neil prenderville set to return to the airwaves

dave1982

THE CORK DJ who has been off air since allegations emerged in November that he exposed himself on a plane is reportedly heading back to work in the coming weeks.
Neil Prendeville hosted a popular three-hour morning radio show on Cork’s 96fm.
In early November, allegations emerged that he had exposed himself and begun masturbating while flying back to Cork from London with Aer Lingus.
He had been in London for a one-day trip as a guest of the Cork Convention Bureau.
Responding to the reports, Prendeville said he had no recollection of the incident or of the flight. He told 96fm listeners that he could not deny the allegations “because I just don’t recall”. He apologised on air to passengers on that flight, to his family, and to colleagues.
He said he had taken painkillers for a persistent neck problem and had been attending a function in London, at which he consumed alcohol. He said that he remembered parts of that day, but not the flight or getting home, and warned people against mixing alcohol and painkillers.
Gardaí launched an investigation into the incident and spoke to some passengers and Aer Lingus staff. The Irish Daily Star reports today that the DPP has yet to decide if charges will be brought and says Prendeville’s return to the airwaves is dependent on the DPP’s decision.
The Irish Sun said a station insider told them that Prendeville had been in communication with station bosses and a date for his return to the mic is expected within the next few days. The source said it was unlikely the station would advertise his return.
The person TheJournal.ie spoke to at 96FM said she was unable to comment on Prendeville’s situation and that the station’s chief executive, Kieran McGeary, is dealing with all enquiries regarding the DJ. She said McGeary was not in the office today and would not provide contact details.
Prendeville doesn’t recall ‘exposing himself’ on flight | Listen back to Neil Prendeville’s reaction to the allegations | Neil Prendeville takes leave from radio show |

Should be a interesting 1st day back

Kimono-Girl

dave1982 wrote: »

Should be a interesting 1st day back

it won't,

he *might* apologise again and then he'll leave it at that, people calling in about it won't be put on air, if they do get on air he'll cut to ads, and in a week or two of him being back people wlll forget about it and move on, if they haven't already.....

gbee

In the 'other' thread it was pointed out that 96fm had a banner on their website say Neill was coming soon.

mudokon

I've never listened to his show but from what I saw on the threads when this occurred was that he had a self righteous attitude. It will be interesting to see if he will still carry on with that attitude when he does get back on air.

gbee

mudokon wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if he will still carry on with that attitude when he does get back on air.

It'll empower him even more!

Caller: "You're just a w******!"
Neill "Feck off ye L****, come back to me when YOU'VE stood up in front of plane full of people, actions speak louder than words .... "

Atlantic1

gbee wrote: »

In the 'other' thread it was pointed out that 96fm had a banner on their website say Neill was coming soon.

Did they also say that he'd be returning to a "hands-on" job?

Sephiroth_dude

I actually wish he wouldn't come back,I much prefer listening to the guy thats on it now.

pow wow

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

I actually wish he wouldn't come back,I much prefer listening to the guy thats on it now.

Oh no, the current guy is awful to listen to. In particular his joke about choking a smurf in the same segment as his coverage of Michaela Harte's murder :rolleyes:. He just seems to have no cop on but insists to himself (and his listeners because he witters on about it incessantly) that he's a self-styled 'man of the people'.

I was no fan of Prendeville but I'd nearly pay him to come back myself if it rescued me from Coogan.

JohnK

Yeah I'm not a big fan of the current guy either, theres just something about the way he talks that puts me off. Grand in small dose's but I couldnt listen to a full show with him. At least with Prendeville you could listen away to him.

CharlesHaughey

He should never have went IMO.

He was caught w**king on a plane, i've heard of people doing that "elsewhere", it's not abnormal. What if he was caught staring at a womans breasts, would he have got thrown of the air then?

Atlantic1

CharlesHaughey wrote: »

He should never have went IMO.

He was caught w**king on a plane, i've heard of people doing that "elsewhere", it's not abnormal. What if he was caught staring at a womans breasts, would he have got thrown of the air then?

What amazed me most about the incident was that he wasn't arrested when the plane landed. If he had been a priest or a traveller, there would have been a fleet of paddy wagons and reporters waiting when it landed. And it wouldn't have taken weeks for the story to get out into the public domain.

jolter

dave1982 wrote: »

Should be a interesting 1st day back

never taught i would be saying this but the sooner the better, coogan doesent spreak with any conviction and has a voice that goes threw you like a dose of salts.

charlemont

Tugging Time with Neil..:pac:

Sephiroth_dude

pow wow wrote: »

Oh no, the current guy is awful to listen to. In particular his joke about choking a smurf in the same segment as his coverage of Michaela Harte's murder :rolleyes:. He just seems to have no cop on but insists to himself (and his listeners because he witters on about it incessantly) that he's a self-styled 'man of the people'.

