Motorcycle helmets in courts

Rawhead

Not sure if anyone watched the news this evening but the 4 Gardai in Waterford made an awful impression by turning up to court doing a Martin Cahill. I know they have a presumption of innocence and I am making no comment on the actual trial, but it looked horrendous.
Who ever came up with that plan needs they're head examined.

goldie fish

Is it against the law to be a motorcyclist now?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0727/holnessa.html#video

Delancey

Agree the helmets suck from a PR perspective , a pair of Y fronts over their faces would have been preferable to the helmets.

Magic Beans

There was a also load of dodgy looking characters there dressed funny and wearing horsehair wigs.

Greenmachine

Looks ridicolous. If joe soap turned up for court like that, they would get a bollicking from the judge. Is this case in closed court. Can someone photograph the alleged perpetrators inside the court.

Rawhead

goldie fish wrote: »

Is it against the law to be a motorcyclist now?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0727/holnessa.html#video

Read the post again, where do I mention the legality of a motorcycle helmet?

My problem is the homoerotic wearing of tight leather and the chip that most motorcyclists seem to carry on they're shoulders, but that's another argument for another day.

goldie fish

Rawhead wrote: »

Read the post again, where do I mention the legality of a motorcycle helmet?

My problem is the homoerotic wearing of tight leather and the chip that most motorcyclists seem to carry on they're shoulders, but that's another argument for another day.

You seem to have a problem with people who arrive to court on a motorcycle, being dressed appropriately for that mode of transport.

Rawhead

goldie fish wrote: »

You seem to have a problem with people who arrive to court on a motorcycle, being dressed appropriately for that mode of transport.

Cabbage

Shield

Rawhead wrote: »

Cabbage

Infracted
No further comment on this please and thanks.

Turner

Was very strange alright... Didnt look very professional.

I presume it was to hide their identity to protect themselves and their families.

Could have been done better in my opinion.

Delancey

Greenmachine wrote: »

Looks ridicolous. If joe soap turned up for court like that, they would get a bollicking from the judge. Is this case in closed court. Can someone photograph the alleged perpetrators inside the court.

No , taking photographs in court will land the photographer in a world of sh1t - strictly forbidden.
There is no question that they were going to wear the helmets in court , rather they were wearing them outside to prevent cameras getting a look in. No way they would be allowed hide their faces in court.

bravestar

Eh... They all appeared to arrive to court on motorcycles, almost all of them were also wearing bike jackets...OP I dont see where you are going with this. It would be against the law to be on the motorcycle and not wearing a helmet.

Or is it because they didnt immediately remove their helmets when they dismounted the bike? Why would they want their faces plastered all over the news? Especially when they are presumed to be innocent.

Sterling Archer

I believe to OP Believes the Officers wore there helmets IN Court...

I don't believe he is making reference to them wearing Helmets TO Court.

Sully

bravestar wrote: »

Eh... They all appeared to arrive to court on motorcycles, almost all of them were also wearing bike jackets...OP I dont see where you are going with this. It would be against the law to be on the motorcycle and not wearing a helmet.

Or is it because they didnt immediately remove their helmets when they dismounted the bike? Why would they want their faces plastered all over the news? Especially when they are presumed to be innocent.

You do know where he is going with it, I think most people would.

The OP is only commenting on the fact it looked weird and unprofessional that some of those in question arrived completely covered up and made a huge effort to hide their identity. It looked odd, as most people wear glasses, put hand over face, or use a newspaper to hide their identity. Not dress up in motorcycle gear.

Understand why, but the way they went about it looked stupid and could have been done better.

BrianD

They are innocent until proven otherwise. I would have thought that legal action against Gardai is something that goes with the territory, an unfortunate part of the job.

However, it is unusual that serving Gardai should have their faces covered by motorcycle helmets while entering a courthouse. While another poster may wish to suggest that it is because of the mode of transport they are using, the public know better. It reflects very poorly on them and I might add makes them look quite sinister.

According to The Phoenix magazine, understand that RTE have allegedly made a complaint to the Courts Service about being unable to film the defendants entering the court house.

Sully

I wouldn't say they normally drive bikes, considering its reported that it was one off duty Garda member who drove them in one at a time. It looks very like it was done on purpose to disguise their identity completely in a less traditional way.

Rawhead

Good job their isn't a river beside the court house, they would have found it difficult to walk in the scuba gear.

SLOOPY

Rawhead wrote: »

Good job their isn't a river beside the court house, they would have found it difficult to walk in the scuba gear.

