garda whistleblowers. heros or just disgruntled employees??

lets face it, they seem a bit mad, no?????

i wasnt allowed out of station because i had a beard, that isnt allowed, so i thought id get my own back on the local chief superintendent.
i got in trouble in dublin because i shot a gun, from inside a car, straight across the drivers face through a window!!

the other one, i tape record everyone i speak to!!!!
paranoid much??????

and, if im not mistaken, both these guys have accessed peoples private information on the pulse system. against Data Protection no?

from interviews i've heard, they're a right pair of weirdos!!

why would the country believe they are great fellows??

Hootanany

Do one Alan.

GenieOz

bubblypop wrote: »

why would the country believe they are great fellows??

For blowing the whistle on the crap that was going on, it's not like everyone thinks they're great for the other stuff.

who's alan????

Sir Arthur Daley

bubblypop wrote: »

who's alan????

He is married to Alice.

wazky

bubblypop wrote: »

who's alan????

Partridge

Hootanany

bubblypop wrote: »

who's alan????

He writes crappy books.

Gatling

There's some interesting stuff in the leaked dossier all over the news in the past few days ,

Including criminal got bail only to reoffend how did this criminal get bail ,

Courth ,solicitor ,DPP and a judge ,trial date ,

What's the whistleblower trying to say here exactly

GenieOz

GenieOz wrote: »

For blowing the whistle on the crap that was going on, it's not like everyone thinks they're great for the other stuff.

but what crap??
that superintendents can cancel tickets?

sure thats always been the case, i believe its the law.

you get a ticket that you believe to be wrong, all you do is write to the superintendent, explain why etc 'i had to bring my really old mother to the doctors, she cant walk well because she had a hip replacement 2 months ago, so i parked outside on double yellows for 5 mins just to bring her in. then i came out and moved my car'

any reasonable superintendent would cancel this right??

wazky

WikiHow wrote: »

He is married to Alice.

Alice?!, Who the fcuk is Alice?!

bajer101

bubblypop wrote: »

lets face it, they seem a bit mad, no?????

i wasnt allowed out of station because i had a beard, that isnt allowed, so i thought id get my own back on the local chief superintendent.
i got in trouble in dublin because i shot a gun, from inside a car, straight across the drivers face through a window!!

the other one, i tape record everyone i speak to!!!!
paranoid much??????

and, if im not mistaken, both these guys have accessed peoples private information on the pulse system. against Data Protection no?

from interviews i've heard, they're a right pair of weirdos!!

why would the country believe they are great fellows??

You have made quite a few posts in the Emergency Services forum that would lead one to believe that you are a member of AGS. And here you pop up in After Hours starting a thread trying to discredit two whistle blowers who reported wrongdoing by members of your organisation! Agenda much?

Sir Arthur Daley

bajer101 wrote: »

You have made quite a few posts in the Emergency Services forum that would lead one to believe that you are a member of AGS. And here you pop up in After Hours starting a thread trying to discredit two whistle blowers who reported wrongdoing by members of your organisation! Agenda much?

This is pure inspector morse stuff.

bajer101

bajer101 wrote: »

You have made quite a few posts in the Emergency Services forum that would lead one to believe that you are a member of AGS. And here you pop up in After Hours starting a thread trying to discredit two whistle blowers who reported wrongdoing by members of your organisation! Agenda much?

well im certainly not the commisioner or minister for justice, so why would i discredit someone if they were genuiely showing up some terrible injustice????

do you not think that members of AGS would welcome bad practise being shown for what it is?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

It all depends on what they have to say or disclose. That will dictate whether it's crap or not.

thestar

I'm currently in the recruitment process for AGS and it crossed my mind as to what I would say on the issue if I was asked in an interview, the fact that Callinan described their actions shows to me that I would have to slate the whistleblowers. Morally what these two guys did was correct however

bajer101

bubblypop wrote: »

well im certainly not the commisioner or minister for justice, so why would i discredit someone if they were genuiely showing up some terrible injustice????

do you not think that members of AGS would welcome bad practise being shown for what it is?