I was no fan of Prendeville but I'd nearly pay him to come back myself if it rescued me from Coogan.

Or even the other guy that was on for a while before coogan would be better.

gerk86

CharlesHaughey wrote: »

He should never have went IMO.

He was caught w**king on a plane, i've heard of people doing that "elsewhere", it's not abnormal. What if he was caught staring at a womans breasts, would he have got thrown of the air then?

You're equating looking at a womans breasts to masturbating in public... Are you for real? How can you defend this guy? He's a self righteous smug dirty old pervert that should've gotten the sack the second this came out.

JohnK

I get why you dont like what he supposedly did but why should someone lose their job for something done in their private life? Should an accountant be fired for doing the same thing? What about a builder? Or a publican?

rebel.ranter

Is he coming back "in" the air or "on" the air? Important to distinguish.

evilivor

JohnK wrote: »

I get why you dont like what he supposedly did but why should someone lose their job for something done in their private life? Should an accountant be fired for doing the same thing? What about a builder? Or a publican?

Allegedly publically masterbating in the front row of an aircraft during take-off while travelling as a paid guest of the city and, in the party of the Lord Mayor, is hardly something done in his private life.

He's a public figure, a broadcaster, restaurateur and a member of the Board of the city's art gallery, people are entitled to speculate as to his future.

Debthree

JohnK wrote: »

I get why you dont like what he supposedly did but why should someone lose their job for something done in their private life? Should an accountant be fired for doing the same thing? What about a builder? Or a publican?

Well if they're sanctimonious, judgemental, arrogant sods who think they're above everyone else and who constantly judge other people's morals then yes, they should be fired.

JohnK

evilivor wrote: »

Allegedly publically masterbating in the front row of an aircraft during take-off while travelling as a paid guest of the city and, in the party of the Lord Mayor, is hardly something done in his private life.

Nope, still nothing to do with his job so why should he lose it over this? Now if he wipped it out in studio in front of his co-workers or guests then sure he should be fired for that but if hes not acting in his professional capacity as a talkshow host then there is no reason he should be fired from that.

evilivor wrote: »

He's a public figure, a broadcaster, restaurateur and a member of the Board of the city's art gallery, people are entitled to speculate as to his future.

Never said people werent entitled to speculate.

Debthree wrote: »

Well if they're sanctimonious, judgemental, arrogant sods who think they're above everyone else and who constantly judge other people's morals then yes, they should be fired.

And yet its still nothing to do with his job so why should he be fired from it?


Seems to me that most people just hate the guy regardless and want any excuse to see him fired but if it was anyone else then their job would never be in question.

evilivor

So, if he is charged and found guilty, you still think it would gave no impact on work capacity? That his contract wouldn't have a proviso for bringing the station into ill repute?

If an accountant or a publican was convicted of what he is alleged to have done I would imagine they would also be fired. A self employed publican would have difficulty getting a licence with a conviction and being on the sex offenders register.

Just saying is all.

JohnK wrote: »

Nope, still nothing to do with his job so why should he lose it over this? Now if he wipped it out in studio in front of his co-workers or guests then sure he should be fired for that but if hes not acting in his professional capacity as a talkshow host then there is no reason he should be fired from that.


Never said people werent entitled to speculate.


And yet its still nothing to do with his job so why should he be fired from it?


Seems to me that most people just hate the guy regardless and want any excuse to see him fired but if it was anyone else then their job would never be in question.

snottybridge

seem to remember he undertook to take a drugs test at the time, to squash rumours that were going around at the time of the incident.were the results ever disclosed?

Sephiroth_dude

pow wow wrote: »

In particular his joke about choking a smurf in the same segment as his coverage of Michaela Harte's murder :rolleyes:..

Didn't hear that but thats bad form alright.

nizarol

apparently DPP won't be pressing charges due to issues of jurisdiction. I wonder would those issues apply if I were to punch a flight attendent or another passanger?

roundymac

Why did it take two weeks for the Aer Lingus personel to make a complaint to the Gardai?

star.chaser

so he's cuming back, eh?

trebormurf

Time to move on methinks

BArra

Still not back on the air, is there any update?

beagle001

He is due to unzip his new show live on air this week.

gbee

Despite that fact that I can't stand PJ, sorry but he just ires me, he was doing a good job, I'll feel sorry for him, he's a very likeable fellow, but I'm constantly turning him off, small doses and he's fine.

