Garda Ombudsman "under high-tech surveillance"

raymon · 12-02-2014 4:03pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Taoiseach Orders Report on ‘Confidential Recipient and Whistleblower Conversation’

This is all related. Explosive stuff if verified. It is totally unacceptable that the Confidential Recipient, who was appointed by Minister Shatter and is one of his political donors, would try and discourage a whistle-blower from coming forward.

A quote from the transcript that is doing the rounds:

How is this related to the <Garda Ombudsman under high-tech surveillance > thread.

I understand that you and your party wants to throw random mud at shatter but this not related to the OP .

Phoebas · 12-02-2014 4:05pm

Rawhead wrote: »

Your right, he said that an international group of experts found that the chances of the anomalies occurring in the electronics in his office by coincidence where close to zero.

He didn't even say that - he said that chance of the telephone ringing immediately following the test on the line being a coincidence was close to zero.
But he didn't attribute the coincidence to evidence of bugging.

Sierra Oscar · 12-02-2014 4:06pm

raymon wrote: »

How is this related to the <Garda Ombudsman under high-tech surveillance > thread.

I understand that you and your party wants to throw random mud at shatter but this not related to the OP .

It is very relevant considering it has been alleged that the Minister has an unhealthy relationship with the Garda Commissioner, which in turn is why GSOC probably did not feel confident approaching the Minister to highlight their bugging concerns.

Now you have the Confidential Recipient, appointed by the Minister, trying to discourage a whistle-blower from revelaing damaging allegations against senior officers in An Garda Síochána.

raymon · 12-02-2014 4:14pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

It is very relevant considering it has been alleged that the Minister has an unhealthy relationship with the Garda Commissioner, which in turn is why GSOC probably did not feel confident approaching the Minister to highlight their bugging concerns.

Now you have the Confidential Recipient, appointed by the Minister, trying to discourage a whistle-blower from revelaing damaging allegations against senior officers in An Garda Síochána.

Who alleged that ? Michael Martin ? The Fianna Fail Press Desk? You ?

I understand that your party is disappointed that the "bugging" story didn't pan out quite as you would have hoped , and are keen to attach it to other stories.

Michael Martin looked defeated on the news yesterday evening trying to salvage the story.

DublinWriter · 12-02-2014 4:22pm

GSOC are probably going to also come under fire for dropping €18K on Verrimus without going through any EU tendering procedure.

Phoebas · 12-02-2014 4:31pm

DublinWriter wrote: »

GSOC are probably going to also come under fire for dropping €18K on Verrimus without going through any EU tendering procedure.

Would it even fall within the rules?

tomdempsey200 · 12-02-2014 4:32pm

DublinWriter wrote: »

GSOC are probably going to also come under fire for dropping €18K on Verrimus without going through any EU tendering procedure.

Would be a bad idea putting it to tender
18k is peanuts anyhow

DublinWriter · 12-02-2014 4:32pm

Phoebas wrote: »

Would it even fall within the rules?

Yes, 18K is well over the threshold.

Sierra Oscar · 12-02-2014 4:41pm

raymon wrote: »

Who alleged that ? Michael Martin ? The Fianna Fail Press Desk? You ?

Anyone with a brain capable of reading between the lines?

It has been commented on in the media since the story broke, and highlighted by all opposition parties since - whether they be FF, SF or Independents.

Also, we finally had Enda Kenny admit in the Dáil today that he misled people by claiming that GSOC were legally obliged to notify the Minister of the breach. The attempt to kill off the story by targeting GSOC has backfired spectacularly. It is worrying that we have a Taoiseach that cannot understand the law, either that or he is trying to interpret the law to suit his own agenda which is even worse.

Did Enda Kenny Just Tell a Lie?

raymon · 12-02-2014 5:07pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Anyone with a brain capable of reading between the lines?

Indeed

hatrickpatrick · 12-02-2014 5:09pm

Apparently the committee meeting is in private session, which is a change from the previous announcement that it would be webcast. Interesting.

edanto · 12-02-2014 5:14pm

Now, that's a pity. Bloody glad GSOC got to go on Prime Time.

