6 years jail for garlic scam

benway

dotsman wrote: »

Not defending the guy in any way. Tax evasion is a serious crime. However, it was non-violent, and a monetary punishment is probably just as effective (and financially better for the taxpayer).

Compared to this scum-of-the-earth who gets another free pass by our great judges...

I mean, in fairness, at some stage you just have to say "this fcuker is always going to be a drain on society" and just throw away the key. And for me, he crossed that line long before his 60th conviction.

Here we go again. A €1.6m drain on the state? I somehow doubt it, unless he comes up with one hell of a scam.

blatantrereg

johnwalters wrote: »

yeh because an entrepeneur creates jobs and wealth. Th e person on the dole is a parasite

He creates wealth for China at Ireland's expense.
And he might well be infecting you with parasites tbh.
Class snob mentalities are funny.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

eth0 wrote: »

There is no fcuking need to go to China for fooking garlic. you can grow it here


Import duty should be 500%

its my ****ing money if I want to spend it on chinese garlic I shouldn't have to piss 500% of it away to the government for the privelege

jesus christ

what next, no foreign businesses operating in the country unless they pay the leprechaun tax?

later12

gurramok wrote: »

Money as in tax evasion takes the high ground over morality(killing a person), nice to see you have the welfare of society in your mind.

It's not a question of either/or.

If it were, we wouldn't be 'wasting police time' with petty theft, insurance fraud, general tax evasion, and indeed white collar crime and breaches of company law of the sort David Drumm's activities are often said to exemplify.

I didn't know you were an apologist for that sort of crime, but the criminal legal code is in place to preside over all criminal offences, variously and at the same time. Sending this man to prison for evading his tax commitments to the tune of €1.6 million does not cancel out the crimes of others, whose cases will go to trial on their own account, taking into account the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances in question peculiar to each case.

If this penalty is argued to be excessive, then it can be re-examined. If another criminal's sentence is argued to be inadequate, then that can be argued too. But such sentences have no bearing on this case, nor ought they.

cock robin

spockety wrote: »

And so too might he 100+ people who work for them?

That is Mr Begley's problem, he made the decision to break the law and evade tax and jepordise his company and his employees and he alone is respnsible. It is a family business and I am sure another family member will fill the breach. If a company has to resort to tax evasion to make a profit then it cannot be a viable business to begin with.

gurramok

later12 wrote: »

It's not a question of either/or.

If it were, we wouldn't be 'wasting police time' with petty theft, insurance fraud, general tax evasion, and indeed white collar crime and breaches of company law of the sort David Drumm's activities are often said to exemplify.

I didn't know you were an apologist for that sort of crime, but the criminal legal code is in place to preside over all criminal offences, variously and at the same time. Sending this man to prison for evading his tax commitments to the tune of €1.6 million does not cancel out the crimes of others, whose cases will go to trial on their own account, taking into account the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances in question peculiar to each case.

If this penalty is argued to be excessive, then it can be re-examined. If another criminal's sentence is argued to be inadequate, then that can be argued too. But such sentences have no bearing on this case, nor ought they.

Yes I see where you come from. Knock some innocent person out while killing them is lesser in the criminal legal code than tax evasion on garlic.

Now, lets re-assure the public again. Getting punched to death by a randomer on the street is of less importance than garlic in the eyes of the law.

I'd rather a safe society acting against aggressive human violence than one that takes tax evasion as precedence over violence.

benway

blatantrereg wrote: »

Class snob mentalities are funny.

I can almost see the thought processes ... prison is for scumbags ... I know what scumbags are, they're lads from council houses with adidas trackie bottoms and slug 'taches, drinkin' dutch gold and doin' yokes ... but this guy's an ootreprenoor ... I bet he drives a Merc an' everythin' ... but he robbed €1.6m off the state ... but yah, I'd probably do the same, and fair play to him ... wait, he can't be going to jail, that's for scumbags ... does not compute ...

cock robin wrote: »

If a company has to resort to tax evasion to make a profit then it cannot be a viable business to begin with.

And if it didn't need to, and it's about pure greed, by my reading of the nearest case I can find that makes it even worse in the eyes of the law.

