Mattie Mcgrath accuses Shatter of being stopped by Gardai

Sully

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The asthma is irrelevant. He was coming from the Dáil and was privileged from arrest under Article 15.13 of Bunreacht na hEireann.

The Garda did not use his discretion because the Garda had no discretion.

That's debatable. A lot of people would explain to a Garda where they were coming from (I have frequently being asked this question, whether or not I was being breath tested). In particular, to say they were returning from work.

"I can't tell you where I came from officer, as then you can't arrest me."

mikehammer67

maybe he didn want to blow into the bag.............

just sayin like.................................................

Cody Pomeray

Sully wrote: »

That's debatable. A lot of people would explain to a Garda where they were coming from (I have frequently being asked this question, whether or not I was being breath tested). In particular, to say they were returning from work.

I'm not proposing that Shatter deliberately raised the issue to avoid arrest. I don't know whether he did or not, I don't believe it matters.

I'm simply stating that once it became known to the Garda operating the checkpoint on Pembroke Street that Shatter was coming from the Dáil, the Garda had absolutely no discretion to exercise. The Garda was constitutionally barred from arresting Shatter.

There is clearly no case to answer here.

_Kaiser_

Here's the sad truth ...

Regardless of anything that's said here, in the media or in the Dail:

- Shatter won't resign or be forced out
- No one will face any kind of charges
- Gardai won't be disciplined for abusing their access to "allegedly" confidential data
- The public certainly won't get involved! It's not like these people work for us after all
- In a week or two the next scandal/farce will emerge and everyone will move on

Seriously guys, you're just wasting your time debating this. We all know how it'll pan out

And this is (yet again) why Ireland shouldn't be "independent"

mikehammer67

were a laughing stock

a banana republic

our idea of job creation-become a conduit for tax avoidance and piss everybody else off in the process

Wildlife Actor

About time for a referendum to get rid of the driving to/from the Dail immunity.

Chucky the tree

If Shatter drove over and killed a small child on his way from work you'd still have lots of people defending his against calls for him to resign - claiming he didn't break the law so technically he didn't do anything wrong. That's the problem in Ireland - once they support a certain party/person they lose all logic/common sense and blindly defend them no matter what.

drkpower

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The asthma is irrelevant. He was coming from the Dáil and was privileged from arrest under Article 15.13 of Bunreacht na hEireann.

The Garda did not use his discretion because the Garda had no discretion.

That is not correct.

First, there are very vague exclusions within article 15.3 which may encompass within them driving under the influence.

But more importantly, the immunity is from arrest, not from complying with road traffic laws or from complying with a Garda direction such as to take a breathalyser test. For instance, if he gave a positive breathalyser, while arguably he could not be arrested, his car could be confiscated as this would not constitute an arrest.

Going Forward

mikehammer67 wrote: »

hmm......

apparently there's a garda record on the breathalyzer incident

it's not over yet


seems like he had a lot of difficulty at the scene
-asthmatic
-on his way from the dail

very complicated

Any Dail bar receipts?

HurtLocker

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If Shatter drove over and killed a small child on his way from work you'd still have lots of people defending him against calls for him to resign - claiming he didn't break the law so technically he didn't do anything wrong. That's the problem in Ireland - once they support a certain party/person they lose all logic/common sense and blindly defend them no matter what.

I very much doubt it. He didn't roll over a kid. There is zero proof he had alcohol, hitting a child is a completely different situation.

People haven't lost common sense or logic just because they won't attack him. It's called having an opinion in a democratic siociety. No ones forcing anyone to defend or attack him, it's up to every individual to decide what they make of this.

I believe Wallace should resign because of his tax and VAT affairs. Some people don't. I've no right to say they have lost "all logic/common sense". Opinions, everyone got one.....



Mines the only right one though:pac:

Cody Pomeray

drkpower wrote: »

That is not correct.

First, there are very vague exclusions within article 15.3 which may encompass within them driving under the influence.

They're not vague, actually.

Are you attempting to interpret suspicion of driving under the influence as 'treason', an arrestable offence punishable with over 5 years in prison, or a 'breach of the peace'?

I'm not sure which is the more obscure.