One would hope. Yet, here you are trying to discredit them? This isn't just about penalty points, there were a lot of other serious cases of malpractice highlighted. But I get the impression that if you uncovered malpractice that resulted in the murder of an innocent woman you wouldn't have reported it. As was concluded by the Judge in the Smithwick tribunal, there is a culture in AGS of valuing loyalty over truth. At least McCabe an Wilson had the balls to break that culture. Try and discredit them as much as you want, the cat is well and truly out of the bag at this stage.

When the personal attacks start, you know you have them worried.

bajer101

bajer101 wrote: »

One would hope. Yet, here you are trying to discredit them? This isn't just about penalty points, there were a lot of other serious cases of malpractice highlighted. But I get the impression that if you uncovered malpractice that resulted in the murder of an innocent woman you wouldn't have reported it. As was concluded by the Judge in the Smithwick tribunal, there is a culture in AGS of valuing loyalty over truth. At least McCabe an Wilson had the balls to break that culture. Try and discredit them as much as you want, the cat is well and truly out of the bag at this stage.

When the personal attacks start, you know you have them worried.

absolutely not, if anybody actually uncovered serious malpractise im sure they would do something about it.

i dont think that joe public should be just backing people that they know nothing about, believing them 100%. why these two?
why not any other member of the garda?

and again, i repeat, what did they actually whistleblow about?
superintendents cancelling tickets? sure that was part of their job!

bajer101

bubblypop wrote: »

absolutely not, if anybody actually uncovered serious malpractise im sure they would do something about it.

i dont think that joe public should be just backing people that they know nothing about, believing them 100%. why these two?
why not any other member of the garda?

and again, i repeat, what did they actually whistleblow about?
superintendents cancelling tickets? sure that was part of their job!

They reported the malpractice that resulted in the murder of Sylvia Roche-Kelly by Jerry McGrath. They reported a case where a young woman was seriously assaulted by three men, but no charges were brought and the woman was handed €150 and sent packing. They reported malpractice in other cases of assault, abduction and false imprisonment. And also the penalty points fiasco with yet to be confirmed reports that some people who had their points incorrectly cancelled were later involved in fatal RTAs.

I have heard them being interviewed and have found them to be believable. I have heard of the treatment that they received at the hands of other members of AGS and found that "disgusting". I am also guided by the opinion of them reported by Conor Brady, the former chariman of GSOC and by Oliver Connolly the confidential recipient who have stated that they found both men to be very hounourable.

Specialun

What a load of bollox..these men should be applauded for blowing it all wide open.I cannot see one reason against it.Sylvia roche kelly could still be alive only for the gombeen behaviour of senior guards.

Time must be right bad when a guard has to come on AH to drum up support

bajer101

bajer101 wrote: »

They reported the malpractice that resulted in the murder of Sylvia Roche-Kelly by Jerry McGrath. They reported a case where a young woman was seriously assaulted by three men, but no charges were brought and the woman was handed €150 and sent packing. They reported malpractice in other cases of assault, abduction and false imprisonment. And also the penalty points fiasco with yet to be confirmed reports that some people who had their points incorrectly cancelled were later involved in fatal RTAs.

I have heard them being interviewed and have found them to be believable. I have heard of the treatment that they received at the hands of other members of AGS and found that "disgusting". I am also guided by the opinion of them reported by Conor Brady, the former chariman of GSOC and by Oliver Connolly the confidential recipient who have stated that they found both men to be very hounourable.

that murder was absolutely terrible, but i really dont think you can say it was garda malpractise that caused it, yes he was out on bail but how many cases are in court every single day of people that have committed crimes whilst on bail??
i dont think you can say, yes this is one individual Guards fault, HE allowed this man out to murder someone. definately not.

points incorrectly cancelled? who decides that they are incorrectly cancelled? if someone had points cancelled by a Superintendent, surely he was the man to decide if they were worthy of cancellation?
do you think you know better than the Superintendent

i must admit im not aware of the assault case you are talking about, but if it can be shown that Gardai maliciously allowed someone to go free, then obviously something should be done about that.

just as an aside, if you heard that gardai were looking up neighbours/relations/aquatenances on the pulse system, how would you feel about that?? would that be ok? even though thats clearly against the Data Protection Act.............

