Caught Drinking On Facebook, Remanded In Custody.

HeyThereDeliah

A MAN who was warned by a judge not to consume alcohol has been remanded in custody after he was seen drinking on Facebook.

Last month John Sinnott (57), of Coolamurray, Davidstown, Enniscorthy, Co Wexford, was sentenced to two years for harassment.

Judge Barry Hickson, at Wexford Circuit Criminal Court, had adjourned sentence until yesterday on condition the accused attended Alcoholics Anonymous and stayed off alcohol.

But Sergeant Tom Murphy told the court he had received pictures, which were downloaded from Facebook, showing Sinnott appearing to consume alcohol.

He said this was not disputed by the defendant.



http://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-breaks-drink-rule-on-facebook-3294546.html&sa=U&ei=oxCmULT8FI2XhQekmYDYAQ&ved=0CBkQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFTiRmung3MUEgnhkU7ZhpXPsbD2Q


Is this a good thing or not, should pictures on facebook be used in court?
If he was drinking in the privacy of his own home or someone else's home is this the same as drinking in public?

I'm sure he did not post the pictures himself and who ever did might not know he should not be drinking.

Are the Gardai looking through facebook to catch people out ?

Death and Taxes

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

A MAN who was warned by a judge not to consume alcohol has been remanded in custody after he was seen drinking on Facebook.

Last month John Sinnott (57), of Coolamurray, Davidstown, Enniscorthy, Co Wexford, was sentenced to two years for harassment.

Judge Barry Hickson, at Wexford Circuit Criminal Court, had adjourned sentence until yesterday on condition the accused attended Alcoholics Anonymous and stayed off alcohol.

But Sergeant Tom Murphy told the court he had received pictures, which were downloaded from Facebook, showing Sinnott appearing to consume alcohol.

He said this was not disputed by the defendant.



http://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-breaks-drink-rule-on-facebook-3294546.html&sa=U&ei=oxCmULT8FI2XhQekmYDYAQ&ved=0CBkQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFTiRmung3MUEgnhkU7ZhpXPsbD2Q


Is this a good thing or not, should pictures on facebook be used in court?
If he was drinking in the privacy of his own home or someone else's home is this the same as drinking in public?

I'm sure he did not post the pictures himself and who ever did might not know he should not be drinking.

Are the Gardai looking through facebook to catch people out ?

He was on bail on condition that he did not consume alcohol, he broke that condition, serves him right!
Garsai can and should use any lawfully available source of evidence.

sbsquarepants

He didn't dispute it, so fúck him!

Faolchu

if people are too stupid to change the privacy settings on facebook they deserve what they get.

if the man in question is twice as stupid to A) not change the privacy settings and post pictures of himself drinking when expressly told as part of his sentencing to stay off the gargle the he deserves what he gets.

stupid is as stupid does.

Uriel.

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

A MAN who was warned by a judge not to consume alcohol has been remanded in custody after he was seen drinking on Facebook.

Last month John Sinnott (57), of Coolamurray, Davidstown, Enniscorthy, Co Wexford, was sentenced to two years for harassment.

Judge Barry Hickson, at Wexford Circuit Criminal Court, had adjourned sentence until yesterday on condition the accused attended Alcoholics Anonymous and stayed off alcohol.

But Sergeant Tom Murphy told the court he had received pictures, which were downloaded from Facebook, showing Sinnott appearing to consume alcohol.

He said this was not disputed by the defendant.



http://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/man-breaks-drink-rule-on-facebook-3294546.html&sa=U&ei=oxCmULT8FI2XhQekmYDYAQ&ved=0CBkQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFTiRmung3MUEgnhkU7ZhpXPsbD2Q


Is this a good thing or not, should pictures on facebook be used in court?
If he was drinking in the privacy of his own home or someone else's home is this the same as drinking in public?

I'm sure he did not post the pictures himself and who ever did might not know he should not be drinking.

Are the Gardai looking through facebook to catch people out ?

If he was told not to drink, he shouldn't have drank irrespective of where he did the drinking. Alcohol addiction was clearly central point in the trial either in regards to his defence or his offence.

No great sympathy from me, but that's my general line on people who commit crimes anyway. Unlucky bugger all the same.

Well the Garda told the court that he received the photos not that he actually went checking. I'd imagine a Garda has more things to be doing than randomly trawling Facebook.