You'd have to have a pretty durable point to make to assert "that's not correct" in relation to the very reasonable point I was making.

rodento

If it was a non incident why are people talking about it 4 years later

Sierra Oscar

The real issue is that Shatter failed to mention this discretion, and instead made a conscious decision to use the Mick Wallace case as an example of Garda discretion in action. It really does highlight that what happened on Prime Time last week was a case of Shatter using confidential information, which was provided to him in trust by the Garda Commissioner, in order to undermine a political opponent.

The fact of the matter is that Alan Shatter is the Minister for Justice, not Mattie McGrath. The behavior of Shatter on prime time illustrates that he is not fit to continue on as Minister for Justice in my view. The portfolio ensures that the Minister comes across highly sensitive and classified information on a weekly basis, some of which pertains to the security of the state amongst other serious matters. Last week Shatter demonstrated that he was willing to use such confidential information for electoral gain, and accordingly he is unfit to be the Minister for Justice.

HurtLocker

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The real issue is that Shatter failed to mention this discretion, and instead made a conscious decision to use the Mick Wallace case as an example of Garda discretion in action. It really does highlight that what happened on Prime Time last week was a case of Shatter using confidential information, which was provided to him in trust by the Garda Commissioner, in order to undermine a political opponent.

The fact of the matter is that Alan Shatter is the Minister for Justice, not Mattie McGrath. The behavior of Shatter on prime time illustrates that he is not fit to continue on as Minister for Justice in my view. The portfolio ensures that the Minister comes across highly sensitive and classified information on a weekly basis, some of which pertains to the security of the state amongst other serious matters. Last week Shatter demonstrated that he was willing to use such confidential information for electoral gain, and accordingly he is unfit to be the Minister for Justice.

But it wasn't discretion. He wasn't caught breaking any law in comparison to Wallace on his phone.

Shatter had constitutional protection from being detained or arrested. No discretion. The guards had to let him go. No discretion involved.

Sierra Oscar

HurtLocker wrote: »

But it wasn't discretion. He wasn't caught breaking any law in comparison to Wallace on his phone.

Yes it was. The Gardai would have been within their right to bring Shatter into the station to provide a urine or blood sample. That is the usual occurrence for those who fail to provide a breathalyser sample. In this case the Gardai used their discretion and allowed Shatter to proceed, despite him being unable to provide a sample at the roadside.

Shatter makes it quite apparent that discretion was used, and that he did not invoke the "I'm on Dáil business" card - his comment that there was no question of alcohol having been consumed seems to indicate that. Or are you claiming that Shatter did indeed use that card? If Shatter did have to use that card to avoid providing a sample then it raises suspicions significantly, don't you think?

Busted Flat.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Here's the sad truth ...

Regardless of anything that's said here, in the media or in the Dail:

- Shatter won't resign or be forced out
- No one will face any kind of charges
- Gardai won't be disciplined for abusing their access to "allegedly" confidential data
- The public certainly won't get involved! It's not like these people work for us after all
- In a week or two the next scandal/farce will emerge and everyone will move on

Seriously guys, you're just wasting your time debating this. We all know how it'll pan out

And this is (yet again) why Ireland shouldn't be "independent"

People that have that sort of attitude, is the reason the country is in the state it is in.

drkpower

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

They're not vague, actually.

Are you attempting to interpret suspicion of driving under the influence as 'treason', an arrestable offence punishable with over 5 years in prison, or a 'breach of the peace'?

I'm not sure which is the more obscure.

You'd have to have a pretty durable point to make to assert "that's not correct" in relation to the very reasonable point I was making.

Breach of the peace is inherently vague. And felony is vague because it no longer exists in Irish law.

But you didn't respond to my second point (the crucial one) at all.

HurtLocker

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Shatter makes it quite apparent that discretion was used, and that he did not invoke the "I'm on Dáil business" card - his comment that there was no question of alcohol having been consumed seems to indicate that. Or are you claiming that Shatter did indeed use that card? If Shatter did have to use that card to avoid providing a sample then it raises suspicions significantly, don't you think?

No.. I'm confused . Had the story wrong. I thought that dail privilege was why he was let go. And it would raise suspicions if he did invoke it himself.

Happyman42

The Garda Commissioner now has Shatter's job in his gift. If he issues a statement to undermine what Shatter said happened then Shatter is gone. That is not a good state of affairs imo. Shatter has compromised the office twice in one week.

Busted Flat.

What is going on in that little club that controls our country.


