Landlord Report Me for Stealing to Guards

carrieflem

Hi guys, i ve posted before about a terrible landlord we had.. we finally got out of our contract in August 2011 and have been living in a new rented property since the middle of August 2011. Last night i received a call from the guards saying the they need to speak to me about a theft that occurred in the apartment , appartently i stole a chest of drawers.. i know the landlord is just trying to get back at me for legally being able to get out of contract.. she has lost three months rent as shes only now rented out the property to someone new it has been vacant since i moved out.

the main issue here is the fact that some one could be so horrible to do that..I didnt take a chest of drawers. in fact i had a spare set and left a chest of drawers so she actually gained a set of drawers not lost a set.. she cleaned the apartment when we moved in and she changed the alarm codes etc on the 29th august... shouldnt she have noticed this 3 months ago if there was something missing.

i have to meet with the guards tonight and im just wondering how they can become invovled in something so silly... would appreciate any help or views. not to sure have i posted it in the right section.

Ellis Dee

Just tell them you have stolen nothing and that, unless they can produce evidence that you did, they should leave you alone.:)

seamus

The Gardai have an obligation to investigate all reports made to them, so they can't just dismiss it.

Just be honest when you meet with them and explain your side of the story. They know as well as you that it's your word against hers, there is no evidence of any missing property and they probably know well enough that she's a crazy bat. But they still have to follow up and file the paperwork. It's likely nothing will come of this.

You don't need to talk to a solicitor to give your statement this evening, but in the unlikely event that anything more comes of it, don't speak to anyone without a solicitor.

If they're happy enough that the landlady is a complete bint, they may even charge her with making a false allegation/report, but that too is unlikely.

Bosco boy

carrieflem wrote: »

Hi guys, i ve posted before about a terrible landlord we had.. we finally got out of our contract in August 2011 and have been living in a new rented property since the middle of August 2011. Last night i received a call from the guards saying the they need to speak to me about a theft that occurred in the apartment , appartently i stole a chest of drawers.. i know the landlord is just trying to get back at me for legally being able to get out of contract.. she has lost three months rent as shes only now rented out the property to someone new it has been vacant since i moved out.

the main issue here is the fact that some one could be so horrible to do that..I didnt take a chest of drawers. in fact i had a spare set and left a chest of drawers so she actually gained a set of drawers not lost a set.. she cleaned the apartment when we moved in and she changed the alarm codes etc on the 29th august... shouldnt she have noticed this 3 months ago if there was something missing.

i have to meet with the guards tonight and im just wondering how they can become invovled in something so silly... would appreciate any help or views. not to sure have i posted it in the right section.

If it was me and i didnt take it then I'd simply tell the gardai that, i'd consider allowing them to search my apartment to prove it and then i'd go to a solicitor and sue the landlord for defamation!

carrieflem

I have talked to a solicitor as she was not a nice landlord at all so i wouldnt trust her,, i just feel upset and hurt that someone would go to that much bother to do that to someone.. i know a few of the guards so i just feel its embarrassing have to go down and declare that i didnt take a chest of drawers... can she still make this lie 3 months later? Im looking forward to posting the outcome tomorrow! can i sue for defamation.. i would love to as i feel she deserves it after everything shes done to me.

tricky D

Print out the thread about the Apartment Issues with the URL, bring it and tell the Garda your story above. That should show the reality ie. that this is petty revenge and she is wasting Garda time.

seamus

carrieflem wrote: »

can i sue for defamation.

I don't think so. Defamation probably contains exclusion which specifically cover complaints made to an authority. However as I mention, there is probably a provision to have her charged with making a false complaint/allegation. If you're willing to talk to a solicitor about it, then that's something to look at.

MagicSean

seamus wrote: »

I don't think so. Defamation probably contains exclusion which specifically cover complaints made to an authority. However as I mention, there is probably a provision to have her charged with making a false complaint/allegation. If you're willing to talk to a solicitor about it, then that's something to look at.

