JUstice the American Way

Rawhead

I know the man has a presumption of innocence, but you have to hand it to the Americans the way they have dealt with Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
-Hauled off first class in JFK
-Perp walked in front of the worlds media
-Remanded in custody to Rikers Island (equivellent to the Joy)

Consider the same situation in this banana republic
-Plane given priority take off clearance
-Super injunction placed on victim
-Gardai sent in 3 months later to get evidence

I know the Americans get it wrong a lot of the time, but man do they give the public at least a sense that the big guys don't always get away with it i.e. Bernie Madoff

Rawhead

I know the man has a presumption of innocence, but you have to hand it to the Americans the way they have dealt with Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
-Hauled off first class in JFK
-Perp walked in front of the worlds media
-Remanded in custody to Rikers Island (equivellent to the Joy)

Consider the same situation in this banana republic
-Plane given priority take off clearance
-Super injunction placed on victim
-Gardai sent in 3 months later to get evidence

I know the Americans get it wrong a lot of the time, but man do they give the public at least a sense that the big guys don't always get away with it i.e. Bernie Madoff

reprazant

Please name one Irish person who has been given a super injunction by the Irish courts.

Guill

On the perp walk?

That a right said Fred song?

Rawhead

reprazant wrote: »

Please name one Irish person who has been given a super injunction by the Irish courts.

Wouldn't be much of an injunction if I knew their names...

Guill

^^^^^

Which case then?

bonzos

If he was in Ireland he would be playing golf with the Taoiseach today.

TheZohanS

reprazant wrote: »

Please name one Irish person who has been given a super injunction by the Irish courts.

Name one Irish person that's facing jailtime over Anglo?

thebigbiffo

i actually thought they were being too hard on him - ffs, it's one person word against another and he can't even get bail!

Guill

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i actually thought they were being too hard on him - ffs, it's one person word against another and he can't even get bail!

If he is innocent it is rough treatment, however, it does look like he tried to flee the country once already.

Rawhead

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i actually thought they were being too hard on him - ffs, it's one person word against another and he can't even get bail!

That's my point though, he got the same treatment as a scrote from the Bronx would.

Sunnyisland

the biffo wrote: »

i actually thought they were being too hard on him - ffs, it's one person word against another and he can't even get bail!

In the majority of countries if you are a foreign national charged with serious crime its very hard to get bail.

Cantona's Collars

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i actually thought they were being too hard on him - ffs, it's one person word against another and he can't even get bail!

He was deemed a serious flight risk,bail was initially going to be set at 2 million dollars but seeing as both he and his missus are so minted that would be like spare change to them plus France doesn't extradite to the States so he'd be on the first plane there never to be seen in the US again.

thebigbiffo

Guill wrote: »

If he is innocent it is rough treatment, however, it does look like he tried to flee the country once already.

Rawhead wrote: »

That's my point though, he got the same treatment as a scrote from the Bronx would.

i think he should have been entitled to bail - i'm no expert, but would it not be likely that in a similar case, all things being equal, the accused would get bail? don't forget there seems to be ZERO evidence against him...so he left his phone behind - hardly enough to hang the man.

Sunnyisland

Rawhead wrote: »

That's my point though, he got the same treatment as a scrote from the Bronx would.

And why shoudent he is his :attempted rape: any different.

bonzos

Maybe if the Gardai had to drag Drummer boy off the plane before he f**ked off to America and questioned about his role in anglo raping the country we might have some answers now!!a few nights in the joy might jog his memory......all we got was Charlie Bird landing on his doorstep of his mansion and being told "show some respect Charlie"

Coriolanus

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i think he should have been entitled to bail - i'm no expert, but would it not be likely that in a similar case, all things being equal, the accused would get bail? don't forget there seems to be ZERO evidence against him...so he left his phone behind - hardly enough to hang the man.

All other things aren't equal. He's already tried to leave the country once. Yes, he's entitled to a presumption of innocence but he's also obliged to remain until investigations are completed.

Rawhead

realies wrote: »

And why shoudent he is his :attempted rape: any different.

Your not with me on this, I AGREE that he deserves to be treated the same as everyone else, in fact that is what the whole post is about.

Sunnyisland

Rawhead wrote: »

Your not with me on this, I AGREE that he deserves to be treated the same as everyone else, in fact that is what the whole post is about.

Read it to fast,jumped to conclusions,my apologies

Guy:Incognito

TheZohan wrote: »

Name one Irish person that's facing jailtime over Anglo?

