Garlic man has sentence reduced to 2 years.

Death and Taxes

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0215/367937-paul-begley-court/

The Court of Criminal Appeal has ruled that businessman Paul Begley, who was jailed for six years for failing to pay import duty on garlic, should have his sentence reduced to two years.
Last year Judge Martin Nolan sentenced Begley, who had pleaded guilty and repaid the money to an excessive sentence of 6 years.
IMO today justice was served.

Rabidlamb

Worst superhero name ever . . . . ever

Micky Dolenz

Considering he repaid the money and pleaded guilty, 2 years is still a long time imo considering what other sentences get handed out for actually harming others.

Even When I Lie

The vampires of Mountjoy are said to be delighted.

not yet

Complete lunacy that he got 6 years to begin with, juding by some of the retards that walk away scot free having done much.much worse...

Either way he will be out soon with remission etc..

Kristopherus

With remission, he could be out by the end of this year.

cofy

He repaid the money and still gets two years - I wonder how many people have moved all their money out of the country and then claimed bankruptcy owing millions.

Anyone

So, should white collar crime not be subject to custodial sentances then?

Just because he didnt "harm" anybody, shouldnt mean he doesnt go to prison. He committed a fraud, went out of his way to deceive and profit from it. Fair enough, he paid the money back, but only because he got caught.

If this was a banker or politician people here would be screaming for him to be hung.

twinQuins

Well maybe if he didn't break the law in the first place he wouldn't be facing any kind of jail sentence - I really don't get why people are championing his cause.
Nope. No sympathy from me. Give a more lenient sentence for being cooperative, sure, but that doesn't simply excuse the wrongdoing.

Missymoohaa

not yet wrote: »

Complete lunacy that he got 6 years to begin with, juding by some of the retards that walk away scot free having done much.much worse...

Either way he will be out soon with remission etc..

I worked it out that he should be released in July, if he was imprisoned last March. 1/3 off sentence for good behaviour, is that correct? Would have like to see him walk free today, I think he's served enough time in relation to his crime. He's no danger to society and there are far worse released without sentence back on the streets anyway.

Micky Dolenz

Kristopherus wrote: »

With remission, he could be out by the end of this year.

He has already served nearly a year so he may be out in a few months.

Death and Taxes

Kristopherus wrote: »

With remission, he could be out by the end of this year.

I would imagine he will be transferred to an open prison or the Training Unit within weeks and be on TR shortly after.

Lollipops23

Two years is still pretty heavy handed IMO- I know he broke the law, but he repaid what he owed etc and 6 months would have been plenty of time for the crime.

Seriously, a little consistency in sentencing wouldn't go amiss. Judges need to remember that rape and murder generally has more impact on people than not paying tax on garlic.

Death and Taxes

twinQuins wrote: »

Well maybe if he didn't break the law in the first place he wouldn't be facing any kind of jail sentence - I really don't get why people are championing his cause.
Nope. No sympathy from me. Give a more lenient sentence for being cooperative, sure, but that doesn't simply excuse the wrongdoing.

Don't recall anyone attempting to excuse him, but the sentence was crazily excessive!

Hunterbiker

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Considering he repaid the money and pleaded guilty, 2 years is still a long time imo considering what other sentences get handed out for actually harming others.

I agree.
Some sort of suspended sentence considering the costs involved in keeping someone locked up might have served better here. The judge still has to stick to any guidelines laid down for a particular crime though.
Saying that that sentence was more about sending a warning to others to not to try the same thing. It's The States way of saying steal from us and we're going to nail you to the wall...

Czarcasm

Justice served my àrse, Mick Wallace has managed to keep his position as a serving TD having owed Revenue nearly €2.1 million. No sanctions nor custodial punishment whatsoever!

Dolbert

Anyone wrote: »

So, should white collar crime not be subject to custodial sentances then?

Just because he didnt "harm" anybody, shouldnt mean he doesnt go to prison. He committed a fraud, went out of his way to deceive and profit from it. Fair enough, he paid the money back, but only because he got caught.

If this was a banker or politician people here would be screaming for him to be hung.

This. White collar crime not being taken seriously is a huge problem in Ireland, and the one time someone actually serves time for it people are up in arms.

FTA69

Hang on a second, we often hear people in Ireland banging on about how white collar criminals get away scot free and how members of the wealthy classes i.e. bankers and developers should be jailed etc; and when it happens people are saying it's too harsh a sentence? Some heroin addict gets caught shoplifting a couple of times from city centre businesses and he'll probably see the inside of a cell for a short period, but yet when a businessman is caught wilfully defrauding the state (i.e. the average worker) of thousands of euros people are cribbing that he got jail?

