6 years jail for garlic scam

ArmaniJeanss

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Yes if they can't apply the law to everyone don't have it at all.

Interesting logic.

This apply to murderers as well?

Since whoever killed Raonaid Murray got away scot free, should we let the likes of Joe O'Reilly out as well?

dvpower

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Yes if they can't apply the law to everyone don't have it at all.

Open up the prisons - free everyone. :rolleyes:

gozunda

dvpower wrote: »

Just balancing that out a bit.

Well done, you have beautifully missed the point through that ol' quoting out of context gag...

OK for the hard of understanding, here it is again - the relevance of
defrauding the state (and ourselves btw) be it a bit more or less is completely beside the point that has been made in this thread. The fact remains this type of behaviour is rife as a result of individuals continuing to exploit such disparities for opportunities of personal gain as a result of inequitable taxes and duties. I do not suggest that this behaviour is right but it would appear to be just as prevalent amongst Joe Citizens as it is the business sector. Thats why the stone throwing exhibited in this thread is more is redolent of "lets get the rich b*st*rd" school of thought than a disparate discussion of the offence committed.

The small man knowingly buying and smoking his contraband cigarettes is just as much committing a crime as this importer of garlic

The garlic came to an amount lost to revenue of € 1,600,000
The loss to the state for dodgy tobacco comes to a whopping €250,000,000

THE STATE imposed fines of €250,000 arising from illegal tobacco sales and smuggling last year, according to Revenue figures.
The annual loss to the exchequer from black market cigarettes is about 1,000 times the amount imposed in fines.
In 2011 a total of 102 convictions for cigarette smuggling led to €136,300 in fines and 31 custodial sentences, 21 of which were suspended. The longest of the 10 sentences which were served was 12 months.
A total of 57 convictions relating to the illegal sale of cigarettes resulted in €115,850 in fines and 14 custodial sentences, seven of which were served, the longest of which was three years, with one year suspended.

(LINK)


Anyone who knowingly buys dodgy cigarettes or other contraband is in my opinion committing a similarly serious offence but hey if its as you are implying it’s just Joe Citizen enjoying a sneaky fag well and obviously thats different and ok then....

SEPT 23 1989

That woman in Blanchardstown was sentenced today to 6 years in prison for driving into a taxi driver snapping his spine in two

6 years

JP Liz V1

You get less for murder these days

Chucky the tree

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

You get less for murder these days

No you don't.

dvpower

gozunda wrote: »

Anyone who knowingly buys dodgy cigarettes or other contraband is in my opinion committing a similarly serious offence but hey if its as you are implying it’s just Joe Citizen enjoying a sneaky fag well and obviously thats different and ok then....

If you buy a pack of smuggled cigarettes with a loss to Revenue <€10, you think its as serious an offence as this case with a loss of €1.6m?

All crimes are equal now? Bizarre.

endabob1

realies wrote: »

Sure most people when caught confess up and would pay anything not to be sent to prison,If the bankers with there millions squirreled away say the same will that be alright then

Anyway have to go,have a good day all.

Missing the point completely.

His reward for co-operation is a scentence longer than the suggested, what message does that send out to other white collar fraudsters?
Most people when caught do not confess up and volunteer additional information & start making payments on their debt, quite a few of them disappear with their ill gotten gains and if I was in a similar position I would be packing my cash into suitcases and heading to Northern Cyprus.

sbsquarepants

Fúck him. I won't loose any sleep over it - if you robbed 1.6m and got caught you wouldn't be allowed just give the money back and say no harm, no foul. And as for that Charlie O'Connor clown saying anyone who knows him will tell you he's a decent , hard working and honest man!! Yea, compared to your shower of cúnts he may well be. But to normal standards he is not an honest or a decent man - he's a fúcking crook and he's being treated like a crook, good enough for him!

mconigol

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Fúck him. I won't loose any sleep over it - if you robbed 1.6m and got caught you wouldn't be allowed just give the money back and say no harm, no foul. And as for that Charlie O'Connor clown saying anyone who knows him will tell you he's a decent , hard working and honest man!! Yea, compared to your shower of cúnts he may well be. But to normal standards he is not an honest or a decent man - he's a fúcking crook and he's being treated like a crook, good enough for him!