Eric Cartman

Baneblade wrote: »

he defrauded the state of €1.6m over 4 years

A) he still paid some import duty
everything else in his company was above board. I highly doubt he became the success he is in business without handing over a lot more than €1.6m to the government. PRSI, VAT, Import Duty at the lower rate, motor tax on the trucks, duty on the fuel etc.....

I really think a man who employs 100 people and probably pumps more than €2m a year in various taxes into the goverment coffers shouldnt be treated this way considering drains on society who cost the taxpayer similar amounts in costs for gards, judges, courts, prisons, dole all get suspended sentances for their crimes.

gurramok

benway wrote: »

And if it didn't need to, and it's about pure greed, by my reading of the nearest case I can find that makes it even worse in the eyes of the law.

Making things up are we? There is nothing in the article about greed. Looks to me the man was trying to keep his business afloat against extortionate taxes and keeping 100+ people employed.

cock robin

Eric Cartman wrote: »

A) he still paid some import duty
everything else in his company was above board. I highly doubt he became the success he is in business without handing over a lot more than €1.6m to the government. PRSI, VAT, Import Duty at the lower rate, motor tax on the trucks, duty on the fuel etc.....

I really think a man who employs 100 people and probably pumps more than €2m a year in various taxes into the goverment coffers shouldnt be treated this way considering drains on society who cost the taxpayer similar amounts in costs for gards, judges, courts, prisons, dole all get suspended sentances for their crimes.

He became successful thanks to his mother and father who had the company well established before he ever got involved. This bullsh1t about him being a successful businessman is nonsense. He took over a company from his parents. Importing any product and trying to evade the correct import tax is a crime it is as simple as that, regardless of how many people he employs or how much legitamate tax he may or may not have paid. The greedy fcuk got caught and got a stretch for his troubles.

benway

benway wrote: »

General deterrence is a legitimate aim in sentencing in this country, plus the offences must surely be at the very top end of the scale. The case law sets out the factors to be taken into consideration:

i) the gravity of the offences;
ii) the circumstances in which these offences were carried out;
iii) the nature of the offences;
iv) the continuing duration of their commission;
v) the role played by the accused in them;
vi) The accused's personal circumstances;
vii) the circumstances of the company;
viii) any aggravating or mitigating factor; and
ix) the principles of proportionality and totality.

Seems that it's an aggravating factor if the offence was one of pure greed, where the company is profitable and stable.

I don't need to make anything up, I'm just sharing what appear to be the pertinent sentencing principles. Read the case note if you like, I think I'm right about this.

Btw, it's these principles that are applicable, not those governing murder or assault.

Guy:Incognito

AntiRip wrote: »

So he scams the state for 1.6m and now the state (us) will pay roughly e500,000 to jail him.

Justice wins again yeah!

What super logic. The government loses money jailing all prisoners. Should we just close all the jails cos they dont make a profit?

Samba

Thread reminds me of this..

http://files.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/homer.jpg

I assume broadsheet.ie are in accordance with copyright law relating to this image

It certainly is excessive.

Otherwise it wouldn't have made the headlines in RTE today.

Bloody Vampires who makes these stupid laws!

skelliser

The speed of the inquiry & length of jail sentence suggests illegal importation of garlic is more serious than collapsing the banks.

Garlic is obviously more systemically important to irelands economy!!

goose2005

blatantrereg wrote: »

I really think the tarriff is justified. How can it be a good idea to import something we can produce easily ourselves?

Because it isn't the 18th century any more? Importing is better if it's cheaper than home producing. Irish landowners are already massively subsidised. Our entire food policy is built around providing steady income for landowners; consumers are rarely thought of.

Aside from the obvious economic and environmental considerations, there are serious health concerns as well.

Because Irish produce has a perfect record?

Dirk Gently

krudler wrote: »

Irish judges: tough on white collar crimes, soft touches on actual criminals.

because white collar isn't actual crime right?
We have a very poor record on white collar crime, actually a non existent record before this case.

Run_to_da_hills

So after this we will see the price of super market Garlic sky rocket.

podge3

This guy cons the state of of €1.6M and gets 6 years.

So Seanie Fitz should get 112,500 years as he cost the country €30 billion?

