Invalid search warrants!

Hitchens

A retired Central Bank administrator who was jailed for the possession of hundreds of thousands of child porn images and videos has walked free from court after his conviction was quashed because of a misdated warrant.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/retired-central-bank-official-walks-free-after-child-porn-conviction-quashed-601366.html

Why does this seem to happen with our law enforcement officials? It's hardly rocket science to be able to get it right.

Smash The House

The Court of Criminal Appeal today overturned the conviction of Raphael Farina (aged 67) after it found that a warrant used to search his home was dated incorrectly and consequently did not permit entry to his apartment in Dublin city centre.

Wow. What a joke

mike65

The Illuminati protecting their own again.

or the Keystones were operating at their usual level of technical competency

michael999999

Hitchens wrote: »

A retired Central Bank administrator who was jailed for the possession of hundreds of thousands of child porn images and videos has walked free from court after his conviction was quashed because of a misdated warrant.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/retired-central-bank-official-walks-free-after-child-porn-conviction-quashed-601366.html,

Why does this seem to happen with our law enforcement officials? It's hardly rocket science to be able to get it right.

€€€€€€€€€

NuckingFacker

That's one central banker that needs to be rendered an invalid.

ColeTrain

Gardaí had called to Farina’s home with a search warrant as part of an international investigation into child pornography led by the Bavarian state police in Germany

I can imagine the culchie Garda ringing our German overlords after the trial "ah sorry we fooked up again boy"

NuckingFacker

Sorry, but could the Judge not have said, "well, Herr Farina, the Gards did indeed royally fcuk up on the date thing, but you're still guilty as sin, so the conviction stands-fcuk you very much and have a nice day."


Is there no common sense involved in the application of the law, or is that just me?? This worship we have of "documents". It's a piece of paper, not a "document". The children involved, and their famalies, no doubt send their profound thanks to that "judge" for his legal precision..

Christ the Redeemer

A banker walks free from court? get the **** out of here.

Wacker The Attacker

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

A banker walks free from court? get the **** out of here.

He's a banker with a penchant for child porn.

It really doesn't get any worse does it?

EuskalHerria

Incorrect date? You'd swear it was done by a child.
A nice change given the charges I suppose.

NuckingFacker

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

A banker in court? get the **** out of here.

fyp. Sadly.

blindside88

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Sorry, but could the Judge not have said, "well, Herr Farina, the Gards did indeed royally fcuk up on the date thing, but you're still guilty as sin, so the conviction stands-fcuk you very much and have a nice day."


Is there no common sense involved in the application of the law, or is that just me?? This worship we have of "documents". It's a piece of paper, not a "document". The children involved, and their famalies, no doubt send their profound thanks to that "judge" for his legal precision..

So to hell with the law, the evidence was obtained incorrectly and should be thrown out, he may well be guilty but it's a slippery slope if the judiciary are allowed to ignore the law because the know he's guilty. Where would you allow judges using "common sense" to end?

He should have been convicted and will undoubtedly get what's coming to him but we have laws for a reason, even the ones you don't agree with

NuckingFacker

blindside88 wrote: »

So to hell with the law, the evidence was obtained incorrectly and should be thrown out, he may well be guilty but it's a slippery slope if the judiciary are allowed to ignore the law because the know he's guilty. Where would you allow judges using "common sense" to end?

He should have been convicted and will undoubtedly get what's coming to him but we have laws for a reason, even the ones you don't agree with

Are you for real?

LowKeyReturn

Courts are pretty good at getting around flaws on search warrants, but some things are just a step too far.

For example the address would not have been an issue (most likely), but come on.. the date? The anger should be directed at the guards.

LowKeyReturn

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Are you for real?

Are you for real?

Guards kick in your door at 5am because they think you look like the kind of lad that smoke a bit of dope? That's grand is it?

The ramifications for an investigation that used unconstitutionally obtained evidence is what keeps the system in check.

NuckingFacker

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Courts are pretty good at getting around flaws on search warrants, but some things are just a step too far.

