3 court sittings (traffic)

carzony

Over the last few years i'v been summonsed to court for :

twice for non producer (tax, insurance and nct) was struck out because I had all my details.

2. I was also sent to court a few weeks ago for ''failing to report change of ownership'' on my car.. This matter was struck out due to garda not attending court 3 times..

I was wondering how that appears on my record or does it even show up on my record atall? And who put this information on file courts or gardai?

Thanks..

NoQuarter

carzony wrote: »

Over the last few years i'v been summonsed to court for :

twice for non producer (tax, insurance and nct) was struck out because I had all my details.

2. I was also sent to court a few weeks ago for ''failing to report change of ownership'' on my car.. This matter was struck out due to garda not attending court 3 times..

I was wondering how that appears on my record or does it even show up on my record atall? And who put this information on file courts or gardai?

Thanks..

Its probably on the Garda PULSE system which is no big deal but you certainly dont need to disclose it for any application form as there is no criminal record there.

coylemj

'Case dismissed', 'struck out' or 'not guilty' means nothing goes on your record.

The major grey area which has been the subject of multiple threads here is where the prosecution case is proved but the judge allows the defendant to make a contribution to the court poor box. Afterwards the individual posts here asking if he/she has a record and if it will show up in a Garda vetting exercise or if it will affect their ability to get a visa for the US or Oz. Depending on the level of vetting, whether your slate is clean can depend on whether the judge applied the Probation Act or simply struck out the charge, in many cases the defendant can't remember which.

None of those apply in your case, you were never convicted of anything.

carzony

NoQuarter wrote: »

Its probably on the Garda PULSE system which is no big deal but you certainly dont need to disclose it for any application form as there is no criminal record there.

would it be marked down as struck out or garda did not appear?

timmy4u2

Not recorded; no need to declare and only place it would be on Pulse is for the purpose of completing the summons for issue by the DCC.
If you have a hang up about it you can ask to have it deleted-the fact that a summons was issued.

carzony

so I can even have it deleted from pulse? I thought this would look bad for me in things like garda vetting and such? I know there was no record but it's still attendance in court..

timmy4u2

carzony wrote: »

so I can even have it deleted from pulse? I thought this would look bad for me in things like garda vetting and such? I know there was no record but it's still attendance in court..

Attendance in court means nothing.
I could pick your name out of the telephone directory and have a plenary summons issued under The Ferocious Haircut Act.
There is nothing you could do to prevent it but obviously you would have to appear in court to dispell it; so appearing in court is not a mark on your character.
This may help you
http://www.iccl.ie/garda%C3%AD-2.html

Bepolite

As it's not been said yet, and your question has be answered, stop acting the maggot in relation to your car(s). You've beaten the odds at this stage, quit while you're ahead.

carzony

Bepolite wrote: »

As it's not been said yet, and your question has be answered, stop acting the maggot in relation to your car(s). You've beaten the odds at this stage, quit while you're ahead.

First time I wasn't asked to produce so that wasn't really avoidable.. Beating what odds? I always had everything in the first place.. Local Guards seem to just like to look busy at this stage;)

Cody Pomeray

Garda vetting releases information on prosecutions, but does that refer to prosecutions which merely commenced, or does it refer only to prosecutions completed, be they successful or not?

Bepolite

carzony wrote: »

First time I wasn't asked to produce so that wasn't really avoidable.. Beating what odds? I always had everything in the first place.. Local Guards seem to just like to look busy at this stage;)

Not really, you've non producers and failed to change ownership.

Crack on it'll bite you in the arse eventually.

johnnyskeleton

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Garda vetting releases information on prosecutions, but does that refer to prosecutions which merely commenced, or does it refer only to prosecutions completed, be they successful or not?

I've heard that sometimes they disclose everything, although they really shouldn't. AFAIK the US Embassy requires information on even an arrest for a serious offence e.g. OAS.

Perhaps it depends on what precisely you ask them for, but really it should be limited to just convictions.

carzony

Bepolite wrote: »

Not really, you've non producers and failed to change ownership.

Crack on it'll bite you in the arse eventually.

In the eyes of the law i'v done nothing wrong

dublin daz

As discussed many times here before:


Within current disclosure policy, details of all convictions and/or prosecutions, successful or not, pending or completed, in the State or elsewhere as the case may be are disclosed to the authorised liaison person in the registered organisation.


http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1535

dublin daz

Just to add, if you request a Police Certificate it will only show successful prosecutions. If the cases have been dismissed then it wont show so visas wont be an issue as they usually ask for Police Certs as they are not usually registered with the Gardai for vetting purposes.

timmy4u2

Prosecution is the act of holding a "trial" in relation to a Criminal Act. It is taken out in the name of the state.
I would expect that the Gardai are sensible enough not to include an unprosecuted no tax offence in their report. Or are they not?

Maybe all the more reason that the non incident is not retained on the Pulse system contrary to Data Protection.

hullaballoo

There must be some question about when a prosecution begins though. Is it on issuing of the summons or receipt of the complaint? It may be open to interpretation.

Does anyone have any views on the validity of these types of disclosure?

dublin daz

timmy4u2 wrote: »

Prosecution is the act of holding a "trial" in relation to a Criminal Act. It is taken out in the name of the state.
I would expect that the Gardai are sensible enough not to include an unprosecuted no tax offence in their report. Or are they not?

Maybe all the more reason that the non incident is not retained on the Pulse system contrary to Data Protection.

The fixed penalty notice give you two options. One - pay the fine and that is the end of the matter or two - don't pay and be prosecuted.

The summons is issued on foot of a complaint by the Gardai and that is when the prosecution begins, a date will be set for hearing.

The act of prosecuting a case before the courts is not exclusive to the criminal law.

dublin daz

hullaballoo wrote: »

Does anyone have any views on the validity of these types of disclosure?

I personally have no issue with the recording of facts. Current disclosure policy can be very useful to organisations who vet individuals and their suitability to certain positions of trust like teaching etc.

I would certainly wonder as to the suitability of someone who has been before the courts x number of times for x offences.

The only concern would be the presumption of innocence - but then if cases are struck out because of a failure to appear by the prosecuting Garda then the issue of innocence is skewed but then again the defendant hasnt been proven guilty either.

Its a hard one and I think a lot will change when the new vetting act comes into force.

carzony

I was always under the assumption that everything to do with courts was recorded. I dont know why I thought that..

Cody Pomeray

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I've heard that sometimes they disclose everything, although they really shouldn't. AFAIK the US Embassy requires information on even an arrest for a serious offence e.g. OAS.

Perhaps it depends on what precisely you ask them for, but really it should be limited to just convictions.

I agree, although I can see why Gardaí would release 'soft' information i.e. commenced, but incomplete, or failed prosecutions where the vetting relates to exposing the individual to children and vulnerable adults. Wasn't that why Ian Huntley got his job in Soham primary school? Previous allegations of sexual abuse had not been released for data protection reasons, there was a big furore at the time.

Nevertheless the current situation, which you describe re: trivial offences, and which seems to be substantiated on the Garda website, has to be a concern.

There was a recent English Supreme Court case taken against the Manchester Police, where the release of soft information on police vetting was held to be incompatible with article 8 ECHR. Some woman had stolen a bicycle and it was affecting her ability to get into the army. Although I think the offence was spent, so that might be irrelevant to Ireland.