However, it wouldn't surprise me if Facebook was monitored as part of wider and or more specific investigations

westendgirlie

What if the picture in many years old? Would you have to prove the age of the piccy?

anncoates

Surely it would be hard to prove when the pictures were taken just by looking at them on facebook?

PizzamanIRL

The world is gone mad.

HeyThereDeliah

Faolchu wrote: »

if people are too stupid to change the privacy settings on facebook they deserve what they get.

if the man in question is twice as stupid to A) not change the privacy settings and post pictures of himself drinking when expressly told as part of his sentencing to stay off the gargle the he deserves what he gets.

stupid is as stupid does.

Was it his own facebook page or someone else's ? Did he post the pictures?

Uriel.

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Was it his own facebook page or someone else's ? Did he post the pictures?

Don't know the answers to your questions but I still conclude that the guy is stupid... For breaking a Court condition

super_furry

Huh? Can't see any problem here at all. He was warned by the Judge not to consume alcohol and his sentencing was delayed to see if he would comply with that court order. He didn't do so and as a result the sentence will be passed down.

Even leaving aside the fact that he's going against court orders, Facebook is the public domain and of course it should be used in evidence.

Dartz

Moron.


This is why I don't use facebook.

castletownman

He should be punished for being a 57 year old man on Facebook anyway!

HeyThereDeliah

Uriel. wrote: »

Don't know the answers to your questions but I still conclude that the guy is stupid... For breaking a Court condition

I agree and don't feel sorry for him but is this what facebook has become, are our lives private anymore?

Faolchu

personally i think he needs to be buggered with a cactus for being so stupid. it matters not if the pictures were on his or someone elses facebook page the fact was he's as dumb as a doorknob for breaking the conditions placed by a judge.

Faolchu

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

I agree and don't feel sorry for him but is this what facebook has become, are our lives private anymore?

not when people put every little detail of their lives on social media right down to the fragrence of their farts or the fact they are having a cup of coffee. they befriend hundreds and thousands of "friends" most of which they wouldnt recognise on the street or be able to hold a two minute conversation with. they dont make their profice private and dont adjust settings to prevent others from sharing their pictures. I blame MTV and its ilk with their "im a dumb cnut and got up teh pole at 12" TV shows.

Treha

castletownman wrote: »

He should be punished for being a 57 year old man on Facebook anyway!

Yeah, why doesn't he stop using fun websites and just act his age? :mad::mad::mad:

El Weirdo

Dartz wrote: »

Moron.


This is why I don't use facebook.

Because you're afraid the Gardaí will find out that you drink alcohol?

mark renton

westendgirlie wrote: »

What if the picture in many years old? Would you have to prove the age of the piccy?

Not necessary to prove age of pic if he didnt dispute it

HeyThereDeliah

castletownman wrote: »

He should be punished for being a 57 year old man on Facebook anyway!

Is he on facebook or was it from someone else facebook the guard got the picture?

If you do something in the privacy of your own home should someone be able to post it on facebook without your permission ?

r3nu4l

westendgirlie wrote: »

What if the picture in many years old? Would you have to prove the age of the piccy?

Almost all digital photographs these days contain plenty of information including the date and time a photo was taken* and the make and model of the camera that was used to take it.

Had the guy disputed the claim I'm sure a court order would have been secured to obtain the original photo and examine the information.

*Of course, if you set the date on your camera, for example, to March 2010, then that is what the photo digital information will show

Duggy747

He was warned, if he (or whoever put that pic up of him) had any sort of cop on then the picture wouldn't have been put up on Facebook.

super_furry

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

I agree and don't feel sorry for him but is this what facebook has become, are our lives private anymore?

Not if you choose to put it on public display. Facebook isn't private, never has been.

Faolchu

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

If you do something in the privacy of your own home should someone be able to post it on facebook without your permission ?

regardless of where it happened he broke a condidtion of teh courts. simples.

if you really want to go down the road of "they had no right to post my picture" he gave conscent to the photo being taken, the photo then becomes the property of the person who took it who can do with what they like.

OP are you the individual in question? or you his lawyer and have the worlds dumbest as a client? you seem to be trying to find some way to prevent the use of the picture as evidence of pure dumbassery.

HeyThereDeliah

super_furry wrote: »

Not if you choose to put it on public display. Facebook isn't private, never has been.

This is my question, what if he did not put it on display and had no idea about the picture?