There is.

Could be a go'er that.:D

goldie fish

Sully wrote: »

I wouldn't say they normally drive bikes, considering its reported that it was one off duty Garda member who drove them in one at a time. It looks very like it was done on purpose to disguise their identity completely in a less traditional way.

Why do you think this? Vewing the clip one is clearly wearing motorcycle leathers. Are you suggesting he dressed up specially for court?
Or perhaps they decided to use this form of transport to avoid parking their own vehicles, or getting caught in traffic?

More anti motorcycling bull****.

savagecabbages

If they turned up in hurling helmets would you call that anti hurling bull****???

goldie fish

savagecabbages wrote: »

If they turned up in hurling helmets would you call that anti hurling bull****???

A hurley is not a means of transport.

savagecabbages

goldie fish wrote: »

A hurley is not a means of transport.

But peoples issue isn't how the accused arrived in court. I dont think anyone here cares about people arriving to court on a motorcycle. The issue is with the clearly sinister and immature attempt at concealing their faces from the public.

Terrible pr here, these people have damaged the image of AGS by pulling this stunt, regardless of the verdict(which is not guilty right now). Anyone who would turn up to a court appearance in a tracksuit and hoodie (helmet or no helmet) is putting forward a bad image of themselves. Anyone accused of a crime during performing work duties, also to an extent represents their employer at court, and in this case both AGS and the state are being poorly represented by this stunt.

goldie fish

savagecabbages wrote: »

But peoples issue isn't how the accused arrived in court. I dont think anyone here cares about people arriving to court on a motorcycle. The issue is with the clearly sinister and immature attempt at concealing their faces from the public.

Terrible pr here, these people have damaged the image of AGS by pulling this stunt, regardless of the verdict(which is not guilty right now). Anyone who would turn up to a court appearance in a tracksuit and hoodie (helmet or no helmet) is putting forward a bad image of themselves. Anyone accused of a crime during performing work duties, also to an extent represents their employer at court, and in this case both AGS and the state are being poorly represented by this stunt.

The accused no longer represents his or her employer in this case as their employer has put them forward for prosecution.
As for turning up in a hoodie and tracksuit, thats what 90% of all those appearing in court wear.
Are you suggesting that those who wear a tracksuit or hoodie are guilty?

Delancey

There are 4 Gardai currently on trial in Dublin for assault , it was interesting to compare their arrival in court ( wearing suits , walking proud and making no effort to hide their identities ) with the arrival in court of their Waterford colleagues.

Sully

goldie fish wrote: »

Why do you think this? Vewing the clip one is clearly wearing motorcycle leathers. Are you suggesting he dressed up specially for court?
Or perhaps they decided to use this form of transport to avoid parking their own vehicles, or getting caught in traffic?

More anti motorcycling bull****.

LOL are you suggesting I am "anti motorcycling" because I believed that three people came to court in full motor gear just to avoid being captured on camera, while believing they are not bikers themselves? Not everybody who doesn't believe someone drives a bike is anti-motorcycling dude.

savagecabbages

goldie fish wrote: »

Are you suggesting that those who wear a tracksuit or hoodie are guilty?

I'm not suggesting anyone accused of a crime is guilty before the conclusion of a trial, I wouldn't dream of saying that.

I made my point about defendants presenting themselves badly to the court (and public too). A public servant giving a bad impression to the public he/she serves is bad PR.
Please don't put words into my mouth.

Sully

Anyone who doesn't go into court dressed appropriately (suit and tie) isn't showing respect.

You get dressed up to go out, to go to a wedding, to go to a funeral, for an important meeting, sometimes for work, interviews etc.

You are on trial in a court of law, by the state, and you should dress more appropriately and not as if its some casual day out.

Perception is everything.

comeandsee

This is unusual behaviour. What is one to take from it ? Their Commissioner or at least their Chief Superintendent should make inquiries into it and ease the public confusion as to why they all arrived in helmets. To be fair, It looks like it was planned, with the intention of hiding their identities. What have they to hide? Are they ashamed ? They should make every honest effort to be accountable and show us who they are for it is their job to hold others to account and that is a special position. If it is true that they wished to hide their identities when brought to account and still expect a public servic job, and that sort of behaviour goes unscrutinized, then we need to look into our police organisation much closer to see where such confidence could come from that they think they can behave however they wish while being held to account. Isnt that the least we shouyld expect, no matter where we live ?