JohnK

beagle001 wrote: »

He is due to unzip his new show live on air this week.

Same timeslot or a different one?

roundymac

I don't think he will be back.There will be such an outcry that advertisers and sponsers won't touch him or 96fm with a barge pole. The owners of 96fm won't make a deceison on whether he come's back until the Garda investigation is compleate, due process etc.

54kroc

roundymac wrote: »

I don't think he will be back.There will be such an outcry that advertisers and sponsers won't touch him or 96fm with a barge pole. The owners of 96fm won't make a deceison on whether he come's back until the Garda investigation is compleate, due process etc.

I'd say advertisers and sponsors are the only thing stopping him returning to the show.

gbee

roundymac wrote: »

Garda investigation is compleate, due process etc.

Don't know how much weight to put on this, but a post somewhere [I know vague] says a jurisdiction issue arose as the incident technically took place in another country.

rebel girl 15

gbee wrote: »

Don't know how much weight to put on this, but a post somewhere [I know vague] says a jurisdiction issue arose as the incident technically took place in another country.

IIRC ever though the incident took place in UK, but because the door of the plane was closed when the incident happened, it is Irish jurisdiction. There was something about the length of time between the incident and it being reported to the Gardai

parsi

JohnK wrote: »

Nope, still nothing to do with his job so why should he lose it over this? Now if he wipped it out in studio in front of his co-workers or guests then sure he should be fired for that but if hes not acting in his professional capacity as a talkshow host then there is no reason he should be fired from that.

Well he only got the gig to be taken over to the UK for wining and dining because he was a talkshow host , so it is related.

JohnK

Well no he got the gig to be taken over because he's a well known personality, not because hes a talkshow host. Ultimately he wasn’t there in any capacity as a representative of his employers so his job should not be under threat because of it.

Max001

JohnK wrote: »

Well no he got the gig to be taken over because he's a well known personality, not because hes a talkshow host. Ultimately he wasn’t there in any capacity as a representative of his employers so his job should not be under threat because of it.

Pointless to comment, as he seems to be back

JohnK

Max001 wrote: »

Given that the majority of flight attendants are female, how'd you feel if your mother, sister or daughter was the crew member forced to deal with a semi-coherent passenger with his cock hanging out?

I'd be annoyed irrespective of the flight attendants gender and want the cops to take action but I'd still fail to see why the person exposing themselves should lose their job since it had no relevance or connection to the offence.

Max001 wrote: »

Laws are written and enforced to protect the public from indecent behaviour, amongst other things. At what point ought the law to intervene? If he had a woman passenger cornered in the galley and was inviting her to perform a lewd act?

At what point did I say the law shouldnt intervene? I've no issue at all with the police conducting a full investigation and if they find these acts did indeed take place then by all means prosecute to the fullest extent.

Max001 wrote: »

No doubt you'd consider that just a bit of fun. Your logic is moronic and your attitude is contemptible.

Oh grow up :rolleyes:

Max001 wrote: »

Your life is not private when you're in a public place. The clue's in the words 'public place' :rolleyes:

And yet its not his professional life either so why should his job be under threat?

Paparazzo

JohnK wrote: »

I'd be annoyed irrespective of the flight attendants gender and want the cops to take action but I'd still fail to see why the person exposing themselves should lose their job since it had no relevance or connection to the offence.

Are you for real? His job is taking the moral high ground with the public on radio and he had a wánk on a plane in front of everyone! You can't see how that's relevant? He can never expect to be taken seriously by the public again. Any time a debate gets anyway heated, all the caller has to say is "Well Neil, at least I didn't have a wánk on a plane" and they've automatically won any argument!
If there was a god, it would have been Joe Duffy instead of Neil

yosemite_sam

gerk86 wrote: »

You're equating looking at a womans breasts to masturbating in public... Are you for real? How can you defend this guy? He's a self righteous smug dirty old pervert that should've gotten the sack the second this came out.

How can he get a second chance

dave1982

Seen on the echo last week the JNLR ratings for 9-12 on a week has dropped by around 15000 (i think numbers sketchy tbh can't stand over it )

In fairness he has been punished along with his family.Although he wouldn't do for anyone else.I think its time to give him another chance.:D

Dan Dare

Well I don't.

mudokon

JohnK wrote: »

I'd be annoyed irrespective of the flight attendants gender and want the cops to take action but I'd still fail to see why the person exposing themselves should lose their job since it had no relevance or connection to the offence.