Specialun

bubblypop wrote: »

that murder was absolutely terrible, but i really dont think you can say it was garda malpractise that caused it, yes he was out on bail but how many cases are in court every single day of people that have committed crimes whilst on bail??
i dont think you can say, yes this is one individual Guards fault, HE allowed this man out to murder someone. definately not.

points incorrectly cancelled? who decides that they are incorrectly cancelled? if someone had points cancelled by a Superintendent, surely he was the man to decide if they were worthy of cancellation?
do you think you know better than the Superintendent

i must admit im not aware of the assault case you are talking about, but if it can be shown that Gardai maliciously allowed someone to go free, then obviously something should be done about that.

just as an aside, if you heard that gardai were looking up neighbours/relations/aquatenances on the pulse system, how would you feel about that?? would that be ok? even though thats clearly against the Data Protection Act.............

Without tne malpractice would the lady still be alive? Yes or no

Kristopherus

bubblypop wrote: »

that murder was absolutely terrible, but i really dont think you can say it was garda malpractise that caused it, yes he was out on bail but how many cases are in court every single day of people that have committed crimes whilst on bail??
i dont think you can say, yes this is one individual Guards fault, HE allowed this man out to murder someone. definately not.

points incorrectly cancelled? who decides that they are incorrectly cancelled? if someone had points cancelled by a Superintendent, surely he was the man to decide if they were worthy of cancellation?
do you think you know better than the Superintendent

i must admit im not aware of the assault case you are talking about, but if it can be shown that Gardai maliciously allowed someone to go free, then obviously something should be done about that.

just as an aside, if you heard that gardai were looking up neighbours/relations/aquatenances on the pulse system, how would you feel about that?? would that be ok? even though thats clearly against the Data Protection Act.............

But in the McGrath case the big mistake was that the Gardai failed to tell the Judge in the bail hearing for the Tipp abduction attempt, the that bastard was on bail for the Cavan assault. That single omission allowed McGrath to kill Sylvia Roche-Kelly. IMO all the other omissions pale into insignificance when compared to that one:(.

bajer101

bubblypop wrote: »

that murder was absolutely terrible, but i really dont think you can say it was garda malpractise that caused it, yes he was out on bail but how many cases are in court every single day of people that have committed crimes whilst on bail??
i dont think you can say, yes this is one individual Guards fault, HE allowed this man out to murder someone. definately not.

He was out on bail, but that is not where the alleged malpractice occurred. The original assault case against Mary Lynch was incorrectly handled and the real issue is that when he appeared in court on the attempted child abduction case, because of the way his case had been mishandled, it was not reported to the court that he was already on bail! If it had been, he would have been denied bail and would have been remanded in custody. Instead, he was released on bail and was free to commit murder. GSOC undertook an investigation into this case and made recommendations of actions to be taken. Guess what happened? Nothing!

points incorrectly cancelled? who decides that they are incorrectly cancelled? if someone had points cancelled by a Superintendent, surely he was the man to decide if they were worthy of cancellation?
do you think you know better than the Superintendent

The whole penalty points issue has been a whitewash and needs to be properly investigated. The internal investigation was a sham with the two lads themselves not even being interviewed. No one is saying that AGS shouldn't have the ability to show discretion - and god forbid that the fallout from this results in that happening - but even the internal whitewash showed that there were points incorrectly wiped. There is no escaping that it will be investigated fully now, and the truth will hopefully emerge.

i must admit im not aware of the assault case you are talking about, but if it can be shown that Gardai maliciously allowed someone to go free, then obviously something should be done about that.

That's just one of the many cases that are in the dossier that the whistleblowers submitted. Michael Martin was on drivetime this evening and he said that all the cases originate in the same area.

just as an aside, if you heard that gardai were looking up neighbours/relations/aquatenances on the pulse system, how would you feel about that?? would that be ok? even though thats clearly against the Data Protection Act.............