The only way that will happen is by cooperating fully with the Gardaí from the off.

coylemj

Gardai are well used to being used to 'get at' people by false or exaggerated accusations but as an earlier poster has pointed out, they have a duty to investgate when an allegation of a crime is made so do not assume that they will arive with handcuffs at the ready!

Just explain your side of the story and believe me they won't be long figuring out that they're being used by the landlady. Secondhand furniture is worth feck all these days with loads of shops going bust and lots of empty rental properties. Based on the fact that it was a rented property with presumably low-grade furniture, the notion that you would have taken a chest of drawers is laughable. The passge of time also weakens her case against you.

rab!dmonkey

In the US, you have the right to remain silent; is the situation different here?If the OP was to have replied to the Garda's request for an interview with 'No, thank you,' could that be taken as evidence against him/her?

Peregrinus

rab!dmonkey wrote: »

In the US, you have the right to remain silent; is the situation different here?If the OP was to have replied to the Garda's request for an interview with 'No, thank you,' could that be taken as evidence against him/her?

No, the OP could decline to be interviewed, and that would not be evidence against him.

But it probably would arouse the guards's suspicions, and lead to further investigations. Pointing out to the guards that there is a history of bad blood between you and the landlord, and pointing to the three-month delay in reporting, are more likely to lead to the outcome you want than being unco-operative.

krd

carrieflem wrote: »

i just feel upset and hurt that someone would go to that much bother to do that to someone..

There are a lot of really mad and bad people out there. You're lucky if you haven't had worse experiences.

Your ex-landlord probably feels very hard done by you and wants to get a little revenge - even if they're entitled to nothing.

Unfortunately, over the last few years, many of the people who became landlords, had absolutely no idea what they were at. They bought houses to rent where they couldn't really afford the mortgage. They thought they were "business people" but they really weren't.

234

rab!dmonkey wrote: »

In the US, you have the right to remain silent; is the situation different here?If the OP was to have replied to the Garda's request for an interview with 'No, thank you,' could that be taken as evidence against him/her?

Yes, in certain circumstances adverse inferences can be drawn from you failure to answer certain questions when asked by the Gardai. This is mainly done under ss18,19,19A of the Criminal Justice Act 1984 (as amended by the Criminal Justice Act 2007). However, this would almost certainly not happen in this case.

irishh_bob

carrieflem wrote: »

Hi guys, i ve posted before about a terrible landlord we had.. we finally got out of our contract in August 2011 and have been living in a new rented property since the middle of August 2011. Last night i received a call from the guards saying the they need to speak to me about a theft that occurred in the apartment , appartently i stole a chest of drawers.. i know the landlord is just trying to get back at me for legally being able to get out of contract.. she has lost three months rent as shes only now rented out the property to someone new it has been vacant since i moved out.

the main issue here is the fact that some one could be so horrible to do that..I didnt take a chest of drawers. in fact i had a spare set and left a chest of drawers so she actually gained a set of drawers not lost a set.. she cleaned the apartment when we moved in and she changed the alarm codes etc on the 29th august... shouldnt she have noticed this 3 months ago if there was something missing.


i have to meet with the guards tonight and im just wondering how they can become invovled in something so silly... would appreciate any help or views. not to sure have i posted it in the right section.

if it was me , i would choose the right to remain silent , most people assume the guards will be most understanding about your situation with your mean spirited landlord , this is where a lot of people not only get a huge shock but end up incriminating themselves by saying something they shouldnt , your landlord sounds like a louser and as such might be a bit of a dab hand at fooling guards and stitching decent people up , if it was me i wouldnt say anything to the guards even they arrest you and interview you but at the very least , speak to a solicitor before you decide to talk to the cops

the cops are not your friend just because you are innocent !

irishh_bob

rab!dmonkey wrote: »

In the US, you have the right to remain silent; is the situation different here?If the OP was to have replied to the Garda's request for an interview with 'No, thank you,' could that be taken as evidence against him/her?