Not paying a tax is not the same as committing a robbery.

Ironically he is probably getting punished because of his background. If he was from a disadvantaged background with numerous convictions for assault etc. we would probably get more leniency.

JP Liz V1

Chucky the tree wrote: »

No you don't.

Manslaughter still murder in my book but you do get less

dvpower

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Manslaughter still murder in my book but you do get less

Your book is incorrect.

Howjoe1

"A woman has been jailed for 6 years for killing a taxi driver. In the first case of its kind Claire Nolan has been sentenced for crushing her victim to death with her car. 66 year old Michael Duffy died in his son's driveway at Wellview Grove in Blanchardstown in 2008. The 25 year old killer, from Sheephill Green in Blanchardstown admitted manslaughter."

news reports on the matter C&P.

Howjoe1

dvpower wrote: »

Your book is incorrect.

so is it more correct to say 6 yrs for killing someone?

benway

Howjoe1 wrote: »

"A woman has been jailed for 6 years for killing a taxi driver. In the first case of its kind Claire Nolan has been sentenced for crushing her victim to death with her car. 66 year old Michael Duffy died in his son's driveway at Wellview Grove in Blanchardstown in 2008. The 25 year old killer, from Sheephill Green in Blanchardstown admitted manslaughter."

news reports on the matter C&P.

That's manslaughter, not murder. Murder carries mandatory life under Section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1990.

Howjoe1 wrote: »

so is it more correct to say 6 yrs for killing someone?

Might possibly be correct to say that people have been sentenced to six years for manslaughter in the particular circumstances of the case, and given the particular circumstances of the accused, where the degree of moral culpability was deemed to have fallen short of the standard of wilful killing necessary to ground a conviction for murder.

The Central Criminal Court have clearly set out their reasoning for the imposition of substantial prison sentences in these cases, including a comparison with offences of violence:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77548631&postcount=384

Hope that helps.

Howjoe1

benway wrote: »

That's manslaughter, not murder. Murder carries mandatory life under Section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1990.

I never said it was murder.

turbobaby

That killer will serve less than 4 years, guaranteed.

I wonder was she a net contributor to the revenue and society. Doubtful!

JP Liz V1

Just an example to add to my point

Wayne O'Donoghue sentenced to four years in prison for the manslaughter of Robert Holohan

dvpower

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Just an example to add to my point

What is your point?
That judges, when sentencing, should review the entire history of criminal sentences, take the lowest one, and then come up with a sentence based on that?

benway

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Just an example to add to my point

Wayne O'Donoghue sentenced to four years in prison for the manslaughter of Robert Holohan

Your point is totally frivolous, youre not comparing like with like. Give a read of that judgment above - 9 1/2 years for €250k dole fraud - and then come back to me.

gozunda

dvpower wrote: »

If you buy a pack of smuggled cigarettes with a loss to Revenue <€10, you think its as serious an offence as this case with a loss of €1.6m All crimes are equal now? Bizarre.

You really didn'y get the point of the post did you dvp?


OK
So you buy a pack of smuggled cigarettes, and your 10 mates buy one each, and their 10 mates buy one and so on ad infinitum. Together they all knowlingly support the guy who is selling 10000 dodgy cigarettes and the other guy who is importing 100000 dodgy cigarettes depriving the state of more revenue in a month than the garlic guy could in 10 years...

So that is how this is just as a serious an offence...I believe its called zero tolerance btw and its about time to look around and see just how many people are intentionaly defrauding the state and others by their behaviour... "ah sure its only a packet of fags - sure that wouldn't do any harm yer honour"....

And of course garlic is so much worse for you than fags...

dvpower

gozunda wrote: »

You really didn'y get the point of the post did you dvp?