Sierra Oscar · 12-02-2014 5:27pm

It is starting now.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/livewebcast/DVR-Flash-Committee3.htm

hatrickpatrick · 12-02-2014 5:27pm

I stand corrected, it's working

Godge · 12-02-2014 5:30pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Apparently the committee meeting is in private session, which is a change from the previous announcement that it would be webcast. Interesting.

edanto wrote: »

Now, that's a pity. Bloody glad GSOC got to go on Prime Time.

???? It is live on Oireachtas TV, consipracy gone mad.

All committees meet to discuss agenda, future business etc. in private session for about five/ten minutes before starting main business.

edanto · 12-02-2014 5:30pm

He should really work on his pronunciation of Síochána - that will really get their goat up. Just call them the Garda if you have to mate!

Sierra Oscar · 12-02-2014 5:36pm

As I suspected, GSOC have said that a report marked 'secret' (which I assume is the security sweep report) has come into the hands of a journalist. I guess we will see that emerge in the Sunday Times, or perhaps before then.

Scofflaw · 12-02-2014 5:42pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

As I suspected, GSOC have said that a report marked 'secret' (which I assume is the security sweep report) has come into the hands of a journalist. I guess we will see that emerge in the Sunday Times, or perhaps before then.

Hmm. If GSOC confirm that the journalist reporting has seen the security report, that would put a very much more serious complexion on the journalist's article, because while GSOC might well limit themselves publicly in their admission of breaches, the journalist wouldn't.

That would suggest in turn that the endless dissection of GSOC press releases is rather fruitless except as an indicator of what they're not saying.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sierra Oscar · 12-02-2014 5:47pm

The Ombudsman Commissioner stated that after learning of the bugging, GSOC launched a formal investigation with An Garda Síochána being the chief suspects.

This brings us back to the main question - why did GSOC suspect An Garda Síochána of being involved, and what events lead to GSOC deciding to do a security sweep?

EDIT: This is serious for Minister Shatter I would imagine. He has been contradicted by GSOC already, and the opening address has only just finished.

Godge · 12-02-2014 5:57pm

Scofflaw wrote: »

Hmm. If GSOC confirm that the journalist reporting has seen the security report, that would put a very much more serious complexion on the journalist's article, because while GSOC might well limit themselves publicly in their admission of breaches, the journalist wouldn't.

That would suggest in turn that the endless dissection of GSOC press releases is rather fruitless except as an indicator of what they're not saying.

cordially,
Scofflaw

It is clear that the Commissioner is distancing himself from what is in the report but expects that the journalist has it.

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The Ombudsman Commissioner stated that after learning of the bugging, GSOC launched a formal investigation with An Garda Síochána being the chief suspects.

This brings us back to the main question - why did GSOC suspect An Garda Síochána of being involved, and what events lead to GSOC deciding to do a security sweep?

EDIT: This is serious for Minister Shatter I would imagine. He has been contradicted by GSOC already, and the opening address has only just finished.

Paranoia is one of the reasons GSOC suspected AGS.

Interesting that nobody has focussed on the leaking of the report and how safe data including reports held by the GSOC is. If, as now believed, a report belonging to GSOC, marked "Secret", is now in the hands of a journalist, what guarantees are there around any other information the GSOC has.

Sierra Oscar · 12-02-2014 5:59pm

Godge wrote: »

Interesting that nobody has focussed on the leaking of the report and how safe data including reports held by the GSOC is. If, as now believed, a report belonging to GSOC, marked "Secret", is now in the hands of a journalist, what guarantees are there around any other information the GSOC has.

Very true, in fairness to the Gardaí one of the points they have been arguing is that they should not have to hand over extensive files / access to GSOC because the data may not be secure outside of the force and it was originally collected for use within the force only. Fair point too in my view.

Godge · 12-02-2014 6:02pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Very true, in fairness to the Gardaí one of the points they have been arguing is that they should not have to hand over extensive files / access to GSOC because the data may not be secure outside of the force and it was originally collected for use within the force only. Fair point too in my view.

Michael Healy-Rae makes the point about the leak.

Launching an investigation in the leak, anyone found to have leaked will be brought to justice.

Commissioner has every confidence in the Minister.

Scofflaw · 12-02-2014 6:11pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The Ombudsman Commissioner stated that after learning of the bugging, GSOC launched a formal investigation with An Garda Síochána being the chief suspects.