NO and even they arrest and interview someone and the suspect chooses to remain silent , they still have a chance to tell thier story should a prosecution be brought against them , the DPP is no more likely to order a prosecution case if you say something , that said , its a good idea to provide some information during an interview , say you happened to be in tesco today and someone accused you of robbing items , even you done no such thing , it would be prudent to admit you were in the place but not nesscessery to indulge a liars accusations by trying to explain and counterpoint thier charges , baschically , tell them ( the cops ) as little as possible

irishh_bob

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, the OP could decline to be interviewed, and that would not be evidence against him.

But it probably would arouse the guards's suspicions, and lead to further investigations. Pointing out to the guards that there is a history of bad blood between you and the landlord, and pointing to the three-month delay in reporting, are more likely to lead to the outcome you want than being unco-operative.

the last thing i would do is tell the guards that thier was bad blood between the tennant and the landlord , that gives the tennant motive , most people seem to think that guards ( acting out of moral reasoning ) will spring to the side of the one ( apparently ) being victimised , this isnt the case , the guards doesnt take any past storys of the landlord being unreasonable into account , not unless the landlord was themselves in the dock for antagonising the tennant , that is

bytheglass

carrieflem wrote: »

Im looking forward to posting the outcome tomorrow!

How did you get on?

Zambia

Is this not a civil matter? If the landlord has proof a tenant has removed items can they not debit the bond or sue in civil court. If you did not take the cabinet I Dont see how any cop can charge you. Utter waste of police time this.

irishh_bob

Zambia wrote: »

Is this not a civil matter? If the landlord has proof a tenant has removed items can they not debit the bond or sue in civil court. If you did not take the cabinet I Dont see how any cop can charge you. Utter waste of police time this.

manys a guard earned points from investigating matters which were a waste of time

Pkiernan

Firstly, let me mention that I have nothing but respect for the Gardai.

Anyone who voluntarily talks to the Guards without legal representation is making a mistake in my opinion.

The attached link (although an American video) demonstrates why you should never talk to the police and why lawyers should instruct their clients likewise.

It.s a long video but well worth your time.

It is interesting how even innocent people can talk their way into a conviction. The video shows some of the ways.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

OP, in your case, I would not be talking to any Garda - you are not obliged to.

MagicSean

If you don't volunteer a statement you will most likely be arrested, detained and interviewed. It's pretty reckless to advise someone not to make a statement without highlighting this fact.

coylemj

I respect someone's right to refuse to make a statement, I also recall that after the guy was killed outside Annabel's night club a few years, a priest in the school advised some of the young people to go to the Gardai and make statements. What followed was that only people who made statements were charged and a few of them were convicted, clearly they would have been better off saying nothing.

However in this case the OP has had a completely false allegation made against her by a vindictive landlord, she would be wasting the Garda's time and prolonging the episode by refusing to make a statement. What she needs to do is emphatically deny the allegation, point out that there is zero evidence to back it up and set out the background to how the relationship with the landlord finished so that the Garda can see the motivation for the allegation i.e. it is a vexatious complaint.

I do not agree that she will be arrested if she refuses to make a statement, the Gardai cannot arrest you simply for asserting your constitutional rights and refusing to make a statement does not constitute evidence that can be used to make a case against you.

What might happen if she refuses to make a statement is that the Gardai could turn up on her doorstep with a search warrant, hence she would be well advised to make a statement to stop the investigation before things get out of hand because without her making a statement, all the Gardai have to go on is the landlord's allegation.

ResearchWill

MagicSean wrote: »

If you don't volunteer a statement you will most likely be arrested, detained and interviewed. It's pretty reckless to advise someone not to make a statement without highlighting this fact.

Please Please don't give such rash advice, I work in this area I am a barrister, I always advice people not, I repeat not to speak to the Guards. (in certain cases maybe such as this, it will be agreed between the Guards and the clients solicitor to produce a written statement in answer to a specific statement from the accuser). In most cases the Guards do no more, if a person is arrested it is because it is necessary for the investigation. In any case if the OP is arrested just repeat the mantra "My solicitor advised me not to answer any question"

What people do not realise is that once you answer a question that question and answer can be put before the court, if you say nothing then nothing can be put in front of the court.