For example the address would not have been an issue (most likely), but come on.. the date? The anger should be directed at the guards.

Why? Because of a typo? Or some typist not paying attention? I'll direct my anger at the child molester, thanks all the same. Or failing that, our dopey, out-of-touch judiciary.

Christ the Redeemer

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Are you for real?

Guards kick in your door at 5am because they think you look like the kind of lad that smoke a bit of dope? That's grand is it?

The ramifications for an investigation that used unconstitutionally obtained evidence is what keeps the system in check.

This is a bit different than simply kicking a door in, a pedo is walking free because he's a banker!

****, I mean because of a "typo".

blindside88

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Are you for real?

So how much incorrect or incorrectly obtained evidence ok?

blindside88

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

This is a bit different than simply kicking a door in, a pedo is walking free because he's a banker!

****, I mean because of a "typo".

I agree with you but where do you draw the line?

LowKeyReturn

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Why? Because of a typo? Or some typist not paying attention? I'll direct my anger at the child molester, thanks all the same. Or failing that, our dopey, out-of-touch judiciary.

Thank god - people would be worried about things getting done if people were even the slightest bit informed. The conspiracy theorists are right about one thing - governments rely on the stupidity of the mob.

Christ the Redeemer

blindside88 wrote: »

I agree with you but where do you draw the line?

I dunno, but knowing this country, the line gets drawn at about 1 million earnings a year.

NuckingFacker

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Are you for real?

Guards kick in your door at 5am because they think you look like the kind of lad that smoke a bit of dope? That's grand is it?

The ramifications for an investigation that used unconstitutionally obtained evidence is what keeps the system in check.

The date was wrong. The search was valid. Your point is invalid. But you're free to go. Thems the rules. I'll leave now, but just remember whose rights you are so strongly defending. Sleep well.

LowKeyReturn

blindside88 wrote: »

So how much incorrect or incorrectly obtained evidence ok?

blindside88 wrote: »

I agree with you but where do you draw the line?

**** loads - the standard is unconstitutionally obtained evidence.

LowKeyReturn

NuckingFacker wrote: »

The date was wrong. The search was valid. Your point is invalid.

I think you'll find my point is well backed up. Nice word play though.

blindside88

NuckingFacker wrote: »

The date was wrong. The search was valid. Your point is invalid. But you're free to go. Thems the rules. I'll leave now, but just remember whose rights you are so strongly defending. Sleep well.

I'm not any way qualified in these matters but if the warrant was invalid is the search not invalid? I hate to see scum like that go free but I can see the judges predicament

NuckingFacker

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

I think you'll find my point is well backed up. Nice word play though.

Yeah, your point is well backed up by well-paid lawyers that exist solely to seek out flaws in prosecution cases, no matter how tenuous. If I was a Gard, I'd jack it in, the lunatics have indeed taken over the asylum. You will now respond how wrong I am, how many rights a person has to a fully constitutional trial, fair and correct due process, the precise servation of warrants and evidence. I say up your bum to that, justice is never done, it is bought by he who can afford the brightest mind in the room. Brightest is seldom best though, or most moral. It's usually just the sharpest. To all the Gardai out there, ye have my sympathy. Ye and the kids and parents involved.

LowKeyReturn

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Yeah, your point is well backed up by well-paid lawyers that exist solely to seek out flaws in prosecution cases, no matter how tenuous. If I was a Gard, I'd jack it in, the lunatics have indeed taken over the asylum. You will now respond how wrong I am, how many rights a person has to a fully constitutional trial, fair and correct due process, the precise servation of warrants and evidence. I say up your bum to that, justice is never done, it is bought by he who can afford the brightest mind in the room. Brightest is seldom best though, or most moral. It's usually just the sharpest. To all the Gardai out there, ye have my sympathy. Ye and the kids and parents involved.

You do know the other side have lawyers too now? AFAIK De Valara wasn't a lawyer, open to correction on that.

EoghanIRL

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

A banker walks free from court? get the **** out of here.

Yet you can get jailed for not paying your tv licence.

LowKeyReturn

How did we get this far into the thread without a mention of Brian Curtin BTW?