This brings us back to the main question - why did GSOC suspect An Garda Síochána of being involved, and what events lead to GSOC deciding to do a security sweep?

EDIT: This is serious for Minister Shatter I would imagine. He has been contradicted by GSOC already, and the opening address has only just finished.

I think it's actually GSOC's job to suspect the Gardai, and I would imagine that the experience of other police ombudsmen elsewhere would suggest the police force as the immediate suspect.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Godge · 12-02-2014 6:12pm

GCOS: "Had I been Garda Commissioner, I would have been furious"

He also praised the work of the men and women of AGS.

Full of praise for the Garda Commissioner.

"Could be likely that the person who leaked this report is also responsible for other issues in our organisation". Now that is very interesting.

tayto lover · 12-02-2014 6:15pm

Paranoia is one of the reasons GSOC suspected AGS.

Interesting that nobody has focussed on the leaking of the report and how safe data including reports held by the GSOC is. If, as now believed, a report belonging to GSOC, marked "Secret", is now in the hands of a journalist, what guarantees are there around any other information the GSOC has.[/QUOTE]

I have suspected that journalists were involved in this from the start especially after the News of the World scandal. Juicy stories in the Ombudsmans office.

raymon · 12-02-2014 6:24pm

Looks like an internal mole now !!

K-9 · 12-02-2014 6:26pm

Godge wrote: »

GCOS: "Had I been Garda Commissioner, I would have been furious"

He also praised the work of the men and women of AGS.

Full of praise for the Garda Commissioner.

"Could be likely that the person who leaked this report is also responsible for other issues in our organisation". Now that is very interesting.

By our organisation I assume he means GCOS? Wonder what that's about.

Scofflaw · 12-02-2014 6:39pm

K-9 wrote: »

By our organisation I assume he means GCOS? Wonder what that's about.

The original claim was that one of the factors motivating the security sweep was the amount of information in the public debate about GSOC cases - that is, that too much was known about GSOC's internal doings.

So it could be the case that whoever leaked the security report was also responsible for the leaks that prompted the security sweep in the first place.

That could be someone in the organisation, or it could be that the same people who had the surveillance in place also leaked the report - or both, if you see what I mean. One thing the leaking of an internal secret report does tell you, of course, is that you do definitely have a leak, and it's more than a bit of loose talk or intelligent guesswork on other people's part.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick · 12-02-2014 6:48pm

tayto lover wrote: »

Paranoia is one of the reasons GSOC suspected AGS.

I don't see why everyone is questioning why the Gardaí would have been suspects. The Gardaí are the people the Ombudsman investigates, they (possible tied with journalists) have the most to gain from such surveillance, they have the motive, they have the means - why wouldn't they be suspects?

For example: If both the Gardaí and the Irish Nurses Organization had the ability to engage in this type of eavesdropping, would you expect both to be suspects on the same level, even though one has a connection to GSOC and a motive for spying, and the other does not?

The Gardaí were suspected because they have both the ability and a reason to want to engage in this kind of surveillance, and nobody else has both.

Why is this so shocking?

Godge · 12-02-2014 6:56pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I don't see why everyone is questioning why the Gardaí would have been suspects. The Gardaí are the people the Ombudsman investigates, they (possible tied with journalists) have the most to gain from such surveillance, they have the motive, they have the means - why wouldn't they be suspects?

For example: If both the Gardaí and the Irish Nurses Organization had the ability to engage in this type of eavesdropping, would you expect both to be suspects on the same level, even though one has a connection to GSOC and a motive for spying, and the other does not?

The Gardaí were suspected because they have both the ability and a reason to want to engage in this kind of surveillance, and nobody else has both.

Why is this so shocking?

Individual gardai about whom complaints are made would have a motive but they wouldn't have the means, unless ordinary people have the means, in which case any nosebody is a suspect.

AGS, as an organisation, does not have a motive but possibly would have the means.

Linking individual gardai (or even small groups of Gardai) under investigation with AGS as an organisation is a huge leap, the kind of leap that falls under conspiracy theory.

It would be like arguing that the CGOS as an organisation deliberately leaked the document to a journalist because they wanted to discredit the gardai. Again, not likely.

Garda Ombudsman "under high-tech surveillance"

Comments