Some thing said that the OP believes is innocent can read very badly on a memo of interview.

coylemj

ResearchWill wrote: »

Please Please don't give such rash advice, I work in this area I am a barrister, I always advice people not, I repeat not to speak to the Guards.

Would you agree that if she does not speak to the Gardai that the next logical step is for them to get a search warrant to search her house for the item of furniture she is alleged to have stolen?

Surely if she is 100% innocent and there is no conceivable way that she can be convicted of the alleged crime then she should make a statement to the effect that the accusation is completely false?

charlemont

Just tell the Guard the truth, Seems from your post you have nothing to lose, But if you want to be on the safe side inform a solicitor about this or have a solicitor with you when you make a statement just in case there is a connection between the investigating Guard and the landlady..

ResearchWill

coylemj wrote: »

Would you agree that if she does not speak to the Gardai that the next logical step is for them to get a search warrant to search her house for the item of furniture she is alleged to have stolen?

Surely if she is 100% innocent and there is no conceivable way that she can be convicted of the alleged crime then she should make a statement to the effect that the accusation is completely false?

No I would not agree its the next logical step at all. In many cases I have seen guards ask for a person to attend and the person refused after legal advice and nothing more happened.

I have seen many people convict themselves with their words, I know it seems silly. But I have seen people make statements that they think are innocent but when read to a jury just don't read right. Also most interviews are recorded. A huge problem for people accused of sexual assault or worse is that their clothes are taken off them and they sit being interviewed in thoses paper coveralls, if you answer questions even claiming innocence that video can be shown, if you stay silent nothing can be read to or shown to the court.

I believe the innocence project in the US have shown a very large number of people who they have proven are innocent, gave statements that convicted them. There is a link to the video above.

Remember in this country you do not have to prove you are innocent, they must prove your guilt. Just tell the Guards you have been advised to say nothing to every question.

Or arrange with your solicitor to produce a written statement to be given to the guards. Your solicitor will ensure you say all the right things to show you are innocent and nothing to ge you into trouble.

Zambia

ResearchWill wrote: »

No I would not agree its the next logical step at all. In many cases I have seen guards ask for a person to attend and the person refused after legal advice and nothing more happened.

I would have to agree in this case, we are talking about a crappy old chest of drawers.

Jesus wept Search warrants ? We are going a bit far here for the above item.

Unless you are being interviewed by Detective Garda Harry Potter I dont see how talking to the Gardai in this case could hurt you.

When you moved out did you get your bond back? That should be evidence enough to prove all items were returned.

rab!dmonkey

Pkiernan wrote: »

*Snip*

It is interesting how even innocent people can talk their way into a conviction. The video shows some of the ways.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
*Snip*

I've watched that video before and I agree that not talking to US law enforcement is definitely the way to go. I'm not well versed in law, but I know we share the same basic system as them (common law) and we also have some sort of right to silence.

The thing that worries me is that here there is the possibility that 'inferences' may be drawn from one's silence. It seems to have neutered our right to silence in a uniquely Irish way.

Zambia

Of course an inference will be drawn.

Did you steal the chest of drawers?

A) "No Comment"
Or
"No I did not steal any chest of drawers"

Which is the answer that helps to convince you the person has not stolen the drawers?

irishh_bob

MagicSean wrote: »

If you don't volunteer a statement you will most likely be arrested, detained and interviewed. It's pretty reckless to advise someone not to make a statement without highlighting this fact.

being arrested isnt the end of the world , you can give no info but your name during an interview and it wont make any difference should thier be a court case although as i said earlier its not wise to say you were in cork on tuesday if you were in actual fact in limerick , better broadly state where you were at a particular time but add nothing further

irishh_bob

coylemj wrote: »

I respect someone's right to refuse to make a statement, I also recall that after the guy was killed outside Annabel's night club a few years, a priest in the school advised some of the young people to go to the Gardai and make statements. What followed was that only people who made statements were charged and a few of them were convicted, clearly they would have been better off saying nothing.