I agree people are responsible for posting about themselves but not if someone post about you.

r3nu4l

r3nu4l wrote: »

Almost all digital photographs these days contain plenty of information including the date and time a photo was taken* and the make and model of the camera that was used to take it.

Had the guy disputed the claim I'm sure a court order would have been secured to obtain the original photo and examine the information.

*Of course, if you set the date on your camera, for example, to March 2010, then that is what the photo digital information will show

And that is why my camera currently thinks it's 1989.

looksee

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

This is my question, what if he did not put it on display and had no idea about the picture?

I agree people are responsible for posting about themselves but not if someone post about you.

How does that make a difference? The issue was whether he was drinking, not whether he was putting pics on facebook.

Gummy Panda

I only have a Facebook account to tell people on facebook what comfortists they are for having facebook accounts.

HeyThereDeliah

Faolchu wrote: »

regardless of where it happened he broke a condidtion of teh courts. simples.

if you really want to go down the road of "they had no right to post my picture" he gave conscent to the photo being taken, the photo then becomes the property of the person who took it who can do with what they like.

OP are you the individual in question? or you his lawyer and have the worlds dumbest as a client? you seem to be trying to find some way to prevent the use of the picture as evidence of pure dumbassery.

How do you know he gave consent to his photo being taken?

Have you never had your photo taken without your knowledge?

I'm not the individual in question and could not care less about him, this is about facebook and what control we have on what is posted about us.


http://news.sky.com/story/1012303/demoted-christian-wins-facebook-post-ruling

This happens to be on sky news At the moment.

D-FENS

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

A MAN who was warned by a judge not to consume alcohol has been remanded in custody after he was seen drinking on Facebook.

The Prosecution likes this

looksee

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

How do you know he gave consent to his photo being taken?

Have you never had your photo taken without your knowledge?

I'm not the individual in question and could not care less about him, this is about facebook and what control we have on what is posted about us.


http://news.sky.com/story/1012303/demoted-christian-wins-facebook-post-ruling

This happens to be on sky news At the moment.

No, this is about his drinking when he shouldn't be. He could have been seen in a pub, or drinking a can on the street and been reported, the fact that a pic went on fb was incidental. You can be on fb as part of a large crowd, people who know you may recognise you, but no-one could be expected to contact every member of the crowd to ask can they put the photo in the newspaper.

I totally agree about fb though, I have an account solely to keep in touch with a group I belong to, everything else is locked down tight and I almost never even look at my own page, really I would prefer not to be involved at all.

Kolido

So the guy didn't dispute it, thats proof enough in this case. But how can a picture be proof that someone is drinking alcohol, I mean it's a still image. Where is the proof it is actually alcohol or he is not just rollplaying. Would this really stand up in court as genuine proof?

HeyThereDeliah

looksee wrote: »

No, this is about his drinking when he shouldn't be. He could have been seen in a pub, or drinking a can on the street and been reported, the fact that a pic went on fb was incidental. You can be on fb as part of a large crowd, people who know you may recognise you, but no-one could be expected to contact every member of the crowd to ask can they put the photo in the newspaper.

I totally agree about fb though, I have an account solely to keep in touch with a group I belong to, everything else is locked down tight and I almost never even look at my own page, really I would prefer not to be involved at all.

He should not have been drinking, no dispute there he deserves what he gets.

Can anyone post pictures and other stuff about people on fb without their knowledge? I'm not a fb fan because I feel people post way to much private stuff on there and younger people are not aware of the dangers of posting such details.

I don't think anyone should post pictures without the consent of the person first.

martomcg

Without actually seeing the picture in question all anyone can do is speculate.

My guess is a 57 yr old alcoholic wouldn't be exactly up-to-date on facebook privacy settings.

My Dad is 56 and he still cant grasp how to use the little red notifications on the top left corner.

Faolchu

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

http://news.sky.com/story/1012303/demoted-christian-wins-facebook-post-ruling

This happens to be on sky news At the moment.

he's a dumbass too, theres is no doubt a term in his contract of employment that states something about his actions in or out of work reflecting poorly on his employer. hes also a semi public figure working for a local authority or something. idiot should have known better, he also by all reports listed his employer on FB thus through his actions linking his employer to his actions and possibly tarnishing their reputation, if there is a clause in his contract about same then he could face disciplinary action. if i owned that company and a homophobic ****wit of an employee did the same thing their ass would be fired too withough hesitation. i believe he has won his case though.

if someone want to rant and talk ballcocks on facebook use a fake name for christ sake dont use your own. that way its not traced back to you and wont bite you on the arse some day.

as for the pics, he may not have conscented but once it was taken he could have said "here delete that will ya" he didnt.

and no ive never had my photo taken without my conscent. when it has been i've asked for it to be deleted. when you're a supersecret agent like me you cant have every tom dick and harry tacking your picture.