Did the high up lads in Anglo try to rape hotel staff too? (queue usual rabble about rapeing the country etc etc)

Elmer Blooker

mmmmmm IMF.... political aspirations..... politics and money - what a toxic combination. The changes will probably be dropped due to "lack of evidence" but his political career is over before it's even started.

gman2k

Rawhead wrote: »

Wouldn't be much of an injunction if I knew their names...

I always get the giggles when I hear that one...

Sunnyisland

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Did the high up lads in Anglo try to rape hotel staff too? (queue usual rabble about rapeing the country etc etc)

No but they left us with some whole

sbsquarepants

Another woman has come forward and said he raped her too (or tried to maybe, i didn't quite catch the details). Some French writer i think.

gosuckonalemon

Yanks don't want a repeat of the Roman Polanski case. i.e. no extradition by France.

Looks like France will need another Socialist Presidential candidate and Europe a new IMF chief whether he gets off or not..

Son Of A Vidic

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i think he should have been entitled to bail - i'm no expert, but would it not be likely that in a similar case, all things being equal, the accused would get bail? don't forget there seems to be ZERO evidence against him...so he left his phone behind - hardly enough to hang the man.

Firstly, the location of his arrest on board a plane virtually guarantees him no bail. He also demonstrated a clear intent to leave the country, so the judge rightly regarded him as a flight risk.

Secondly, Roman Polański that famous pedo creep who fled to France in 1977 after pleading guilty to unlawful sex with a 13 year old girl. France granted him sanctuary and refused to extradite him back to the US.

France has well established 'form' of not cooperating with the American judicial system.

Son Of A Vidic

bonzos wrote: »

Maybe if the Gardai had to drag Drummer boy off the plane before he f**ked off to America and questioned about his role in anglo raping the country we might have some answers now!!a few nights in the joy might jog his memory......all we got was Charlie Bird landing on his doorstep of his mansion and being told "show some respect Charlie"

Some 'extraordinary rendition' would be nice for that kunt.

humanji

Was he actually fleeing from the states, or was he on board a flight that he was already booked on?

And can he not be tagged with an ankle bracelet or something, and his passport taken off him?

metrovelvet

If this happenned in France, and probably the rest of Europe, it would have been all hushed away.

Americans arent sycophantic.

humanji

metrovelvet wrote: »

If this happenned in France, and probably the rest of Europe, it would have been all hushed away.

Americans arent sycophantic.

Like with Julian Assange?

irelandrover

Does anyone else see nothing wrong with this. As it stands now the man has done nothing wrong as he hasn't been found guilty. However his face is everywhere and he will forever be labelled a rapist.
This is ok if it turns out that he did do it, but if it turns out that he is innocent then his life has been completely ruined by the lies. In my opinion he should remain anonymous until he has been found guilty. Which is part of the purpose of injunctions referred to earlier.

Mawbish

He was arrested on board his flight about to depart JFK airport - he left his mobile phone and other belongings behind his rather plush suite in NYC he tried his best to scarper but thankfully the cops and the district attourney got the arrest warrent and hauled him off the plane.
He went from DNA & full medical exam (to search for scratches or bruising left on him by the victim) straight to bail hearing and was turned down flat.

We'll have to wait and see how the trial goes (ain't no way he's pleading anything other than NOT GUILTY)

Another woman has come forward to say he attempted to rape her in 2002 I think it was....she's now pondering if she should press charges....

This guy was a potential presidential candidate LOL

pickarooney

I've always thought it a disgrace that anyone's identity was made public in relation to any criminal charge up to and until a guilty sentence has been passed and I stand by that.

Ray Palmer

pickarooney wrote: »

I've always thought it a disgrace that anyone's identity was made public in relation to any criminal charge up to and until a guilty sentence has been passed and I stand by that.

What makes it worse some accusers remain unidentified when the other person is found innocent. It is therefore very easy to ruin a persons reputation.

Coming out to the press 8 years after an alleged assault when you are an adult at the time is a little odd too.