That's an aside as that is not really what happened in this case. They weren't just looking into cases to discover a bit of gossip - they were looking for evidence of malpractice. By definition, whistleblowers have to break the rules of their employers to make the wrongdoing public. They will usually be vilified for this. But history usually judges them as having taken the correct course of action.

J K

bajer101 wrote: »

it was not reported to the court that he was already on bail! If it had been, he would have been denied bail and would have been remanded in custody. .

this remark shows that you know nothing about the irish criminal justice system.

Kristopherus

Kristopherus wrote: »

But in the McGrath case the big mistake was that the Gardai failed to tell the Judge in the bail hearing for the Tipp abduction attempt, the that bastard was on bail for the Cavan assault. That single omission allowed McGrath to kill Sylvia Roche-Kelly. IMO all the other omissions pale into insignificance when compared to that one:(.

We don't know that the judge wouldn't have given him bail in this case even if he did know he was already on bail.
There are a huge amount of offenders that commit crimes while on bail.
Its not fair but that is the judges decision.

In this particular case, yes, the judge should've been aware of all the details but it still does not mean he wouldn't have got bail.

bajer101

J K wrote: »

this remark shows that you know nothing about the irish criminal justice system.

Another member of AGS to give his unbiased opinion? Coming in to defend his colleague. As Judge Smithwick reported, "loyalty over truth".

The original attack was extremely serious and was mishandled. The attempted abduction of the child was also very sinister. I may not have as much inside knowledge of the bail laws, but at the very least one would have to think that there was a very good possibility that he would have been remanded in custody.

You are doing yourselves no favours lads. The vast majority of people have absolutely no problem with the rank and file members of AGS - myself included. Most people would count family members and/or friends as members. But this issue has really got the public's back up, and blindly attacking the whistle blowers is just giving the public the impression that even the rank and file members have something to hide.

For the record, I actually believe that the support within AGS for the two lads is increasing. I believe that most ordinary members wouldn't be too enamoured with the upper echelons of AGS. I think it would make for a much healthier debate if members of AGS discussed these issues honestly, instead of just blindly attacking the whistle blowers and defending each other.

J K

bajer101 wrote: »

Another member of AGS to give his unbiased opinion? Coming in to defend his colleague. As Judge Smithwick reported, "loyalty over truth".

I'll leave you to your circle jerk then if you feel inclined to censor balanced debate. It was Judge Morris not Smithwick who made that comment - to cover for the fact that at huge expense to the tax payer his show trial failed to bring justice on a number of individual gardai guilty of wrong doing and threw up a smoke screen castigating 14000 members of which he knew nothing about and had heard no evidence about during his tribunal.

bajer101

bubblypop wrote: »

We don't know that the judge wouldn't have given him bail in this case even if he did know he was already on bail.
There are a huge amount of offenders that commit crimes while on bail.
Its not fair but that is the judges decision.

In this particular case, yes, the judge should've been aware of all the details but it still does not mean he wouldn't have got bail.

But there is a much greater chance that he would have been remanded in custody, if the Judge had been aware that he was already out on bail. The malpractice that was exposed ensured that he wasn't remanded in custody, and as a result he was definitely free to commit murder.

I don't understand why you are trying to defend this or to obscure the issue. Have you any idea how it looks to the public? You should be saying - "Jaysus, that was terrible. There are some clowns out there who have really messed up and are giving the rest of us decent Guards a bad name."

As Dr. Tom Clonan said, his father and grandfather were members of AGS, but at the moment when he sees the badge, there is a question mark over it!

Nermal

bubblypop wrote: »

you get a ticket that you believe to be wrong, all you do is write to the superintendent, explain why etc 'i had to bring my really old mother to the doctors, she cant walk well because she had a hip replacement 2 months ago, so i parked outside on double yellows for 5 mins just to bring her in. then i came out and moved my car'

any reasonable superintendent would cancel this right??