I say he got a fair sentence. For years it has been the case that if you're poor and commit a crime associated with that background it's "lock them up" but yet many of those lauded as "wealth creators" and all that b*llocks have been pulling scams like this (and worse) in order to shirk tax. It's gas that many of those giving out about welfare expenditure will rarely focus on tax avoidance by the rich which deprives the state of vast sums of money.

The fact this scam concerns garlic might give it a funny undertone, but it's a serious issue. Irish society needs to take a stand against greed and corruption, it'll be a lot more difficult if people jump to defend those committing it.

twinQuins

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Don't recall anyone attempting to excuse him, but the sentence was crazily excessive!

Perhaps not excuse but the attitude is one of "ah sure he paid it back, what's the point of even doing that if he's still going to be punished". He only paid it back because he was caught; he still broke the law in the first place and should have to face some consequences for that.

not yet

Anyone wrote: »

So, should white collar crime not be subject to custodial sentances then?

Just because he didnt "harm" anybody, shouldnt mean he doesnt go to prison. He committed a fraud, went out of his way to deceive and profit from it. Fair enough, he paid the money back, but only because he got caught.

If this was a banker or politician people here would be screaming for him to be hung.

Surely you realise he did get a sentence, That sentence has now been reduced on appeal to 2 years....is that not enough for you ? I seem to be getting from your post that they should let him rot in prison.

FTA69

twinQuins wrote: »

Perhaps not excuse but the attitude is one of "ah sure he paid it back, what's the point of even doing that if he's still going to be punished". He only paid it back because he was caught; he still broke the law in the first place and should have to face some consequences for that.

Paying it back counts for f*ck all. There's no stating the amount he garnered before he was caught, and you can make a good guess that it wasn't the first time he did this. Similarly if he wasn't nabbed he'd still be at it. However because he's a "respectable" individual people are more sympathetic to him than some "skanger" caught shoplifting a few electrical items.

Anyone

not yet wrote: »

Surely you realise he did get a sentence, That sentence has now been reduced on appeal to 2 years....is that not enough for you ? I seem to be getting from your post that they should let him rot in prison.

Well then you are misreading me. I wanted to highlight that this sort of crime shouldnt go unpunished just because a person wasnt physically harmed. As I said, had that been a banker,politician or developer, people here would be screaming for blood.

Micky Dolenz

Things like this put it into perspective for me.There are hundreds of examples.

Of course crime should be punished. A little consistency would be sound though.

Anyone

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Things like this put it into perspective for me.There are hundreds of examples.

Of course crime should be punished. A little consistency would be sound though.

But the two crimes are very very different. And the VAT scammer's sentance shouldnt be compared to an attempted murder's sentance. Consistency should be that crimes of a similar nature receive a similar punishment, those two are miles apart.

Micky Dolenz

Anyone wrote: »

But the two crimes are very very different. And the VAT scammer's sentance shouldnt be compared to an attempted murder's sentance. Consistency should be that crimes of a similar nature receive a similar punishment, those two are miles apart.

To me it shows money is more important then life.

Rabidlamb

Rabidlamb wrote: »

Worst superhero name ever . . . . ever

There is a superhero called "animal vegetable mineral man"[Removed Image]

Death and Taxes

Czarcasm wrote: »

Justice served my àrse, Mick Wallace has managed to keep his position as a serving TD having owed Revenue nearly €2.1 million. No sanctions nor custodial punishment whatsoever!

Can't find any record of Mick Wallace having been charged or convicted.
This is a case where a man did defraud the State of millions, gained an unfair advantage over his competitors and was caught.
The question is did his crime warrant the sentence he recieved.
If you want to have one of your usual rants, then a start a thread about Mick Wallace instead of trying to derail this one!

Death and Taxes

FTA69 wrote: »

Paying it back counts for f*ck all. There's no stating the amount he garnered before he was caught, and you can make a good guess that it wasn't the first time he did this. Similarly if he wasn't nabbed he'd still be at it. However because he's a "respectable" individual people are more sympathetic to him than some "skanger" caught shoplifting a few electrical items.

If you bothered to read the case you would know the amount of money he owed included his previous times doing this, which was noted by the CCA who said themselves that he had voluntarily disclosed his previous fraud.

Robbo

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Can't find any record of Mick Wallace having been charged or convicted.
This is a case where a man did defraud the State of millions, gained an unfair advantage over his competitors and was caught.
The question is did his crime warrant the sentence he recieved.
If you want to have one of your usual rants, then a start a thread about Mick Wallace instead of trying to derail this one!

This.