However in this case the OP has had a completely false allegation made against her by a vindictive landlord, she would be wasting the Garda's time and prolonging the episode by refusing to make a statement. What she needs to do is emphatically deny the allegation, point out that there is zero evidence to back it up and set out the background to how the relationship with the landlord finished so that the Garda can see the motivation for the allegation i.e. it is a vexatious complaint.

I do not agree that she will be arrested if she refuses to make a statement, the Gardai cannot arrest you simply for asserting your constitutional rights and refusing to make a statement does not constitute evidence that can be used to make a case against you.

What might happen if she refuses to make a statement is that the Gardai could turn up on her doorstep with a search warrant, hence she would be well advised to make a statement to stop the investigation before things get out of hand because without her making a statement, all the Gardai have to go on is the landlord's allegation.

i had a false accusation made against me not so long ago yet was arrested , the guards didnt go any easier on me , i told them nothing as experience has taught me not to trust the guards unconditionally , not every guard cares whether your a decent skin and the landlord is a slimeball

irishh_bob

coylemj wrote: »

I respect someone's right to refuse to make a statement, I also recall that after the guy was killed outside Annabel's night club a few years, a priest in the school advised some of the young people to go to the Gardai and make statements. What followed was that only people who made statements were charged and a few of them were convicted, clearly they would have been better off saying nothing.

However in this case the OP has had a completely false allegation made against her by a vindictive landlord, she would be wasting the Garda's time and prolonging the episode by refusing to make a statement. What she needs to do is emphatically deny the allegation, point out that there is zero evidence to back it up and set out the background to how the relationship with the landlord finished so that the Garda can see the motivation for the allegation i.e. it is a vexatious complaint.

I do not agree that she will be arrested if she refuses to make a statement, the Gardai cannot arrest you simply for asserting your constitutional rights and refusing to make a statement does not constitute evidence that can be used to make a case against you.

What might happen if she refuses to make a statement is that the Gardai could turn up on her doorstep with a search warrant, hence she would be well advised to make a statement to stop the investigation before things get out of hand because without her making a statement, all the Gardai have to go on is the landlord's allegation.

your post assumes that the guard will ( out of empathy ) sympathise with the tennant - OP , i see it differently , by pointing to the fact that thier has been passed conflict between the OP and the landlord , the tennant has motive to steal

as for the possibility of the guards showing up with a search warrant , this is highly unlikely unless the accuser has pull with guards who are high in command

irishh_bob

Zambia wrote: »

Of course an inference will be drawn.

Did you steal the chest of drawers?

A) "No Comment"
Or
"No I did not steal any chest of drawers"

Which is the answer that helps to convince you the person has not stolen the drawers?

why not instead wait until any potential court case to answer , NO , i did not steal a chest of drawers , the garda inspector who asks questions in a court is not allowed work you over like the guards do in the interview room of a police station yet how you answer questions in this hostile pressurised envioroment can be used against you in a subsequent court setting , say nothing , you have nothing to loose

most people have never had any dealings with the guards and their default possition is to assume the guards are on their side due to the fact they are innocent , this is foolish

ResearchWill

Zambia wrote: »

Of course an inference will be drawn.

Did you steal the chest of drawers?

A) "No Comment"
Or
"No I did not steal any chest of drawers"

Which is the answer that helps to convince you the person has not stolen the drawers?

It matters not a jolt what the Garda thinks, once you answer questions the interview can go before the court, if you say nothing the memo does not exist. Guards are very good at asking questions where innocent answers can be twisted. I have nevere seen the refusal to answer cause a problem, I have never seen the agreement to answer not cause an issue.

Are you a lawyer, have you ever run a trial if the answer to either of those is no please do not give legal advice. I have seen lives ruined because people gave statements innocent people.

