I mean she should not have been shot dead by a scumbag.

No one should die in Garda custody, but equallu no one should lie about their drug use in an attempt to get a fix of methadone. You play with fire, you get burnt. He got burnt. Badly.

Yes, indeed - you play with fire you get burned.

questioner · 18-09-2010 11:17am

Madden and Finucane also represented one of the Dundons, "Noddy" I believe, the lovable rogue.

It affected my opinion of them, I had considered applying to them for placement but on researching the firm I found this and decided against it.

Can't say I'd be comfortable representing people like that TBH, right wing lunatic that I am:rolleyes:

If you would like something to really get exercised about look at what Michael Staines has made from legal aid.

questioner · 18-09-2010 11:21am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I would imagine the lesser of the two evils is to refuse to prescribe, at least that way you won't kill anyone.

failure to adminster requested medical assistance would count as duress and could nullify any admissions made whilst in custody, DPP v. Meehan - defendant maintained that methadone was withheld/ administered selectively in order to facilitate confessions.

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 11:25am

questioner wrote: »

failure to adminster requested medical assistance would count as duress and could nullify any admissions made whilst in custody, DPP v. Meehan - defendant maintained that methadone was withheld/ administered selectively in order to facilitate confessions.

but he'd be alive.

Sardonicat · 18-09-2010 11:34am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I would imagine the lesser of the two evils is to refuse to prescribe, at least that way you won't kill anyone.

So, based on your logic, if a patient states to a Dr. they have no allergies to certain drugs, the Dr shouldn't take his word for it in case he's lying?

"Are you allergic to penicillin?"

"No"

"I'm sorry, I can't give you any, you might be lying to me. I need to check the national register of all those allergic to antibiotics before I can treat you. That way I won't accidentially kill you."

You know, there is such a thing as personal responsibility. Those who don't excercise it, can, as ebixa says, get burned.

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 11:35am

Larry Gigantic Permit wrote: »

Yes, indeed - you play with fire you get burnt.

FYP

arybvtcw0eolkf · 18-09-2010 11:38am

ebixa82 wrote: »

FYP

I'm an old codger, what does that mean?.

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 11:40am

Larry Gigantic Permit wrote: »

I'm an old codger, what does that mean?.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fyp

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 11:43am

Sardonicat wrote: »

So, based on your logic, if a patient states to a Dr. they have no allergies to certain drugs, the Dr shouldn't take his word for it in case he's lying?

"Are you allergic to penicillin?"

"No"

"I'm sorry, I can't give you any, you might be lying to me. I need to check the national register of all those allergic to antibiotics before I can treat you. That way I won't accidentially kill you."

You know, there is such a thing as personal responsibility. Those who don't excercise it, can, as ebixa says, get burned.

I think trying to compare the prescription of penicillin to the prescription of Methadone is a little bit ludicrous, at best.

I'm aware of this " personal responsibility" you mention, but I don't think drug addicts are really capable of exercising it.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 18-09-2010 11:47am

ebixa82 wrote: »

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fyp

Oh I see, you wanna be a smart arse!.

Sigh...

One thing people hate on boards.ie - spelling & grammar nazi's.

Generally they're as welcomed as a dose of pox.

ebixa82 · 18-09-2010 11:48am

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I think trying to compare the prescription of penicillin to the prescription of Methadone is a little bit ludicrous, at best.

I'm aware of this " personal responsibility" you mention, but I don't think drug addicts are really capable of exercising it.

So because drug addicts are too ****ed on drugs to exercise personal responsibility it is up to everybody else to do so for them? Luck them!

ilovelamp2000 · 18-09-2010 11:52am

ebixa82 wrote: »

So because drug addicts are too ****ed on drugs to exercise personal responsibility it is up to everybody else to do so for them? Luck them!

Not everybody else, but a Doctor should.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to expect that the Doctor would make a phone call to the Ballymun Clinic to check whether the lad was on the Methadone treatment programme.

One phone-call could have saved a life. I'm not going to bother getting into the value of that life, but the point still stands.

mikemac · 18-09-2010 11:57am

The jury made three recommendations in addition to the verdict.

They recommended a methadone protocol be implemented in all Garda stations as soon as possible. They said there should be written medical information on prisoners for those who needed it, including visiting doctors. And they recommended that there should be access out-of-hours to the central treatment list, a list of people being maintained on State methadone programmes.

They all sound pretty sensible and workable to me

“The family of Dwayne Foster intend to reflect carefully on the findings of the inquest into his death and consider what options are now open to them. It is hoped that all concerned, especially An Garda Síochána, will do the same,” the statement said.

Ciarán Lawlor, solicitor for Foster’s partner Selena Cannon, said he had already begun civil legal action against the State, An Garda Síochána and Beaumont Hospital. The action was being taken on behalf of Ms Cannon’s and Foster’s three children and included claims of negligence and breach of duty.

It'll go to court and a decision will be made. I don't see a settlement being made here but who knows
OP, just as view someone as a scumbag doesn't mean their family can't bring this case.
We can't pick and choose the cases depending on somebodys background

The State are used to these cases, a recent one in Cork and that joyrider Terence Wheelock.
Before this case is over we will probably see marches and local politicians getting pulled in to give support. If you are a local you can make representations and make your views known to them too, they represent you.

They'll get their day in court so accept it.

Scumbag dies...Solicitor sues State on his behalf..

Comments