During the period of tax evasion, Begleys apparently became one of the biggest fruit and veg importers in the country. It stands to reason that jobs were lost in competitors due to the illegal advantage Begleys had over them.

gurramok

Anyone wrote: »

But the two crimes are very very different. And the VAT scammer's sentance shouldnt be compared to an attempted murder's sentance. Consistency should be that crimes of a similar nature receive a similar punishment, those two are miles apart.

VAT will not try to murder me, a person can hence sentencing for attempted murder should always supercede a VAT sentence. After all, the justice system is there to protect people from crime, ya know make streets safer.

twinQuins

"There are worse crimes than this" is never a good argument. The justice system is there to protect people from all types of crime, not just violent crimes.

Anyone

gurramok wrote: »

VAT will not try to murder me, a person can hence sentencing for attempted murder should always supercede a VAT sentence. After all, the justice system is there to protect people from crime, ya know make streets safer.

Look, I didnt say anything about the attempted murderers sentance other than it was wrong to use it as a comparison to the VAT scammer's sentance when judging how fair the sentance was.

Judge like for like is what I am saying.

gurramok

Anyone wrote: »

Look, I didnt say anything about the attempted murderers sentance other than it was wrong to use it as a comparison to the VAT scammer's sentance when judging how fair the sentance was.

Judge like for like is what I am saying.

No-one said Begley should not be subject to a custodial sentence, its the scale of it.

Murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, assaults of all types, rapes etc are more of a priority to a safer society to citizens than a VAT scammer.

Getting 6 years for VAT scamming and yet 6 years for murder\manslaughter, they are relevant for comparison, both persons are sent to prison for their crimes. I'd prefer the latter be locked up longer as a deterrent to make our streets safer.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Anyone wrote: »

So, should white collar crime not be subject to custodial sentances then?

Just because he didnt "harm" anybody, shouldnt mean he doesnt go to prison. He committed a fraud, went out of his way to deceive and profit from it. Fair enough, he paid the money back, but only because he got caught.

If this was a banker or politician people here would be screaming for him to be hung.

Correct. However, what about all the criminal scumbags and the likes of that wa**er Mick Wallace and criminal bankers who are walking about without ever even being prosecuted for their crimes!

paddy147

he will be out in 6 months.


How the fcuk did that Lyons scumbag only do 5 months in jail for sexually assaulting that girl???

Does offering the victim a big amount of money get you a reduced term???

Patrick2010

Has Mick Wallace paid back any of the VAT he pocketed, has he done any time in jail?

channro

I don't see anyone trying to excuse Paul Begley in this thread - he has to be punished but its the severity of the sentence that's the issue. As said by previous posters other serious crimes aren't punished with such heavy jail terms.

Government priorities are clear. Only big business and insiders are allowed to evade tax in Ireland - the small businessman is to be crushed if he breaks the rules.

I wouldn't class him as a small businessman but it's a high profile case. He has to be made an example of for anyone else thinkin about not funding the banana republic.

Cienciano

Sort of funny that he's now referred to as "garlic man" and everyone knows what you're talking about

mackg

Of course rapists, murders etc. should have harsher sentences imposed on them. No one is denying that but do we have to minimise sentences for other crimes based on the sentences we all agree we are getting wrong. Lets not use our mistakes as the benchmark.

"we're being far too leniant to violent criminals so it's only fair we be far too leniant to white collar criminals too".

Duck Soup

2 years seems about fair. There's no way in hell that fiddling millions of euro into your pocket shouldn't attract a custodial sentence. And no, Mick Wallace didn't get jail time. But he should have. No, many, many of the property developers who cooked the books and moved money out of the reach of the taxman and auditors didn't receive jail time. But they should have.

The Begleys are hard-nosed businessmen. Paul Begley knew what he was doing. It was worth a fortune to him and he thought he'd never get caught. My argument is that all substantial white-collar crime should meet custodial sentences. There are, broadly speaking, two elements to a judicial sentence - that it fits the crime [the punishment component] and that it would make the convicted and others think twice about ever doing it again [the deterrence component].

The problem is that Irish judges have a terrible time countenancing putting into jail people who went to Blackrock or Wesley, who attend the same social functions, whose face they might see across a room at the same restaurant. I don't think it's completely coincidental that the Begleys are working-class duckers and divers who made it big and are not afforded the same leniency many of the bankers, accountants and property developers are.

There is almost no deterrence for white collar crime in Ireland. You pretty much have to fill a Hiace van with cash from the back of a bank and drive off with it before Irish prosecutors contemplate the possibility of even charging you. The only politician I can think of that got jail time for the like was Ray Burke who was seen literally with a bin bag full of cash bribes.

And even then, with the right accent, background or connections, it can probably all be 'smoothed over' before it ever sees the inside of a court. That needs to change drastically and it needs to change quickly, unless the country wants to go through the same implosion brought on by corruption again and again and again.