ResearchWill

rab!dmonkey wrote: »

I've watched that video before and I agree that not talking to US law enforcement is definitely the way to go. I'm not well versed in law, but I know we share the same basic system as them (common law) and we also have some sort of right to silence.

The thing that worries me is that here there is the possibility that 'inferences' may be drawn from one's silence. It seems to have neutered our right to silence in a uniquely Irish way.

Inferences cannot be drawn except in very very rare cases, you have to be warned in advance and quoted the law, I have only ever seen it done once. It would not and could not be used in this case.

ResearchWill

irishh_bob wrote: »

being arrested isnt the end of the world , you can give no info but your name during an interview and it wont make any difference should thier be a court case although as i said earlier its not wise to say you were in cork on tuesday if you were in actual fact in limerick , better broadly state where you were at a particular time but add nothing further

If you have an alibi defense, you will be told by the Judge in Court on the first return date the alibi warning, your solicitor will then inform the state that you can prove or produce an alibi witness, and that's the end of that.

irishh_bob

ResearchWill wrote: »

If you have an alibi defense, you will be told by the Judge in Court on the first return date the alibi warning, your solicitor will then inform the state that you can prove or produce an alibi witness, and that's the end of that.

if you have no alibi , its better to outline your wherabouts on a particular day , i come at this from the point of view of someone who was in a particular place at a particular time but who did nothing wrong , in this istance , i would not deny being where i was

ResearchWill

irishh_bob wrote: »

if you have no alibi , its better to outline your wherabouts on a particular day , i come at this from the point of view of someone who was in a particular place at a particular time but who did nothing wrong , in this istance , i would not deny being where i was

But you do not have to do it then, the issue is not what you say but the very fact once you answer a question that can be put before the jury, the video can be put before the jury. How many times have we said when looking at someone on TV saying "I did not do it" and we say God he looks guilty. If nothing is said nothing can go before the court.

To be honest before I practiced I would have said the same as most posters on this forum, but now for very good legal and practical reasons just say nothing.

The guards don't ask simple questions like "did you steal it" they ask questions that lead you to getting confused, remember the events are often months in the past, you answer a question one way and another a different way later they are inconsistent, that's put before the court it can look like the person is telling porkies.

Pkiernan

Here is a reason why the OP should not talk to the guards:

1. A 3rd party witness saw someone take the chest of drawers in question from the apartment.
2. The 3rd party witness, although genuinely mistaken, is convinced that it was the OP that took the chest of drawers.
3. Guard says: "Did you steal the chest of drawers?"
4. OP says: "No".
5. Guard says: "You are lying, an independent witness saw you steal it".

Now there is no way the Guard will let the matter drop, as in his mind he has been lied to.

REMEMBER: ANYTHING you say can be used against you. Nothing you say will be used to your benefit by the Gardai.

source

Pkiernan wrote: »

REMEMBER: [SIZE="5"]ANYTHING[/SIZE] you say can be used against you. Nothing you say will be used to your benefit by the Gardai.

That is not in the caution, the caution is: "You are not obliged to say anything unless you wish to do so, but whatever you say will be taken down in writing and may be given in evidence."

People on here need to remember that the Garda's job is both to find the person responsible for a crime, and to eliminate those who are innocent from the investigation.

By refusing to talk to the Gardai the op is only going to raise their suspicion more. By talking about it and telling them what happened in a cautioned statement (not memo of interview) the op will get to tell their side of the story.

irishh_bob

source wrote: »

That is not in the caution, the caution is: "You are not obliged to say anything unless you wish to do so, but whatever you say will be taken down in writing and may be given in evidence."

People on here need to remember that the Garda's job is both to find the person responsible for a crime, and to eliminate those who are innocent from the investigation.