It doesn't take a complicated conspiracy theory to think that this is a possible stitch up.

thebigbiffo

pickarooney wrote: »

I've always thought it a disgrace that anyone's identity was made public in relation to any criminal charge up to and until a guilty sentence has been passed and I stand by that.

i completely agree with this. as far as i can see this lad's been ruined already only by the fact that he left a mobile phone behind in a hotel room and was taken off his flight home (which afaik he's been sheduled to take anyway).

so in the context of the poster's original point - ie. fair play to the states for their unflinching pursuit and detention of a possible rapist, whoever he may be - i'm not completely sure i'd want to live in a country where ANYBODY can be remanded to the likes of Rikers Island on the basis of one claim by one person...especially when it's more than obvious there's any amount of people who would like this guy ruined and millions ($$) of different reasons why this woman could try her hand at making a false claim.

imo, as some pointed out earlier, it would cost less and be a whole lot fairer if this guy's passport was taken from him, an ankle bracelet fitted and he was confined to house arrest until he's convicted or aquitted.

orourkeda

Rawhead wrote: »

I know the man has a presumption of innocence, but you have to hand it to the Americans the way they have dealt with Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
-Hauled off first class in JFK
-Perp walked in front of the worlds media
-Remanded in custody to Rikers Island (equivellent to the Joy)

Consider the same situation in this banana republic
-Plane given priority take off clearance
-Super injunction placed on victim
-Gardai sent in 3 months later to get evidence

I know the Americans get it wrong a lot of the time, but man do they give the public at least a sense that the big guys don't always get away with it i.e. Bernie Madoff

Why is parading someone in front of the worlds media for an ALLEGED assault a good thing?

What if he is found innocent?

Nodin

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i completely agree with this. as far as i can see this lad's been ruined already only by the fact that he left a mobile phone behind in a hotel room and was taken off his flight home (which afaik he's been sheduled to take anyway).

so in the context of the poster's original point - ie. fair play to the states for their unflinching pursuit and detention of a possible rapist, whoever he may be - i'm not completely sure i'd want to live in a country where ANYBODY can be remanded to the likes of Rikers Island on the basis of one claim by one person...especially when it's more than obvious there's any amount of people who would like this guy ruined and millions ($$) of different reasons why this woman could try her hand at making a false claim.

imo, as some pointed out earlier, it would cost less and be a whole lot fairer if this guy's passport was taken from him, an ankle bracelet fitted and he was confined to house arrest until he's convicted or aquitted.

How do you know that the only evidence is her claim?

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

How do you know that the only evidence is her claim?

Nobody knows what the evidence is. Thats part of the problem. How can the case be discussed accurately when the evidence (or lack thereof) isn't readily available.

Nodin

orourkeda wrote: »

Nobody knows what the evidence is. Thats part of the problem. How can the case be discussed accurately when the evidence (or lack thereof) isn't readily available.

Indeed.

Personally I'd be suprised if they grabbed somebody off a plane, arrested and charged them if all they had was one word vs another...however I have no more clue what they have than the next eejit.

pickarooney

Actually, the case shouldn't be discussed on here at all until it's over, going by recent events.

HellFireClub

You can only imagine the outcome if he was implicated in that manner in Ireland...

"We need to keep moving forward, we cannot shock the markets or the IMF"...

"The IMF are delighted at our engagement with their organisation and a decision was made to release the suspect as he enjoys diplomatic immunity anyway so it's only a waste of tax payers money holding a trial"...

Fair play to the Yanks for holding him to the same standard as everyone else less privileged, without fear or favour, it just shows this sorry backwater kip up for the childish smarmy corrupt sh*thole that it is...

Nodin

pickarooney wrote: »

Actually, the case shouldn't be discussed on here at all until it's over, going by recent events.

....different jurisdiction, different laws etc.

HellFireClub

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i completely agree with this. as far as i can see this lad's been ruined already only by the fact that he left a mobile phone behind in a hotel room and was taken off his flight home (which afaik he's been sheduled to take anyway).

so in the context of the poster's original point - ie. fair play to the states for their unflinching pursuit and detention of a possible rapist, whoever he may be - i'm not completely sure i'd want to live in a country where ANYBODY can be remanded to the likes of Rikers Island on the basis of one claim by one person...especially when it's more than obvious there's any amount of people who would like this guy ruined and millions ($$) of different reasons why this woman could try her hand at making a false claim.

imo, as some pointed out earlier, it would cost less and be a whole lot fairer if this guy's passport was taken from him, an ankle bracelet fitted and he was confined to house arrest until he's convicted or aquitted.

This guy isn't your ordinary Joe who has to go to an airport with a passport to leave a country, he is connected with some of the wealthiest people on earth, people with private jets, etc. He probably has his 1 Mil bail money hanging off his shoe or else he has it on his credit card. Dead right to remand him.

orourkeda

HellFireClub wrote: »

You can only imagine the outcome if he was implicated in that manner in Ireland...