Einhard

This man basically robbed the state of almost €2 million and people are claiming that he's been hard done by?! Every week we have threads and comments about how leniently white-collar crime is treated in this country, and then when we get a significant custodial sentence, people are outraged. This wasn't a petty, victimless crime. It was a premeditated attempt to defraud the rest of us, and it gave him a significant advantage over competitors. I welcome the fact that he's in prison. He deserves it. He's every bit as much a scumbag as the the guy who smashes your car window and steals something.

Personally I`d rather see those who set taxes at 232% for food imports in jail. And at a time when food prices are increasing and peoples pay decreasing.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/garlic-importer-begleys-sentence-cut-from-six-to-two-years-584866.html

he avoided paying a higher tax of up to 232% on garlic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20976887
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/9791027/British-garlic-smuggling-pair-wanted-by-police-in-Sweden.html

mconigol

Anyone wrote: »

So, should white collar crime not be subject to custodial sentances then?

Just because he didnt "harm" anybody, shouldnt mean he doesnt go to prison. He committed a fraud, went out of his way to deceive and profit from it. Fair enough, he paid the money back, but only because he got caught.

If this was a banker or politician people here would be screaming for him to be hung.

Well yes. Prison should be only for those people who are a danger to society and need rehabilitation otherwise we go down the road of punishment and retribution. There are other ways to deal with that without having to burden an already overworked prison service.

What purpose is served by sending him to prison? Massive fine, temporarily striped of passport, exclusion from serving as a director and weekly community service for two years would be much better for him and the exchequer. Let him pay back his debt to society.

FTA69

mconigol wrote: »

Well yes. Prison should be only for those people who are a danger to society and need rehabilitation

Tax avoidance is a danger to society.

FTA69

FTA69 wrote: »

Tax avoidance is a danger to society.

Taxes at 232% are a as much a danger

Zico

If I could import Garlic labelled Apples and get away without much fuss, I would import a lot more interesting items for the same risk.

Czarcasm

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Can't find any record of Mick Wallace having been charged or convicted.
This is a case where a man did defraud the State of millions, gained an unfair advantage over his competitors and was caught.
The question is did his crime warrant the sentence he recieved.
If you want to have one of your usual rants, then a start a thread about Mick Wallace instead of trying to derail this one!

Ah geez Wiley I picked you up wrong, I thought you were saying justice was served because the man received a reduced sentence. My point was that justice could hardly be considered served when there was a clear discrepancy in the way Mick Wallace was treated for tax evasion and the way Paul Begley was treated for tax evasion. I'm not seeing the thread derailment here.

The difference I am seeing though, is that not only did Paul Begley serve time in prison for his crime, but he also paid the tax and any penalties due.

Mick Wallace on the other hand has brazen faced as much as told the Revenue he is not responsible for his companies tax liabilities, he bears no responsibility for the debt that he witheld from Revenue to keep his company afloat, and refuses to declare bankruptcy because it would mean giving up his seat in the Dáil.

One man's life is ruined for his transgression, the other still maintains one of the top positions in the country and expects his debt to be covered by the tax payers who won't come within a sniff of €2 million in their lifetimes!

Again I say to you- justice? I think not!

JustAThought

I'm sick of all the political correctness. Take all the rapists & murderers & pedophiles & scobies who rob old people & break into people's homes & terrorise them & people who sexually assault little children & lock them up in a miserable dark hole of a prison with no hot water, or TVs or f'ing menus or mattresses & let them rot.

Too much s**t being let away with in this country & no one has any respect.

Y - paying back & 2 years time for garlic crime sounds ok to me. But what about the Bertie's & wallaces & pyrite kings & all the rest. They should be punished too. What's the point if crime pays.

Greenmachine

If he was unhappy with the Vat rate he had two choice that would have been acceptable.
Pay the tax and sell garlic on.
Remove garlic from his inventory.

mconigol

FTA69 wrote: »

Tax avoidance is a danger to society.

Do you know what the phrase "a danger to society" means?

Tax avoidance is perfectly legal by the way.

mikemac1

Lollipops23 wrote: »

Two years is still pretty heavy handed IMO- I know he broke the law, but he repaid what he owed etc

He only repaid it because he was caught.

And if it gave him an advantage over his competitors then it's certain those companies let people go or were unable to hire more.

Lollipops23 wrote: »

Seriously, a little consistency in sentencing wouldn't go amiss. Judges need to remember that rape and murder generally has more impact on people than not paying tax on garlic.

If the OP started a thread about Seanie Fitzpatrick the thread would melt down in anger.

He never assualted anyone, not that I know of.
Decent chap, family man......