Yeah. I got the point. It was very clear.

gozunda wrote:

Anyone who knowingly buys dodgy cigarettes or other contraband is in my opinion committing a similarly serious offence but hey if its as you are implying it’s just Joe Citizen enjoying a sneaky fag well and obviously thats different and ok then....

If you meant to say something else, then say it, but don't expect us to guess what you really mean.

Chucky the tree

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Just an example to add to my point

Wayne O'Donoghue sentenced to four years in prison for the manslaughter of Robert Holohan

Is this another point you got from the book that also contains "manslaughter is still murder"?

JP Liz V1

I guess my point I was trying to make was that you can take a life in Ireland and get a lesser sentence

ArmaniJeanss

gozunda wrote: »

So that is how this is just as a serious an offence...I believe its called zero tolerance btw and its about time to look around and see just how many people are intentionaly defrauding the state and others by their behaviour... "ah sure its only a packet of fags - sure that wouldn't do any harm yer honour"....

I don't actually think its an offence to buy street cigarettes, let alone a 'yer honour' offence to which zero telerance needs to be applied.

Its currently up to the seller to be licensed properly, and to pay the appropriate taxes.

plasmaguy

Large scale and deliberate tax evasion, as was the case here, is treasonous in my and many other people's book.

He was lucky only to get 6 years, given that it was treasonous. That money was denied to the exchequer, which could be spent on teachers, nurses, ambulances and so on.

It might even have cost someone their life, in our run down health system. There is always a knock on effect from under payment of tax. Someone somewhere suffers, usually the most vulnerable.

This guy was a multimillionaire who lived well based on a scam.

mconigol

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I don't actually think its an offence to buy street cigarettes, let alone a 'yer honour' offence to which zero telerance needs to be applied.

Its currently up to the seller to be licensed properly, and to pay the appropriate taxes.

Emmmm...yes it is. You're not paying duty or VAT. That's like saying it's grand to buy washed diesel.

ArmaniJeanss

mconigol wrote: »

Emmmm...yes it is. You're not paying duty or VAT. That's like saying it's grand to buy washed diesel.

Different scenario I think.
Isn't the actual offence there that you have illegal diesel that is not for sale to the general public, or that has those funny dyes in it?

Like I've seen the washed diesel programs on TV and they make clear that its an offence on the drivers part. That there are specific laws making it illegal to buy or possess these products.

But have also seen the equivalent programs re cigarettes in markets and have never seen a customs officer mention that there is an offence being committed by the buyer?

And when I buy cigarettes in Dunnes or Spar, I never pay duty either. I pay an amount specified by the shop and the tax and duty obligations are on the shop.

cock robin

mconigol wrote: »

Not paying a tax is not the same as committing a robbery.

Ironically he is probably getting punished because of his background. If he was from a disadvantaged background with numerous convictions for assault etc. we would probably get more leniency.

His backround ? He was brought up in Tallaght and his parents used to pack fruit and veg in a garage at the side of their house. So what point you are making there escapes me. Unless your making the case that like thousands of other criminals from Tallaght who broke the law got caught and got sentenced, he is no different to any other citizen who knowingly sets out to defraud the state and gets busted. The only difference is that Mr Begley had an excellent standard of living as opposed to some who steal cos they could'nt be bothered to get a job and provide for themself. His motive was either greed or he thought he and he alone should determine the import rates for garlic as he saw fit. In either case he broke the law and now has time to reflect on his actions.

cock robin

BarackPyjama wrote: »

Or battering an OAP to death. Whatever you want to call it. My point remains. :rolleyes:

Your point remains alright. Mr Begley was charged with a case of tax evasion which he pleaded guilty to and was sentenced. Rapists, murderers, paedophiles and such like should not be compared to his crime and nor should the sentences they recieve. They are totally different crimes and carry different tarrifs. Why if you want to defend the guy you would continue to compare him or his sentence to that of sex offenders is just weird. He is not and should not be grouped in such a category. It amazes me that the bleeding hearts feel it nessecary to make such comparisons, is it that they realise this may be the only avenue left open to them in an effort to secure the relase of this criminal, compare his sentence to rape and murder. FFS get real.