A superintendent in a normal police service would tell you to get lost at that point. That's the problem with AGS.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

bubblypop wrote: »

lets face it, they seem a bit mad, no?????

i wasnt allowed out of station because i had a beard, that isnt allowed, so i thought id get my own back on the local chief superintendent.
i got in trouble in dublin because i shot a gun, from inside a car, straight across the drivers face through a window!!

the other one, i tape record everyone i speak to!!!!
paranoid much??????

and, if im not mistaken, both these guys have accessed peoples private information on the pulse system. against Data Protection no?

from interviews i've heard, they're a right pair of weirdos!!

why would the country believe they are great fellows??

This has been a Party Political Broadcast by Alan Shatter TD the minister for Garda incompetence cover ups.

bajer101

J K wrote: »

I'll leave you to your circle jerk then if you feel inclined to censor balanced debate. It was Judge Morris not Smithwick who made that comment - to cover for the fact that at huge expense to the tax payer his show trial failed to bring justice on a number of individual gardai guilty of wrong doing and threw up a smoke screen castigating 14000 members of which he knew nothing about and had heard no evidence about during his tribunal.

"Circle Jerk"! Are you aware of the irony? I am in now way trying to censor balanced debate and I don't understand how you can make that statement. I am putting forward reasoned, rational arguments, whereas all you have done is throwing out a meaningless one liner; cast aspersions; and exhibited total arrogance in stating facts that are completely wrong. It was Judge Smithwick, not Morris who mentioned the loyalty issue:

"“Loyalty is prized above honesty."

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/smithwick-tribunal-report-culture-must-change-if-confidence-in-garda-is-to-be-maintained-says-judge-1.1616165

The Morris case was also another window into the corruption that exists at in some sections of the AGS. You're not doing much to reassure me that you're not all like that, or that you are interested in being an accountable, transparent organisation.

So in your mind, the end justifies the means?

If you were stopped for speeding, and the 2nd guard at the checkpoint decided to look up your personal info & see if you paid a ticket, you think that's ok?

What if you wrote a letter to the superintendent b
stating that you had a serious medical condition & you were speeding to get home in relation to that? Or your father was beating your mother & you were rushing home to deal with it? Or your granny had just been brought into hospital & was about to die?
Do you think its ok for some random individual to bring your case up to a third party?
Perhaps give your story to a TD?

All I'm saying is, people shouldn't be so quick to say just 2 people are right & and the other 12 thousand are wrong without knowing all the background.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

This has been a Party Political Broadcast by Alan Shatter TD the minister for Garda incompetence cover ups.

I doubt you will find too many gardai ready to stand behind the minister for justice

J K

bajer101 wrote: »

But there is a much greater chance that he would have been remanded in custody, if the Judge had been aware that he was already out on bail.

Every criminal that is brought into every garda station through every hour of each day has typically dozens of cases pending. At any given time they are rotating through different stages in the life cycle of many cases anywhere from five to fifty. That's the life of a career criminal - you're picking up charges as you go along. Occupational hazard. The fact that you are currently on bail for multiple other charges does not have a bearing on whether you get bail. In this country it is extremely difficult and unusual to get an accused remanded in custody. Only in the strongest circumstances will a district court deny someone bail. And even then they will usually get it from the High Court a couple of days later.

Pay a trip to a court room sometime if doubt this.

Also if you're criticising how a garda presented a case in court bear in mind they have no legal training. The state could and should send a barristor or solicitor to represent the state/prosecution. The accused will have the best legal representation your money can buy.

Nermal

Nermal wrote: »

A superintendent in a normal police service would tell you to get lost at that point. That's the problem with AGS.

Well maybe AGS should operate a zero tolerance policy then in future.
Do you think that's what the country needs?
Police that couldn't give a crap about your personal circumstance & screw you at every opportunity?

J K

bajer101 wrote: »

"Circle Jerk"! Are you aware of the irony? I am in now way trying to censor balanced debate and I don't understand how you can make that statement.

I addressed the content of your post. You responded with a snide remark addressing what you assume is my occupation. It was the third post in the thread where desenting opinion was addressed with 'Oh Garda' response.

So if you don't want dissenting oppinion and just want a rant then carry on.

bajer101

bubblypop wrote: »

So in your mind, the end justifies the means?

If you were stopped for speeding, and the 2nd guard at the checkpoint decided to look up your personal info & see if you paid a ticket, you think that's ok?