While the offence is not directly related to his job, radio stations make their money from advertising. If one of the DJ's act in a way that puts that income at risk then they have behaved in a way that is detrimental to the company and they should have to face the consequences of their actions, including losing their job if the company deems it necessary.

JohnK

I'd agree with that line of reasoning however I'd disagree that they couldnt get big advertising money out of his return. Lets face it, like or loathe the guy everyone is talking about him and if he returns to air then huge numbers will be tuning in to listen, certainly to his first few shows if for no other reason than to hear him grovel. Any advertiser who buys a spot on that show will get a huge audience listening to their advert.

True it might be tough to find a full show sponsor for a little while but people have very short memories and its only a matter of time before some other story of the hour comes along and everyone pretty much forgets all about this. Had be stayed on the air this whole time I seriously doubt anyone would be talking about it now.

gbee

JohnK wrote: »

I but people have very short memories and its only a matter of time ... anyone would be talking about it now.

We wouldn't either, except the Cork [Irish] Examiner bring up the story every two weeks like clockwork.

evilivor

JohnK wrote: »

I'd agree with that line of reasoning however I'd disagree that they couldnt get big advertising money out of his return. Lets face it, like or loathe the guy everyone is talking about him and if he returns to air then huge numbers will be tuning in to listen, certainly to his first few shows if for no other reason than to hear him grovel. Any advertiser who buys a spot on that show will get a huge audience listening to their advert.

True it might be tough to find a full show sponsor for a little while but people have very short memories and its only a matter of time before some other story of the hour comes along and everyone pretty much forgets all about this. Had be stayed on the air this whole time I seriously doubt anyone would be talking about it now.

I would imagine there is a moral turpitude clause in his contract and, until the issue has been clarified, he would be suspended effectively.

dave1982

An unemployed man has been jailed for six months after he was observed masturbating while travelling on the Dart.
Michael McDonald, a 54-year-old unemployed man from Delgany, County Wicklow, was handed the sentence at a sitting of the Bray District Court last Thursday.
McDonald, who was already serving a six-month sentence for a similar offence, has five previous conviction all for simlar offences.
Outlining details to the court on Thursday, Detective Inspector Garda Declan McCarthy of Bray Garda station said McDonald had been travelling on the Dart from Pearse Street in Dublin to Bray in mid November last year when the incident took place.
“During the journey a young woman who was sitting opposite Mr McDonald observed the accused masturbating,” he said.
When the train reached Bray, the Detective Inspector told the court that the accused followed the woman, who was in her 20s, onto the platform and out of the station.
After viewing CCTV footage of the incident, on foot of a complaint, Gardai arrested McDonald and charged him.
The offence for which he was jailed last week took place only two days before he was to be sentenced for a similar offence from earlier last year.
On that occasion, he was jailed after he was seen masturbating on a bus. A girl of just 15 was exposed to McDonald’s actions.
The Delgany man has five previous convictions in total dating back to 1996, all for similar offences, the court heard.
Judge Murrough Connellan said he could not “see any hope” for Mr McDonald “mending his ways” and said he was a “total recidivist”.
The six month term – which is the maximum sentence for this type of offence – is to begin after his previous jail terms end, meaning McDonald will be in prison until Christmas.

6 months

evilivor

http://www.thejournal.ie/no-charges-brought-against-cork-96fm-dj-neil-prendeville-2011-3/

No charges brought against Cork 96FM DJ Neil Prendeville


THE DPP HAS DECIDED NOT to bring charges against Cork DJ Neil Prendeville after complaints he had exposed himself and masturbated on an Aer Lingus flight, according to RTÉ’s Six One News.

The incident was alleged to have occurred on the flight from London to Cork on 19 October.

Cork 96fm presenter Prendeville said he did not recall the flight at all because he had taken painkillers for a neck injury and consumed alcohol while attending an event in London that day.

Speaking on air when the allegations emerged in early November, Prendeville offered his “deepest apologises to the passengers on the plane, to the flight personnel, to my family, to my employers and my work colleagues and to all of the people of Cork”.

He warned people not to mix painkillers and alcohol, and said he could not refute the allegations because he did not recall the events.

Prendeville has been on leave of absence from the station since early November.

Airline staff and passengers are understood to have made statements to the gardaí regarding the alleged incident, but the DPP has directed that no charges will be brought against Prendeville.

BArra

interesting...

JohnK

Interesting indeed. Question now is when (if?) he'll be back. Guess I'll need to start listening to the radio in the mornings again.