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=gv+wright+drink+driving&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Fcolumnists%2Fryle-dwyer%2Fabuse-of-power-and-the-gardai-is-nothing-new-to-boozy-politicians-131768.html&ei=f3OeUfvIA6uQ7Aa7-IDACA&usg=AFQjCNEPkMtgotpJVI1DBE63e8HHnq3UMQ.
In a workplace there is no room for drink, according to the HSA.

_Kaiser_

Busted Flat. wrote: »

People that have that sort of attitude, is the reason the country is in the state it is in.

Well (genuinely now), you tell me what we're supposed to do about it...

- Protests don't work. The people are ignored, the media barely/don't cover it and the Gardai are called to remove them if it goes "too far"

- Speaking of the Gardai, as if we didn't already know this, recent events have shown them to be just as bad really what with the penalty points scandal and now this free-for-all with supposedly private confidential data

- The main "opposition" party (be it FF or FG, depending on whose turn at the wheel it is) is really just the other side of the same coin with the same track record

- Vote alternative? What (real) alternative have we got? And what good is that going to do us 2 years from now? Besides, FF got "punished" last time round and they're shaping up to be back in power next time round. Those who are directly responsible for the mess have retired to the lecture circuit or on lavish pensions at our expense while the "average taxpayer" is squeezed ever further because there IS law and consequences for those people you see!

So what is Average Joe/Jane Public supposed to do about it exactly?

Busted Flat.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Well (genuinely now), you tell me what we're supposed to do about it...

- Protests don't work. The people are ignored, the media barely/don't cover it and the Gardai are called to remove them if it goes "too far"

- Speaking of the Gardai, as if we didn't already know this, recent events have shown them to be just as bad really what with the penalty points scandal and now this free-for-all with supposedly private confidential data

- The main "opposition" party (be it FF or FG, depending on whose turn at the wheel it is) is really just the other side of the same coin with the same track record

- Vote alternative? What (real) alternative have we got? And what good is that going to do us 2 years from now? Besides, FF got "punished" last time round and they're shaping up to be back in power next time round. Those who are directly responsible for the mess have retired to the lecture circuit or on lavish pensions at our expense while the "average taxpayer" is squeezed ever further because there IS law and consequences for those people you see!

So what is Average Joe/Jane Public supposed to do about it exactly?

Croppy lie down, in other words.

_Kaiser_

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Croppy lie down, in other words.

Songs from 1798 aside, you haven't answered what you think we should do in 2013's modern "Republic" to address these issues

Cody Pomeray

drkpower wrote: »

Breach of the peace is inherently vague.

It's not, it's well defined at this stage. Leaving aside, that is, the fact that we don't know whether a breach of the peace would be considered to be the same legal definition as set out in case law, as it would be for the purposes of Article 15.13 of Bunreacht na hEireann.

However the most widely referenced case in Irish law in relation to Breach of the Peace is Thorpe v The DPP [2006] IEHC 319, where it was held by Murphy J that in any determination of a breach of the peace, there would have to be determined some danger to the person.

A Garda manning a mandatory alcohol checkpoint on Pembroke Street on this particular evening, would not seem to have reasonable grounds to believe that Shatter was drunk in charge of a motor vehicle, and therefore a danger to the person. I would remind you that it was a mandatory alcohol checkpoint - i.e. random - and Shatter would not appear to have been tested because he appeared drunk. The Garda would therefore not have reason to arrest Shatter for a breach of the peace.

It is not a breach of the peace to be incapable of providing a breath sample, even where there is mandatory breath testing in place.

But you didn't respond to my second point (the crucial one) at all.

I'm not sure what was crucial about it. I'm not contesting Shatter's obligation to provide a breath sample. I'm saying that given the circumstances of the case, there were no grounds to arrest him, in light of Article 15.13 of Bunreacht na hEireann, and that your earlier assertion that I was wrong, is itself incorrect.

drkpower

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

It's not, it's well defined at this stage. Leaving aside, that is, the fact that we don't know whether a breach of the peace would be considered to be the same legal definition as set out in case law, as it would be for the purposes of Article 15.13 of Bunreacht na hEireann.

However the most widely referenced case in Irish law in relation to Breach of the Peace is Thorpe v The DPP [2006] IEHC 319, where it was held by Murphy J that in any determination of a breach of the peace, there would have to be determined some danger to the person.