By refusing to talk to the Gardai the op is only going to raise their suspicion more. By talking about it and telling them what happened in a cautioned statement (not memo of interview) the op will get to tell their side of the story.

your either very naieve or a guard using garda speak

1st of all , whether a guard is suspicious of the OP is nether here nor there, guards are required to be more suspicious than your average person and as such thier suspicions are often misplaced , no summons was ever brought based on suspicion alone , trying to make a guard think you are cleaner than a bishops sheets is foolish in several ways

Ms Minnie Mouse

I assume we are still keeping this as being a discussion about the accusation of the theft of a chest of drawers and not the Book of Kells? Let's face it, when talking about the Gardai, there are good and bad in every profession. More so depending on whether you do DPP or defence work ;-)

OP, How did you get on?

MagicSean

Ms Minnie Mouse wrote: »

I assume we are still keeping this as being a discussion about the accusation of the theft of a chest of drawers and not the Book of Kells?

Same crime.

irishh_bob

MagicSean wrote: »

Same crime.

to an ambitious cop , yes

MagicSean

irishh_bob wrote: »

to an ambitious cop , yes

Are you suggesting that only people with valuable property should be considered victims of theft? Or are you simply suggesting that the value of the property should decide how much manpower is put into an investigation. Personally I think all thefts should be investigated. I don't think your wealth should decide what level of justice you get.

irishh_bob

MagicSean wrote: »

Are you suggesting that only people with valuable property should be considered victims of theft? Or are you simply suggesting that the value of the property should decide how much manpower is put into an investigation. Personally I think all thefts should be investigated. I don't think your wealth should decide what level of justice you get.

no im saying an ambitious guard will put as much effort into a stolen can of coke as a drug deal involving real criminals

johnnyskeleton

irishh_bob wrote: »

no im saying an ambitious guard will put as much effort into a stolen can of coke as a drug deal involving real criminals

That's demonstrably untrue. The vast majority of top gardai have been promoted up through CAB, serious crime or some other messy and dangerous job.

As far as I know the only head of CAB who hasn't made it to Garda Commissioner / Assistant Commissioner is the current head of CAB, and that's probably only a matter of time.

irishh_bob

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

That's demonstrably untrue. The vast majority of top gardai have been promoted up through CAB, serious crime or some other messy and dangerous job.

As far as I know the only head of CAB who hasn't made it to Garda Commissioner / Assistant Commissioner is the current head of CAB, and that's probably only a matter of time.

im talking about rank and file who are gunning for seargant , not top brass

Zambia

ResearchWill wrote: »

It matters not a jolt what the Garda thinks, once you answer questions the interview can go before the court, if you say nothing the memo does not exist. Guards are very good at asking questions where innocent answers can be twisted. I have nevere seen the refusal to answer cause a problem, I have never seen the agreement to answer not cause an issue.

Are you a lawyer, have you ever run a trial if the answer to either of those is no please do not give legal advice. I have seen lives ruined because people gave statements innocent people.

Yes it does matter what a Garda knows. As source put previously the Garda is trying to both eliminate avenues of enquiry as well as convict the guilty. By refusing to answer questions you throw a great big cloud of doubt over your involvement.

With respect your dealings are at a certain level (when people end up in court). On a daily basis people talk to police tell their side of the story and hear nothing more of it. No solicitors are contacted at all.

As for other posts on Tricky questions what tricky questions are we Talking about in this case? Can anyone suggest a tricky question that could be put to the OP?

What's this about working you over in the interview room. Are we talking real life or TV here?

ResearchWill

Zambia wrote: »

Yes it does matter what a Garda knows. As source put previously the Garda is trying to both eliminate avenues of enquiry as well as convict the guilty. By refusing to answer questions you throw a great big cloud of doubt over your involvement.

With respect your dealings are at a certain level (when people end up in court). On a daily basis people talk to police tell their side of the story and hear nothing more of it. No solicitors are contacted at all.

As for other posts on Tricky questions what tricky questions are we Talking about in this case? Can anyone suggest a tricky question that could be put to the OP?

What's this about working you over in the interview room. Are we talking real life or TV here?

As a peron who works real life in the criminal courts every day, I have seen plenty of people who have spoken to the Guards having their own words convict them. I have never seen a person who has stayed silent convict themselves. It's simple if you stay silent your words can not convict you if you speak they can.