Faolchu

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Can anyone post pictures and other stuff about people on fb without their knowledge? I'm .

very easily, you simply add the photo to your timeline and do not tag ever person in it etc the pic then appears in your timeline

as for writing stuff you use your fingers then hit the post button ands its there, no one can prevent you from doing it they can only ask you not to or to remove it after the fact.

asherbassad

WileyCoyote wrote: »

He was on bail on condition that he did not consume alcohol, he broke that condition, serves him right!
Garsai can and should use any lawfully available source of evidence.

Yep,

Back the authorities no matter what.

asherbassad

super_furry wrote: »

Huh? Can't see any problem here at all. He was warned by the Judge not to consume alcohol and his sentencing was delayed to see if he would comply with that court order. He didn't do so and as a result the sentence will be passed down.

Even leaving aside the fact that he's going against court orders, Facebook is the public domain and of course it should be used in evidence.

Don't you worry about precedents though?

charlemont

Someone must have ratted him out !
But it wouldn't surprise me if cops could by pass your privacy settings anyway, Its not too hard to do.

ResearchWill

charlemont wrote: »

Someone must have ratted him out !
But it wouldn't surprise me if cops could by pass your privacy settings anyway, Its not too hard to do.

If they did they would need court approval except in an emergency situation. http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/act/pub/0019/sec0004.html#sec4

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/act/pub/0019/index.html

Plazaman

PizzamanIRL wrote: »

The world is gone mad.

Heh heh, I love new complications that occur due to Facebook. Things you thought might never happen, do.

Nearly as bad as the swedish one who was the subject of a death threat on a Facebook page so she screenshots it and put it on her page. Facebook bans her for breach of privacy.

Shanotheslayer

Could be non alcoholic beer, if that's what he was drinking...

MaxSteele

I seriously doubt the Gardai we're spying on an alcoholic's Facebook or monitoring it, the Sergeant said he "received" the pictures.

Must have been a "concerned citizen" :rolleyes:.

Some nosey, wimp of a thing with nothing to do except rat on someone for having a can. What a hero. Hope the coward gets his comeuppance.

HeyThereDeliah

Faolchu wrote: »

very easily, you simply add the photo to your timeline and do not tag ever person in it etc the pic then appears in your timeline

as for writing stuff you use your fingers then hit the post button ands its there, no one can prevent you from doing it they can only ask you not to or to remove it after the fact.

I know how it's done, what I want to know is can the person posting about other people be charged with anything.

if someone did take your pic and post it on fb, would you be offended ?

ResearchWill

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

I know how it's done, what I want to know is can the person posting about other people be charged with anything.

if someone did take your pic and post it on fb, would you be offended ?

Yes most people would be offended but I don't think any offence is committed.

I have been hearing stories like this for the past few years, a couple of PI cases thrown out of court because of photos on face book, criminal cases because of Harresment on Facebook, hence why I deleted my account ages ago.

HeyThereDeliah

ResearchWill wrote: »

Yes most people would be offended but I don't think any offence is committed.

I have been hearing stories like this for the past few years, a couple of PI cases thrown out of court because of photos on face book, criminal cases because of Harresment on Facebook, hence why I deleted my account ages ago.

I don't think it's right people can post stuff on fb without your knowledge especially if it's in the privacy of your own home.

This is nothing to do with the man in the op, it's the way he was caught out that caught my attention, it could happen to anyone it seems.

ResearchWill

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

I don't think it's right people can post stuff on fb without your knowledge especially if it's in the privacy of your own home.

This is nothing to do with the man in the op, it's the way he was caught out that caught my attention, it could happen to anyone it seems.

I agree with you hence why I left Facebook, if you don't think it's right then leave FB.

Reloc8

ResearchWill wrote: »

Yes most people would be offended but I don't think any offence is committed.

I have been hearing stories like this for the past few years, a couple of PI cases thrown out of court because of photos on face book, criminal cases because of Harresment on Facebook, hence why I deleted my account ages ago.

How's the dodgy PI/harassment/other criminal trial going for you since ?