Rawhead

goldie fish wrote: »

Why do you think this? Vewing the clip one is clearly wearing motorcycle leathers. Are you suggesting he dressed up specially for court?
Or perhaps they decided to use this form of transport to avoid parking their own vehicles, or getting caught in traffic?

More anti motorcycling bull****.

At the risk of another infraction, you sir are a CABBAGE.

Back on topic. It does contrast greatly with the 4 Gardai in Dublin, who all appear in court with their heads held high wearing suits surrounded by family and friends.
The really sad thing about the Waterford case is they made the scrote, standing in his finery, smoking a fag, look more respectable than themselves.

Shield

Rawhead wrote: »

At the risk of another infraction, you sir are a CABBAGE.

Infracted.
No further comment on this please and thanks.

goose2005

goldie fish wrote: »

You seem to have a problem with people who arrive to court on a motorcycle, being dressed appropriately for that mode of transport.

One paper said that the same bike dropped them off one by one i.e. their arrival was planned so that they would enter in disguise. As for the impression it made, they miht as well have come in in balaclavas.

Eru

comeandsee wrote: »

This is unusual behaviour. What is one to take from it ? Their Commissioner or at least their Chief Superintendent should make inquiries into it and ease the public confusion as to why they all arrived in helmets.

My dear god, are you actually suggesting that because they are while in work, Gardai that there should be a law against dressing themselves in whatever they choose to wear? Seriously? That it should be punishable for someone to wear a motorcycle helmet? Should this fashion law be for everyone, just Gardai or people who wear helmets?

Can someone please slap me because I must be going mad.

As for perception, that's exactly why we DON'T allow trial by media and public opinion, because then people would be found guilty based on how they dress. Thankfully a Judge will look at the facts of the case to see are they actually guilty of a crime and not just annoying journalists by protecting their own identities.

And PR? PR for who? You think people on trial and possible facing jail give a **** about PR for AGS? In fact, what in gods name does PR have to do with a criminal case anyway?

Geansai

Well someone must have said something to them (or perhaps they thought better of it themselves), because the next day they all arrived in court wearing suits and allowed themselves to be photographed by the press.

Hooch

Geansai wrote: »

Well someone must have said something to them (or perhaps they thought better of it themselves), because the next day they all arrived in court wearing suits and allowed themselves to be photographed by the press.

Or of course they decided not to bother taking the motorbike in the rain that day???

savagecabbages

Eru wrote: »

As for perception, that's exactly why we DON'T allow trial by media and public opinion, because then people would be found guilty based on how they dress. Thankfully a Judge will look at the facts of the case to see are they actually guilty of a crime and not just annoying journalists by protecting their own identities.

And PR? PR for who? You think people on trial and possible facing jail give a **** about PR for AGS? In fact, what in gods name does PR have to do with a criminal case anyway?

I know the judge wont care what people are wearing turning up to court, its not a fashion show. My issue is with the members giving a bad impression to the public they are supposed to be serving. Next week they could all be cleared of everything and back on duty serving the same public they made a show out of themselves in front of by pulling said stunt. That, in my eyes is where PR comes into it.

comeandsee

savagecabbages wrote: »

I know the judge wont care what people are wearing turning up to court, its not a fashion show. My issue is with the members giving a bad impression to the public they are supposed to be serving. Next week they could all be cleared of everything and back on duty serving the same public they made a show out of themselves in front of by pulling said stunt. That, in my eyes is where PR comes into it.

It was a sorry move. It definitely didn't do them or the organisation that they are employed with any favours. They are employed to provide a service to the public and that service in part, is to hold others to account. I'm sorry to say that they failed to account for themselves on that day. No matter what anyone says it has been a bad public relations move... why? Were still talking about it! I've heard members of the public talk about it too. I wont comment on it again and I hope it never happens again.

Eru

savagecabbages wrote: »

I know the judge wont care what people are wearing turning up to court, its not a fashion show. My issue is with the members giving a bad impression to the public they are supposed to be serving. Next week they could all be cleared of everything and back on duty serving the same public they made a show out of themselves in front of by pulling said stunt. That, in my eyes is where PR comes into it.

By that thinking, you coming here and judging people based on clothing reflects on your employer? cmon now, if this was any other occupation you wouldnt be making these comments and you know it.

What a Garda chooses to wear while off duty is no different to how you dress when not working, or a bus driver, taximan, tesco cashier, ryanair flight attendant...................

Geansai

Eru wrote: »

By that thinking, you coming here and judging people based on clothing reflects on your employer? cmon now, if this was any other occupation you wouldnt be making these comments and you know it.