What if you wrote a letter to the superintendent b
stating that you had a serious medical condition & you were speeding to get home in relation to that? Or your father was beating your mother & you were rushing home to deal with it? Or your granny had just been brought into hospital & was about to die?
Do you think its ok for some random individual to bring your case up to a third party?
Perhaps give your story to a TD?

All I'm saying is, people shouldn't be so quick to say just 2 people are right & and the other 12 thousand are wrong without knowing all the background.

The problem with your argument is that no one is disagreeing that AGS should not have discretion. The Irish public actually really like that AGS use discretion in a lot of cases. We've all been stopped, got the verbal warning and have then been given the nod and told not to let it happen again. The Irish public love that about our police force. When we see some TV shows of police in other countries who are like feckin robots - we smile to ourselves and are glad that our police are not like that.

But that is not the problem here! Apparently, since the penalty points scandal has come to the fore, the health of the nations kids and grandmothers has drastically improved. Because those excuses are a lot less prevalent on pulse when points are wiped. The conclusion being, that those excuses were used when they weren't actually true at all!

bajer101

bajer101 wrote: »

The problem with your argument is that no one is disagreeing that AGS should not have discretion. The Irish public actually really like that AGS use discretion in a lot of cases. We've all been stopped, got the verbal warning and have then been given the nod and told not to let it happen again. The Irish public love that about our police force. When we see some TV shows of police in other countries who are like feckin robots - we smile to ourselves and are glad that our police are not like that.

But that is not the problem here! Apparently, since the penalty points scandal has come to the fore, the health of the nations kids and grandmothers has drastically improved. Because those excuses are a lot less prevalent on pulse when points are wiped. The conclusion being, that those excuses were used when they weren't actually true at all!

Well in fairness, guards are told plenty of fibs at the side of the road, have done it myself, & they let u away with a little lecture & a 'don't do it again'
So basically, do you think its ok for a guard to believe people but a superintendent is not to believe anyone that writes a letter to him?

Hardly corruption, superintendent s were guards once as well!

bajer101

J K wrote: »

I addressed the content of your post. You responded with a snide remark addressing what you assume is my occupation. It was the third post in the thread where desenting opinion was addressed with 'Oh Garda' response.

So if you don't want dissenting oppinion and just want a rant then carry on.

I didn't make a snide remark - I made the observation that you were obviously a member of AGS. I checked your previous posts, saw where and what you posted and then made that comment. I would counter that it was you who made the snide remark, by ignoring all other aspects of the discussion, and just throwing in a one-liner to focus on my inferior knowledge of bail laws.

I don't know what you are talking about when you say "third post in the thread". That wasn't me, and was nothing to do with me. But I don't know how you can argue against that poster's comment as he was obviously correct in his conclusion that the starter of the thread was a member of AGS!

I am perfectly willing to listen to dissenting opinion and am quite prepared to have a reasoned argument with you, or anyone else. I don't know where you got the impression that I didn't. I am only too willing to discuss any points you wish you make or discuss. I am also perfectly willing to change my mind and admit when I am wrong. As I would have if I was wrong about the Smithwick reference!

K-9

I really think there is something in the Irish Psyche that hates touting, comes up often on threads in AH. When taken to an extreme you get a thread like this.

J K

bajer101 wrote: »

I made the observation that you were obviously a member of AGS.

Meaning I can't have an opinion?
Or meaning my opinion is automatically of less value than yours?
Or something else?

As I would have if I was wrong about the Smithwick reference!

You're wrong on two counts.
Smithwick wasn't the Judge.
Secondly Morris's comments on AGS in general are invalid as he had heard no evidence in his tribunal to form them. He had evidence of the wrong doing of a group of individuals. The rest is speculation on his part. I think GSOC would back that up as well. I think the public have been given a misguided view of GSOCs view of AGS in general and also of the relationship between GSOC and AGS in general.

bajer101

J K wrote: »

Every criminal that is brought into every garda station through every hour of each day has typically dozens of cases pending. At any given time they are rotating through different stages in the life cycle of many cases anywhere from five to fifty. That's the life of a career criminal - you're picking up charges as you go along. Occupational hazard. The fact that you are currently on bail for multiple other charges does not have a bearing on whether you get bail. In this country it is extremely difficult and unusual to get an accused remanded in custody. Only in the strongest circumstances will a district court deny someone bail. And even then they will usually get it from the High Court a couple of days later.