A Garda manning a mandatory alcohol checkpoint on Pembroke Street on this particular evening, would not seem to have reasonable grounds to believe that Shatter was drunk in charge of a motor vehicle, and therefore a danger to the person. I would remind you that it was a mandatory alcohol checkpoint - i.e. random - and Shatter would not appear to have been tested because he appeared drunk. The Garda would therefore not have reason to arrest Shatter for a breach of the peace.

It is not a breach of the peace to be incapable of providing a breath sample, even where there is mandatory breath testing in place.

I'm not sure what was crucial about it. I'm not contesting Shatter's obligation to provide a breath sample. I'm saying that given the circumstances of the case, there were no grounds to arrest him, in light of Article 15.13 of Bunreacht na hEireann, and that your earlier assertion that I was wrong, is itself incorrect.

You said the Garda had no discretion.

He clearly did have discretion. He could have asked him to accompany him to the station; he could have confiscated his car if he suspected that he was drunk in charge; and arguably he could have arrested him under the exemptions in article 15.13. We don't know what the basis for him allowing shatter to go on his way.

M three

Deleted User wrote: »

Clare Daly admitted having a drink. There is no suggestion that it was suspected that Alan Shatter had been drinking.

You're some laugh, a few days ago you were all for private details about mick Wallace being released.
Now you're still defending shatter. Very hypocritical of you.

Dob74

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

What are the Gardaí at. I don't care so much if Shatter was stopped and used Dáil privilege, as much as there are some extremely loose lipped Gardaí in the force.

These Gardaí are not whistleblowers - there is no question of illegality and any impropriety seems political and inadequate.

Forget Shatter, it's about time these unacceptable leaks of individual's records started being clamped down upon.

Maybe we should have a secret police force to make sure the right information gets to the public?



Shatter brought this on himself by not admitting the cops didn't follow correct procedure. All's he had to say that in the future it won't happen again.

Instead he gone after the people who brought to the public attention. Cliare Daly being handcuffed on suspension on DUI. Seriously, that's out of line, if she was involved in a brawl I could see it. But for doing an illegal u-turn.

If someone is in the system let them plea there case in open court. Judges are reasonable for the must part. The fact that if you knew the right garda you could your ticket thrown out. That's unacceptable.

trashcan

For me a lot of people are missing one of the main issues in the story. Why was the fact that Mick Wallace was given a ticking off by the Gardai (No conviction, no penalty points to even cancel, remember) even mentioned by the Commissioner to the Minister for Justice ? In fact, how did the information even make it's way to the Commissioner, if not for political motivation ? Does the Garda Commissioner become aware of every citizen spoken to in this way by his officers ? Does he f**k. That's the most sordid aspect of the whole story for me. Are there little black books being filled up with TDs antics by the Gardai, to be released when it's politically appropriate ?

Busted Flat.

trashcan wrote: »

For me a lot of people are missing one of the main issues in the story. Why was the fact that Mick Wallace was given a ticking off by the Gardai (No conviction, no penalty points to even cancel, remember) even mentioned by the Commissioner to the Minister for Justice ? In fact, how did the information even make it's way to the Commissioner, if not for political motivation ? Does the Garda Commissioner become aware of every citizen spoken to in this way by his officers ? Does he f**k. That's the most sordid aspect of the whole story for me. Are there little black books being filled up with TDs antics by the Gardai, to be released when it's politically appropriate ?

We are reliving the seventies here, black books and blacklists were all the go, ask VB, and a lot of journalists of the time. Phone taps, CCOB, surveillance Cooney and Donegan. Irish Times bugged, home of journalists bugged. People afraid to use their phones, seen at a republican function, or in the company of a republican, you would loose your job if you were in a government job. Those were the days, why bring them back.

M three

trashcan wrote: »

For me a lot of people are missing one of the main issues in the story. Why was the fact that Mick Wallace was given a ticking off by the Gardai (No conviction, no penalty points to even cancel, remember) even mentioned by the Commissioner to the Minister for Justice ? In fact, how did the information even make it's way to the Commissioner, if not for political motivation ? Does the Garda Commissioner become aware of every citizen spoken to in this way by his officers ? Does he f**k. That's the most sordid aspect of the whole story for me. Are there little black books being filled up with TDs antics by the Gardai, to be released when it's politically appropriate ?

The only logical explanation I can think of is that the minister for justice requested info about political opponents from the Garda commissioner.
He may have gone as far as requesting they be followed. That would explain the Claire daly situation.
Given the type of crook shatter is none of this would surprise me.

Obviously naive people will not accept this could possibly be happening.