"We need to keep moving forward, we cannot shock the markets or the IMF"...

"The IMF are delighted at our engagement with their organisation and a decision was made to release the suspect as he enjoys diplomatic immunity anyway so it's only a waste of tax payers money holding a trial"...

Fair play to the Yanks for holding him to the same standard as everyone else less privileged, without fear or favour, it just shows this sorry backwater kip up for the childish smarmy corrupt sh*thole that it is...

What does arresting anyone on suspicion of a serious sex crime prove about the criminal justice system of any nation.

Nobody has been prosecuted and the case has not even got to court yet. If this is true why is the US worthy of praise on the basis of an arrest?

thebigbiffo

HellFireClub wrote: »

it just shows this sorry backwater kip up for the childish smarmy corrupt sh*thole that it is...

hy·po·thet·i·cal (hp-tht-kl) also hy·po·thet·ic (-thtk)
adj. 1. Of, relating to, or based on a hypothesis: a hypothetical situation. See Synonyms at theoretical.
2. a. Suppositional; uncertain. See Synonyms at supposed.
b. Conditional; contingent.

orourkeda

HellFireClub wrote: »

This guy isn't your ordinary Joe who has to go to an airport with a passport to leave a country, he is connected with some of the wealthiest people on earth, people with private jets, etc. He probably has his 1 Mil bail money hanging off his shoe or else he has it on his credit card. Dead right to remand him.

It isn't a matter of right or wrong with a crime of this magnitude. Surely it's a matter of necessity that a crime like this be investigated. For all anyone knows he could be perfectly innocent. Let's just see how the investigations develop first.

irelandrover

HellFireClub wrote: »

Fair play to the Yanks for holding him to the same standard as everyone else less privileged, without fear or favour, it just shows this sorry backwater kip up for the childish smarmy corrupt sh*thole that it is...

Is he being treated the same as everyone else? When wsa the last time you saw images from an American court of someone charged with attempted rape?

pickarooney

HellFireClub wrote: »

You can only imagine the outcome if he was implicated in that manner in Ireland...

"We need to keep moving forward, we cannot shock the markets or the IMF"...

"The IMF are delighted at our engagement with their organisation and a decision was made to release the suspect as he enjoys diplomatic immunity anyway so it's only a waste of tax payers money holding a trial"...

Fair play to the Yanks for holding him to the same standard as everyone else less privileged, without fear or favour, it just shows this sorry backwater kip up for the childish smarmy corrupt sh*thole that it is...

HellFireClub wrote: »

This guy isn't your ordinary Joe who has to go to an airport with a passport to leave a country, he is connected with some of the wealthiest people on earth, people with private jets, etc. He probably has his 1 Mil bail money hanging off his shoe or else he has it on his credit card. Dead right to remand him.

Can you really not see the blatant contradiction of these two posts?

HellFireClub

pickarooney wrote: »

Can you really not see the blatant contradiction of these two posts?

No I can't see any contradiction whatsoever. He is clearly a flight risk, he clearly has connections way beyond those that any of the rest of us would have access to, if we wanted to get out of the US in a hurry. There is no extradition agreement between the US and France so if he did manage to get out of the jurisdiction, there would be very little chance of getting him back for a trial and if he is found guilty, he is facing up to 75 years in custody.

My first post you quoted, I fully stand over, which is that if he was suspected of committing the same set of crimes in this country, I think it is beyond any doubt whatsoever that he would be enjoying foie gras and bordeaux in his country chateau at the moment, because we have one form of treatment that we reserve for the wealthy and the powerful in this country and another form of treatment that we keep for the rest of us, hence why the country is in absolute bits...

No contradiction there whatsoever that I can see...

up for anything

thebigbiffo wrote: »

millions ($$) of different reasons why this woman could try her hand at making a false claim.

Money talks in more than one way. This could be one of the reasons why women from a certain section of society don't tend to report rape especially when the alleged rapist is from a rich an influential family. It could well be why the woman who says she was raped by him 8 years ago didn't report it at the time.

kraggy

Guill wrote: »

If he is innocent it is rough treatment, however, it does look like he tried to flee the country once already.

You see, the press are making out that he tried to flee on that Air France flight.

But he was due to leave the country that day to fly to Europe for 2 meetings, one of which was with the European Finance Ministers to sort out the bail out crisis.

I'm not so sure he was on the run.