Irish Examiner

Irish Examiner wrote:

She said that among the five flaws were a misspelling of Mr Farina’s address as “Springer’s Yard”, an absence of information regarding the issuing District Court area and number and a misdating of the warrant as May 6 2007, when it had actually been issued on June 6, 2007.

That's enough to get a case thrown out? There are threads about court summons with incorrect information in the 'Legal Discussion' forum every other day, and the answer is always that minor mistakes don't really matter.

General General

Whole thing is a push toward dropping the need for a search warrant at all... which is a move not against guys like the one who got away here, but rather a move towards what a certain sick kind of mind actually wants; removal of civil rights for people other than some chosen elite.

Ahem... sorry, what did I just say there? I think I was channeling... I think I was channeling.

Think_then_talk

No retrial was ordered. Next he'll be looking for the €5000 back.:rolleyes:

thebaz

its not the first time this has happened for child pornography charges on supposed respected pillars of society - child pornography violates children in the most cowardly manner - but, if the average joe doesn't pay parking fines or gets busted for a bit of weed , everything seams to be in order - shame on the Irish judiciary.

LowKeyReturn

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

That's enough to get a case thrown out? There are threads about court summons with incorrect information in the 'Legal Discussion' forum every other day, and the answer is always that minor mistakes don't really matter.

It's enough to render the search warrant invalid. The address wouldn't be much of an issue but the date would as would. The rationale being the violation of your dwelling is prohibited by your constitutional rights. That right has to give way to fairness, so a judge can order that for a certain period your right may be violated because of the proof they have been shown as to wrong doing.

The courts will allow evidence that has been gathered in violation of rights so long as they are not constitutionally protected rights. This is the red line marker as it were. If evidence if gathered in violation of a constitutional right then it is disregarded as a mechanism to ensure that the guards do not start employing an 'ends justifies the means' mentality.

It's not a perfect system but really all the guards needed to do was check the bloody warrant!

LowKeyReturn

thebaz wrote: »

its not the first time this has happened for child pornography charges on supposed respected pillars of society - child pornography violates children in the most cowardly manner - but, if the average joe doesn't pay parking fines or gets busted for a bit of weed , everything seams to be in order - shame on the Irish judiciary.

It would be the same if the average joe was found growing a million euros worth of cannabis in his flat. If the search warrant was invalid the conviction would be quashed.

The judiciary has to uphold constitutionally protected rights. If you think the judges sitting on the Court of Appeal, almost all of which have children IIRC took any pleasure from that verdict you're a fool. I suspect each one of them went home after that verdict after having a 'bad day at work' most of us will only have in our worst nightmares.

Cee-Jay-Cee

The bastard will now probably take a action against the state and fcuking win it too!!!

Christ the Redeemer

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

That's enough to get a case thrown out? There are threads about court summons with incorrect information in the 'Legal Discussion' forum every other day, and the answer is always that minor mistakes don't really matter.

They matter if you can afford a decent defence team.

thebaz

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

It's not a perfect system but really all the guards needed to do was check the bloody warrant!

you seam to blame the guards, I blame Raphael Farina for viewing the child pornography - this case make me so feckin angry - pure technical judicial bull****

LowKeyReturn

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

They matter if you can afford a decent defence team.

The team you get on legal aid is as good as any you can hire, it's actually a strength of the Irish system of independent barristers and huge competition. The state also get the cream of the crop in prosecution.

thebaz wrote: »

you seam to blame the guards, I blame Raphael Farina for viewing the child pornography - this case make me so feckin angry

This is a bit of a silly statement isn't it? Surely if society regulated itself there would be no need for the guards or the courts? If the guards had done their job the person would have stayed in prison. Lets not forget one judge already locked the guy up notwithstanding the faulty warrant.

thebaz

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

This is a bit of a silly statement isn't it?

child pornography is the lowest form of crime in my book , i just despise the legal loopholes used by the legal system , that I have little faith in or respect for , so perhaps I'm silly - I believe our legal system is a joke , that keeps an elite few well oiled in coin and delivers very little (Anglo inquiry or what have the tribunals actually delivered for all the money spent) . on that note, good night.

downonthefarm

the keystone cops strike again

LowKeyReturn

thebaz wrote: »

child pornography is the lowest form of crime in my book , i just despise the legal loopholes used by the legal system , that I have little faith in or respect for , so perhaps I'm silly - I believe our legal system is a joke , that keeps an elite few well oiled in coin and delivers very little (Anglo inquiry or what have the tribunals actually delivered for all the money spent) . on that note, good night.