I'm sure I'm missing something here........

blatantrereg

goose2005 wrote: »

Because it isn't the 18th century any more? Importing is better if it's cheaper than home producing. Irish landowners are already massively subsidised. Our entire food policy is built around providing steady income for landowners; consumers are rarely thought of.

Once again, that is the whole point. People dodging import taxes are what make it impossible for local produce to compete. He's killing indigenous production.

Because Irish produce has a perfect record?

Not at all, but you're a lot better off with food from the EU in general than outside. There's lots published about the real and severe issues with Chinese crops, some of which I linked to already. This is based on what is known and acknowledged only - which might be only the top of the iceberg when you consider that it's illegal for a foreign person/agency to inspect Chinese food production.

Sonnenblumen

Mr Taxman hates smart asses and severe punishment is routine.

I hope he kept a few cloves for inside, could come in handy.

Howjoe1

THE JUDGE SAID HE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO GIVE HIM A SIX YEAR JAIL SENTENCE. CAN'T WAIT FOR THE TERMS OF THE BANKERS JAIL SENTENCES. I'M SURE WE WILL GET GOOD OLD JUSTICE IN IRELAND.

AND YES I AM SHOUTING.

hollypink

I dont get it. Why is the tax on garlic so much higher than apples? If the high tax on garlic is to protect local industry, well does the local apple industry not also need similar protection? And I've seen french and spanish garlic in the shops but not irish garlic which seems strange if the tax is to protect it.

Chinese garlic isnt very nice anyway, I dont buy it myself.

patrickjquinn

Hey guys, i am generally not the activist type but i couldn't let this one slide.

i'm just looking to draw peoples attention to the petition in support of Paul Begley to the High Court or other governing bodies to have this sentence overturned or at the very least reduced?

Im not looking to incite anything OTT here, just trying to do my bit to right what in my eyes is a pretty big wrong.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/something-stinks/

What you think? Any takers?

Cheers

benway

patrickjquinn wrote: »

Hey guys, i am generally not the activist type but i couldn't let this one slide.

i'm just looking to draw peoples attention to the petition in support of Paul Begley to the High Court or other governing bodies to have this sentence overturned or at the very least reduced?

Im not looking to incite anything OTT here, just trying to do my bit to right what in my eyes is a pretty big wrong.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/something-stinks/

What you think? Any takers?

Cheers

I think that he should pay for his appeal and after that take his medicine, whatever it may be.

No sympathy. None.

And yeah, Sean Fitz should be looking at 112,500 years, hopefully this is going to set the benchmark.

patrickjquinn

Well this case is exceptional because he stood up and took it like a man, co-operated with the courts and revenue and was made an example of for it, all this is teaching people is that the best way to avoid sentencing is to be cute and cover your tracks, which is totally the wrong message.

He fell into a very human trap, he owned up for his mal-judgement. I think that is example enough don't you?

spockety

Search google for judge martin Nolan.

Cuckoo.

(see the story of the drunk going the wrong way down a dual carriageway and killing someone. Guess the sentence anyone?)

Run_to_da_hills

Ireland must be the only country in the world where someone can get a six year prison sentense for bringing some Garlic into the country. He would probably have got less if he was importing cannabis.

flatty

patrickjquinn wrote: »

Well this case is exceptional because he stood up and took it like a man, co-operated with the courts and revenue and was made an example of for it, all this is teaching people is that the best way to avoid sentencing is to be cute and cover your tracks, which is totally the wrong message.

He fell into a very human trap, he owned up for his mal-judgement. I think that is example enough don't you?

So, if I stick an axe in your head and am man enough to own up, punishment enough. This man's business has grown rapidly, fuelled no doubt in part by the illegal and pre-meditated tax fraud he was committing to the tune of millions of euro. If I were trying to compete whilst honestly paying my way I would think the jail sentance justified. The bankers are irrelevant.

abouttobebanned

There are scumbags out there who attack people with hammers...deal drugs..intimidate people with violence and threats of violence...and they walk free. Crimes like this SHOULD ALWAYS...be given fines. Why are we imprisoning people who are of no danger to the public?

And PC photo..your post made me angry. Get down off your high horse. This verdict is another reason why I hate this country. And I genuinely do. I hate it.