An example, fictional but an example, 18 year old boy meets a girl they mess around now he knows she is 16. But he has been told by loads of people that's the age of consent. Ok with me so far. They have full sex, protection used all ok. Now then a few weeks later she tells her friend she had sex with Mr. X her friend puts it on face book, the girls parents find out. Guards interview the girl she gives a wishy washy interview, guards arrest young man, he gives full interview admits knowing she was 16 but it's ok thats legal admits having sex but it's ok she consented. As he is 18 his parents aren't there, he does not need a solicitor to tell him it's ok she consented.

But he is in trouble, the age of consent is 17 not 16 the usual defense is believing the girl was 17 or over, he has now talked himself into a conviction. Say the girl gets into the stand and says nothing happened, well the Jury have a lovely interview and statement to be read where the guy says he did it, and knew she was 16. He is now a sex offender.

By all means agree to provide a written statement drafted by a solicitor, it can be as simple as I took nothing from the apartment. But the trouble is when people try to convince the guards remember you don't have to, there is a reason for the right to silence, use it.

source

ResearchWill wrote: »

Zambia wrote: »

Yes it does matter what a Garda knows. As source put previously the Garda is trying to both eliminate avenues of enquiry as well as convict the guilty. By refusing to answer questions you throw a great big cloud of doubt over your involvement.

With respect your dealings are at a certain level (when people end up in court). On a daily basis people talk to police tell their side of the story and hear nothing more of it. No solicitors are contacted at all.

As for other posts on Tricky questions what tricky questions are we Talking about in this case? Can anyone suggest a tricky question that could be put to the OP?

What's this about working you over in the interview room. Are we talking real life or TV here?

As a peron who works real life in the criminal courts every day, I have seen plenty of people who have spoken to the Guards having their own words convict them. I have never seen a person who has stayed silent convict themselves. It's simple if you stay silent your words can not convict you if you speak they can.

An example, fictional but an example, 18 year old boy meets a girl they mess around now he knows she is 16. But he has been told by loads of people that's the age of consent. Ok with me so far. They have full sex, protection used all ok. Now then a few weeks later she tells her friend she had sex with Mr. X her friend puts it on face book, the girls parents find out. Guards interview the girl she gives a wishy washy interview, guards arrest young man, he gives full interview admits knowing she was 16 but it's ok thats legal admits having sex but it's ok she consented. As he is 18 his parents aren't there, he does not need a solicitor to tell him it's ok she consented.

But he is in trouble, the age of consent is 17 not 16 the usual defense is believing the girl was 17 or over, he has now talked himself into a conviction. Say the girl gets into the stand and says nothing happened, well the Jury have a lovely interview and statement to be read where the guy says he did it, and knew she was 16. He is now a sex offender.

By all means agree to provide a written statement drafted by a solicitor, it can be as simple as I took nothing from the apartment. But the trouble is when people try to convince the guards remember you don't have to, there is a reason for the right to silence, use it.

In your example, under Irish law he was a sex offender the minute he got into bed and had sex with her. It's the act of committing the crime that makes him the sex offender, not telling the truth to the Gardai.

Making an ill informed statement to Gardai wouldn't change that. A solicitor cannot tell a suspect to lie, just to remain silent. Which in such a serious case wouldnt do your suspect any favours.

Anyway enough of the hypotheticals, the op didn't steal the drawers, the op is not going to be interviewed. The op will however make a voluntary cautioned statement, where they will tell their side of the story.

Both the ops statement and landlords statement will go in a file with a report from the member, recommending prosecution/no prosecution.

Some people on here are making this out to be a massive thing.

Op if you wish to seek legal advice before hand then that's fine. But there's a big difference between a interrogation/interview and making a cautioned statement.

The former will involve video tapes, and questions, the latter is a member writing down your version of events in your words as you say them. Once you tell the truth (you didnt steal the drawers) there's nothing to worry about.