You're ill-informed opinion, fueled it seems by the tabloid press, is one of the main reasons why change is so slow to happen in this country. If even a fraction of the misdirected anger was aimed in the directions it should be rather than the courts, change would be swift.

thebaz

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

You're ill-informed opinion, fueled it seems by the tabloid press, is one of the main reasons why change is so slow to happen in this country.

why do you say I am fuelled by the tabloid press ?

then again you have termed me silly , because I have little faith in our legal system , which has nothing to do with whether I read or don't tabloid newspapers.

ps perhaps if more of the judiciary did actually read more tabloid newspapers, they would be more in touch with the real world, rather than the law library world of antiquated books.

LowKeyReturn

thebaz wrote: »

why do you say I am fuelled by the tabloid press ?

then again you have termed me silly , because I have little faith in our legal system , which has nothing to do with whether I read or don't tabloid newspapers.

ps perhaps if more of the judiciary did actually read more tabloid newspapers, they would be more in touch with the real world, rather than the law library world of antiquated books.

I have no idea how silly you are, several statements you've made are ill-informed. For all I know you're an astrophysicist. I assume your opinions are formed by the tabloid press as you put forward the same misconceptions, perhaps it is mere coincidence.

What gives you the impression the Supreme Court (judges of which sit on the CCA) are out of touch?

Christ the Redeemer

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

What gives you the impression the Supreme Court (judges of which sit on the CCA) are out of touch?

Well, IMO it is evidenced by letting an admitted paedophile walk free over a typo.

I wonder would some lowly heroin dealer walk under the same circumstances.

LowKeyReturn

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

Well, IMO it is evidenced by letting an admitted paedophile walk free over a typo.

I wonder would some lowly heroin dealer walk under the same circumstances.

A typo? Several flaws in a warrant. Case on point was a good old fashioned criminal of some description, I cant remember what wholesome activity he was engaged in.

The courts are tied to upholding the law. The law is given to them by several sources including the Constitution and statute. You seem to be suggesting a judiciary with unfettered powers to change the law on a whim?

JJayoo

"Mr (Raphael) Farina of Spranger’s Yard, Crow Street, Temple Bar" some piece of sh1t.

downonthefarm

probably one of his guarda mates 'accidently' put the wrong date on the warrant to begin with,they are implicit in protecting those in the higher echelons of power in this country

thebaz

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

I have no idea how silly you are, several statements you've made are ill-informed. For all I know you're an astrophysicist. I assume your opinions are formed by the tabloid press as you put forward the same misconceptions, perhaps it is mere coincidence.

so I'm silly and misinformed , as are the tabloid press - if we can not protect the abuse of children in our society something is wrong - you are happy with cosy elite cartel of the Irish legal system , I'm not - so please less of the patronising comments

Christ the Redeemer

downonthefarm wrote: »

probably one of his guarda mates 'accidently' put the wrong date on the warrant to begin with,they are implicit in protecting those in the higher echelons of power in this country

I have a terrible feeling this is exactly what happened. Besides, a locked up with nothing to lose banking insider could become a rattling old can of worms for his "friends" in the industry.

A banker with nout to lose is dangerous to other bankers.

LowKeyReturn

downonthefarm wrote: »

probably one of his guarda mates 'accidently' put the wrong date on the warrant to begin with,they are implicit in protecting those in the higher echelons of power in this country

On that note, what exactly is a senior administrator? I assume he had masses of power and sat on some sort of throne and not just someone who had the keys to all the filing cabinets?