Pay a trip to a court room sometime if doubt this.

Also if you're criticising how a garda presented a case in court bear in mind they have no legal training. The state could and should send a barristor or solicitor to represent the state/prosecution. The accused will have the best legal representation your money can buy.

Here's the thing. I absolutely hear what you are saying and know where you are coming from. 99% of the population do too and have huge sympathy for the sh1te that you have to put up with. But you know that this case was a clusterfúck. The original assault on Mary Lynch was dealt with incorrectly and we all know now that it could have ended up as a murder. The subsequent attempted abduction of a child was also huge. I think we know how that would have ended up. If all the facts had have been available to the Judge, it is very likely that McGrath wouldn't have got bail.

The public is on the side of AGS in nearly all cases, and AGS enjoy huge public support. But when there are issues that have to be confronted and addressed, members have to stand up and address them, because they will lose the public's support. Your duty is to the public - not to incompetent or corrupt fellow members.

bajer101

bubblypop wrote: »

Well in fairness, guards are told plenty of fibs at the side of the road, have done it myself, & they let u away with a little lecture & a 'don't do it again'
So basically, do you think its ok for a guard to believe people but a superintendent is not to believe anyone that writes a letter to him?

Hardly corruption, superintendent s were guards once as well!

That's not what the Penalty points scandal is about. No one wants that level of discretion to stop. We love that about our police force. The issue is that penalty points were wiped because of contacts. Journos and other people with AGS contacts got their points wiped with no valid excuse.

Sid Fletcher

K-9 wrote: »

I really think there is something in the Irish Psyche that hates touting, comes up often on threads in AH. When taken to an extreme you get a thread like this.

It is almost Sicilian in its nature.

bajer101

K-9 wrote: »

I really think there is something in the Irish Psyche that hates touting, comes up often on threads in AH. When taken to an extreme you get a thread like this.

Definitely. The proverbial 800 years will do that to the psyche. I'm sure that it is the bane of AGS and ironically we see it manifested again here.

downonthefarm

Nobody like a squealer

Sid Fletcher

downonthefarm wrote: »

Nobody like a squealer

Childlike mentality.

downonthefarm

Its true,doesn't matter what you're doing squealing is frowned upon

K-9

bajer101 wrote: »

Definitely. The proverbial 800 years will do that to the psyche. I'm sure that it is the bane of AGS and ironically we see it manifested again here.

Exactly, the 800 years thing, add a natural tendency of police forces to practice omerta, sometimes justifiably, sometimes not, and well, we see what can happen.

We've seen it within the Church and another good example was Dr. Patrick Neary and Drogheda, that could have been stopped in its tracks years earlier if whistle blowing wasn't condemned and feared so much.

bajer101

bajer101 wrote: »

That's not what the Penalty points scandal is about. No one wants that level of discretion to stop. We love that about our police force. The issue is that penalty points were wiped because of contacts. Journos and other people with AGS contacts got their points wiped with no valid excuse.

You don't know that, you believe that happened because a 'whistleblower' said so, neither of whom are privy to private correspondence sent to superintendents. So basically they looked up people on an internal system, saw they didn't have points & decided themselves that they shouldn't have had points quashed.

Who are they to know the reasons why? Without any correspondence from the people that cancelled the tickets they are just assuming that it was done corruptly.
They have not seen any reason that any person gave to cancel these tickets.

Why do you believe these two men who clearly have their own agenda here?

And I am not in any way just backing up the gardai here, all injustice should be dealt with. I just think joe public had jumped on a very bad bandwagon here.

downonthefarm

downonthefarm wrote: »

Its true,doesn't matter what you're doing squealing is frowned upon

Please.

Times are very different now to even 10 years ago.

Give it another couple of years, guards will be afraid to come out of the station