What a Garda chooses to wear while off duty is no different to how you dress when not working, or a bus driver, taximan, tesco cashier, ryanair flight attendant...................

Unfortunately the people in question are not bus drivers, taximen, tesco cashiers or ryanair flight attenents. They are Gardaí. And it is for this reason that this case is in the news. Not many other reletively minor assaults would make the news for three weeks running.

Of course these people can wear what they like in their own time, and I have no doubt that underneath the motorcycle gear they had appropriate attire for Court. However, as Gardaí serving the public, they should also be held accountable to the public. All defendents involved pleaded "Not Guilty" and so should have nothing to be embarressed about or hide.

Also, anyone who claims that the only reason they came on motorcycle and wearing the relevant clothing, in my opinion, is only trying to fool themselves. It was a clear attempt to hide their faces. Although understandable, I believe it is inappropraite for a garda to be doing so, when defending his actions whilst on duty.

bravestar

Geansai wrote: »

Although understandable, I believe it is inappropraite for a garda to be doing so, when defending his actions whilst on duty.

I do not believe it is inappropriate. I believe it is inappropriate to stick cameras in peoples faces, regardless of where or when it is. I believe it is inappropriate to give more air time to something just because a Garda was involved. Allegations of anything can have serious consequences for a person regardless of how true or false they are found out to be. If you or anyone else wants to know what those Gardai look like and really care that much, go to court and have a look.

goldie fish

Gardaí convicted in Waterford trial

Friday, August 05, 2011 - 08:09 PM


Two Gardaí have been convicted at Waterford Circuit Court in connection with an assault in the city last year.

A jury of five men and seven women found Garda Daniel Hickey guilty of assault causing harm to Anthony Holness on New Street in January 2010.

Garda John Burke was also found guilty of attempting to pervert the course of justice.

It was alleged that he deliberately moved a CCTV camera away from New Street as officers attempted to arrest Mr Holness.

Sergeant Alan Kissane was found not guilty of assault causing harm.

The jury is still deliberating in the case of Sergeant Martha McEnerney who is also accused of assault.

All four had denied the charges.


Read more: http://www.examiner.ie/breakingnews/ireland/gardai-convicted-in-waterford-trial-515559.html#ixzz1UBm3OdxA

Ruen

bravestar wrote: »

I do not believe it is inappropriate. I believe it is inappropriate to stick cameras in peoples faces, regardless of where or when it is. I believe it is inappropriate to give more air time to something just because a Garda was involved. Allegations of anything can have serious consequences for a person regardless of how true or false they are found out to be. If you or anyone else wants to know what those Gardai look like and really care that much, go to court and have a look.

It's totally appropriate to take pictures, ever heard of freedom of the press?

A Garda is employed by the irish people and, not just your average public servant, is entrusted with additional rights, responsibilities and legal authority. As such when allegations are made against a Garda that they committed a criminal act while on duty as a functionary of the state I believe it is most definitely in the public interest that this receive more air time compared to the same charges being leveled against a shop assistant for instance.
If they are being vested with legal powers and the authority of the state they should be held to account in as stringent a manner as any citizen if not more so.

Sully

I still don't understand how Gda. John Burke was preventing the course of justice - why wouldn't he just move the camera down the next street if he was trying to cover it up? It was his recording that got the other chap convicted and this whole case!

Seemed like a good point, but saying that we don't have half of the facts so probably more to it than that..

bravestar

Ruen wrote: »

It's totally appropriate to take pictures, ever heard of freedom of the press?

A Garda is employed by the irish people and, not just your average public servant, is entrusted with additional rights, responsibilities and legal authority. As such when allegations are made against a Garda that they committed a criminal act while on duty as a functionary of the state I believe it is most definitely in the public interest that this receive more air time compared to the same charges being leveled against a shop assistant for instance.
If they are being vested with legal powers and the authority of the state they should be held to account in as stringent a manner as any citizen if not more so.

Ever heard of a right to privacy? Ah right, I get your point, so Gardai should be treated differently than everyone else just because they are Gardai, even when they are off duty. I hope the staff in Tesco's remember this when all the off duty Gardai are doing their weekly shop and politely tell them that because they are Gardai and special they dont have to pay as much as everyone else :rolleyes:

savagecabbages

bravestar wrote: »

Ever heard of a right to privacy? Ah right, I get your point, so Gardai should be treated differently than everyone else just because they are Gardai, even when they are off duty. I hope the staff in Tesco's remember this when all the off duty Gardai are doing their weekly shop and politely tell them that because they are Gardai and special they dont have to pay as much as everyone else :rolleyes:

Its a weak argument to pull out the right to privacy card here. Everyone has a right to privacy- we all know this. The four defendants here did themselves or the force they represent absolutely no favours by pulling that stunt. Yes they had every right to turn up the way they did, but in my eyes it was foolish and had half the country talking about it.

