Garda Commissioner rubbishes claims that crime figures are ‘massaged’

pa990

Garda Commissioner rubbishes claims that crime figures are ‘massaged’

http://www.thejournal.ie/garda-commissioner-gra-crime-890111-Apr2013/

i wonder how the GRA will back up their claims without obtaining info from PULSE, as that info can only be accessed for lawful purposes ??

hmm. rock and a hard place

efb

The GRA guy seemed to row back and qualify the statement where the claimant didn't want to pursue the claim

efb wrote: »

The GRA guy seemed to row back and qualify the statement where the claimant didn't want to pursue the claim

The crime still occurred though. And they also explained about if a window is broken to gain entry but nothing is taken about those being reclassified as Criminal Damage rather than a burglary which is what actually occurred.

And the GRA wouldn't need to access PULSE wholesale. Their individual members who claim this happened can do that and pass it on.

Potential-Monke

If it is being done (which i don't doubt in the slightest), then why is it being done? Surely everyone in AGS (Commissioner aside) wants to show that we are crazy busy and need more members?

Zambia

Potential-Monke wrote: »

If it is being done (which i don't doubt in the slightest), then why is it being done? Surely everyone in AGS (Commissioner aside) wants to show that we are crazy busy and need more members?

Its the Commissioner who is rubbishing the claims, not on my watch sort of thing.

Manager always like to be seen to turn water into wine.

nutts_77

I thought I could actually see his nose getting longer as the interview continued....

discus

pa990 wrote: »

Garda Commissioner rubbishes claims that crime figures are ‘massaged’

I don't think he'll be getting a happy ending.

SB2013

Potential-Monke wrote: »

If it is being done (which i don't doubt in the slightest), then why is it being done? Surely everyone in AGS (Commissioner aside) wants to show that we are crazy busy and need more members?

Political apointees would be more interested in making themselves look good.

Geansai

foreign wrote: »

The crime still occurred though. And they also explained about if a window is broken to gain entry but nothing is taken about those being reclassified as Criminal Damage rather than a burglary which is what actually occurred.
QUOTE]

Is this about pursing what can be proved? If a window is broken, then there was criminal damage - easy to prove.
If items are taken, it follows that the person entered the private property to commit the act.

However, if no item is taken, it may be more dificult to prove burglary.
Obviously CCTV etc, will play a part.

The above may not be related, but just interested in people views. This may be happening (I'm not a member, so cannot commment either way), but if it is, the reason may be legitimate, and not to "massage" the crime stats.

Geansai wrote: »

foreign wrote: »

The crime still occurred though. And they also explained about if a window is broken to gain entry but nothing is taken about those being reclassified as Criminal Damage rather than a burglary which is what actually occurred.
QUOTE]

Is this about pursing what can be proved? If a window is broken, then there was criminal damage - easy to prove.
If items are taken, it follows that the person entered the private property to commit the act.

However, if no item is taken, it may be more dificult to prove burglary.
Obviously CCTV etc, will play a part.

The above may not be related, but just interested in people views. This may be happening (I'm not a member, so cannot commment either way), but if it is, the reason may be legitimate, and not to "massage" the crime stats.

well a burglary is entering somebodies property and committing an arrestable offence.

2012paddy2012

Geansai wrote: »

foreign wrote: »

The crime still occurred though. And they also explained about if a window is broken to gain entry but nothing is taken about those being reclassified as Criminal Damage rather than a burglary which is what actually occurred.
QUOTE]

Is this about pursing what can be proved? If a window is broken, then there was criminal damage - easy to prove.
If items are taken, it follows that the person entered the private property to commit the act.

However, if no item is taken, it may be more dificult to prove burglary.
Obviously CCTV etc, will play a part.

The above may not be related, but just interested in people views. This may be happening (I'm not a member, so cannot commment either way), but if it is, the reason may be legitimate, and not to "massage" the crime stats.

Once they enter as a trespasser it is a burglary if you came home and found all your bed sheets thrown around drawers left opened but nothing gone would you think you were a victim of a criminal damage or a burglary ?

source

Geansai wrote: »

well a burglary is entering somebodies property and committing an arrestable offence.

Whether he took anything or not is immaterial as the prosecution only has to prove there was an intent, also criminal damage is an arrestable offence so it is burglary if a person breaks the glass and enters.

Great way of remembering what burglary is:
BITE
Building
Intent
Trespass
Enter

source wrote: »

Whether he took anything or not is immaterial as the prosecution only has to prove there was an intent, also criminal damage is an arrestable offence so it is burglary if a person breaks the glass and enters.

Great way of remembering what burglary is:
BITE
Building
Intent
Trespass
Enter

That is what I was trying to say.

2012paddy2012

foreign wrote: »

That is what I was trying to say.

anyone know what"cows" is the handy way of remembering!!!

Bosh

2012paddy2012 wrote: »

anyone know what"cows" is the handy way of remembering!!!

Now that takes me back

2012paddy2012 wrote: »

anyone know what"cows" is the handy way of remembering!!!

Ask Clare Daly.

It's meant for people who shouldn't be handcuffed.

Children
Old People
Women
Solider in Uniform.

But at the end of the day it was down to the member to decide based on your own safety. And they have changed the use of force rules now.

2012paddy2012

foreign wrote: »

Ask Clare Daly.

It's meant for people who shouldn't be handcuffed.

Children
Old People
Women
Solider in Uniform.

But at the end of the day it was down to the member to decide based on your own safety. And they have changed the use of force rules now.

well done!!!

3fullback

Diana Immense Stick wrote: »

Ask Clare Daly.

It's meant for people who shouldn't be handcuffed.

Children
Old People
Women
Solider in Uniform.

But at the end of the day it was down to the member to decide based on your own safety. And they have changed the use of force rules now.

Why solider in uniform ?

Pappa Charlie

3fullback wrote: »

Why solider in uniform ?

The uniform represents the state and the army of the state, a handcuffed soldier is a bad image, it's more out of respect for the uniform and army than the soldier. IMO

Zambia

Is there a different state for burg if the homeowner is present?

Zambia wrote: »

Is there a different state for burg if the homeowner is present?

No.
But usually sent forward to the circuit court.

Mikros

Zambia wrote: »

Is there a different state for burg if the homeowner is present?

No. The only other type of burglary would be an aggravated burglary - that is one where the offender has a weapon.

Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 wrote:

13.—(1) A person is guilty of aggravated burglary if he or she commits any burglary and at the time has with him or her any firearm or imitation firearm, any weapon of offence or any explosive.

2012paddy2012

Zambia wrote: »

Is there a different state for burg if the homeowner is present?

No . There are a group of burglars known as sleepers .. Specialise in burglary when occupants are asleep ... Just burglary ... Should burglar bring knife or other weapon the category could change then .... To ... Aggravated burglary