Compare the similar case in Dublin where the defendants turned up to court as one would expect them to. -All forgotten about already while this is still rambling on...

Ruen

bravestar wrote: »

Ever heard of a right to privacy? Ah right, I get your point, so Gardai should be treated differently than everyone else just because they are Gardai, even when they are off duty. I hope the staff in Tesco's remember this when all the off duty Gardai are doing their weekly shop and politely tell them that because they are Gardai and special they dont have to pay as much as everyone else :rolleyes:

I have heard of right to privacy but the press and anybody with a camera for that matter has a right to take pictures of anyone or anything in a public place, we don't live in North Korea. And if it is in the public interest you can expect that the press will take pictures of people coming to and going from court when reporting on the case.
Regarding your point about Gardai being treated differently while off duty I'd remind you that the people in question were on duty when they allegedly committed these disgusting acts, two of whom were just convicted by the way which means they are convicted criminals in addition to being Gardai.

bravestar

Ruen wrote: »

bravestar wrote: »

Ever heard of a right to privacy? Ah right, I get your point, so Gardai should be treated differently than everyone else just because they are Gardai, even when they are off duty. I hope the staff in Tesco's remember this when all the off duty Gardai are doing their weekly shop and politely tell them that because they are Gardai and special they dont have to pay as much as everyone else :rolleyes:

I have heard of right to privacy but the press and anybody with a camera for that matter has a right to take pictures of anyone or anything in a public place, we don't live in North Korea. And if it is in the public interest you can expect that the press will take pictures of people coming to and going from court when reporting on the case.
Regarding your point about Gardai being treated differently while off duty I'd remind you that the people in question were on duty when they allegedly committed these disgusting acts, two of whom were just convicted by the way which means they are convicted criminals in addition to being Gardai.

The outcome of the case has no bearing on this thread. Nor does them being on duty at the time of the alleged offence. They were off duty when they arrived to court to represent themselves and are entitled to wear whatever they want, up to and including Groucho Marx disguises, gimp suits and slayer t shirts when coming to and from court.

Ruen

Just thought I'd point out that two of the Gardai are convicted criminals.
Anyway nobody was denying they have a right to wear helmets just that it's a scummy looking thing to do.

goldie fish

Ruen wrote: »

Just thought I'd point out that two of the Gardai are convicted criminals.

Tecnically, not until they have been sentenced to anything other than Probation/bound to the peace. If they get probation, after the period has lapsed, they do not have a criminal record, as sutch.

Ruen wrote: »

Anyway nobody was denying they have a right to wear helmets just that it's a scummy looking thing to do.

Wear helmets, or use a motorcycle? Or both?

Roman Emperor

Over the years I've seen (on TV) many defendants arriving to court hiding behind various disguises.Newspapers,coats,briefcases,umbrellas, even their hands and in Martin Cahill's case a balaclava.I've never seen someone hiding in a helmet before. Then one evening I turn on the news and there's not just one, but four of them hiding in their helmets! What a remarkable coincidence.

Ruen

goldie fish wrote: »

Ruen wrote: »

Just thought I'd point out that two of the Gardai are convicted criminals.

Tecnically, not until they have been sentenced to anything other than Probation/bound to the peace. If they get probation, after the period has lapsed, they do not have a criminal record, as sutch.

Ruen wrote: »

Anyway nobody was denying they have a right to wear helmets just that it's a scummy looking thing to do.

Wear helmets, or use a motorcycle? Or both?

Let's not be pedantic here they've been convicted by a jury, I'm not saying they're "convicts" just convicted criminals regardless of sentence. No need for you to be an apologist for known criminals.

Regarding the dress choice, we all know what was going on there and not denying their right just pointing out the scummyness.

goldie fish

Ruen wrote: »

Let's not be pedantic here they've been convicted by a jury, I'm not saying they're "convicts" just convicted criminals regardless of sentence. No need for you to be an apologist for known criminals.

Regarding the dress choice, we all know what was going on there and not denying their right just pointing out the scummyness.

We all know?
Do We?
You seem to have your mind made up.
I hope for your sake you never get into a situation where you end up in court, get probation, and then try to seek employment as a "convicted criminal".