Anglo Trial - Read Mod Warning in First post

fedor.2.

The Ultimate Warrior wrote: »

WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT COUTROOM WAS ALREADY WRITTEN; SEAN FITZPATRICK - for the walls of justice are built on fear WHERE GREATER MEN HAVE FALLEN FOR LESSER CRIMES - which has contributed to your false sense of security and invincibility but let it be known what goes around; COMES AROUND and should the warrior seek you out and you feel the strong arm of the ULTIMATE WARRIOR then the repercussions will resound -- within your family walls not just for those generations to come but that they shall be felt FOREVERRRRRRRRRRRR.................

RIP

Ben1994

An absolute joke!

Montroseee

msg11 wrote: »

I'm actully thinking, if I vote Sinn Fein in the next election and they get into power and turn out just like all the others (which will happen) maybe the scummers will feel like they have been used and lied to and actually do something about it.

Cause I won't be voting FF, FG or LAB ever again. It's not just there fairly on this, it's just everything there doing is exactly what they said they wouldn't do.

I couldn't claim and allowance for a pencil parer let alone one for a pencil, yet it seems you can claim an allowance for just about anything once your a TD, seemly endless supply of cash for there own agenda yet we are told more taxes more cuts and shut the **** up.

Honestly think it's time we start causing a fuss. I mean the amount we are been taxed and there is nothing to show for it.

Such a stupid statement. What about the hospitals and healthservice, schools, gardai etc. - Do they pay for themselves?

cunnifferous

K-9 wrote: »

Would you be saying that if you got a guilty verdict?

I didn't keep up with the trial much, but my reading when it started out was that it would be difficult to get a conviction, especially when the stuff about the Regulator knowing about the loans came out.

Given what we know about lack of regulation and a general laissez faire attitude during the bubble, it isn't surprising we had no laws to deal with what happened at that bank.

Didn't the judge specifically say this couldn't be taken into account. Even if the regulator says it's ok, it's still a crime if it breaks any laws.

hatrickpatrick

Montroseee wrote: »

Such a stupid statement. What about the incompetent, bloated and mismanaged HSE, dismal education system, scandal ridden police force etc. - Do they pay for themselves?

FYP.
A fine bunch of institutions we have in Ireland to be sure. Sheer value for money. :rolleyes:

ShaggyQueen

Diego Simeone wrote: »

Any examples?

I think most will agree that his behaviour was unethical and perhaps immoral, I certainly do. However. I have no issues with the judgement today. He broke no laws.

We don't know that though, do we. He could well have broken laws, there's just not enough proof to convict him and he pleaded ignorance. Personally I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't have known about loans & deals of that magnitude.

andrewdeerpark

The prosecution is this case was a shambles. A sad day for the legal system and the stability of the country, one of the pillars of the country has failed to do its job and administer justice in a civilized manner.

Dangerous times as mob mobilization has happened for a lot less.

Amirani

thebaz wrote: »

hang on , have we not just been released from an IMF bailout - was that not caused by Anglo, the Nationwide and AIB ?? - they bankrupted this state with sheer greed, and get off scott free - ****e em

I think you need to learn what bankruptcy is.

ShaggyQueen

ShaggyQueen wrote: »

We don't know that though, do we. He could well have broken laws, there's just not enough proof to convict him and he pleaded ignorance.

Well you could have broken laws too, or me or anyone. Should anyone be convicted on what they could have done, or on what they have been proved to have done?

And of course no one should be convicted without enough proof. Why would anyone state that like it's some sort of deception or some exception in this case?

If there isn't enough proof you don't convict, if there is you do. It's quite black and white.

He didn't plead ignorance, he pleaded not guilty. As upheld by the court after considering all the evidence.

awec

darkpagandeath wrote: »

People do not look ecstatic getting away with something they have not done or known about.

Is this a joke?

rwg

First the KPMG girl and now Seannie... no justice at all in this country

Stavros Murphy

The Ultimate Warrior wrote: »

WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT COUTROOM WAS ALREADY WRITTEN; SEAN FITZPATRICK - for the walls of justice are built on fear WHERE GREATER MEN HAVE FALLEN FOR LESSER CRIMES - which has contributed to your false sense of security and invincibility but let it be known what goes around; COMES AROUND and should the warrior seek you out and you feel the strong arm of the ULTIMATE WARRIOR then the repercussions will resound -- within your family walls not just for those generations to come but that they shall be felt FOREVERRRRRRRRRRRR.................

I read that in the ultimate warriors voice. He has a silly voice.

Stavros Murphy

andrewdeerpark wrote: »

The prosecution is this case was a shambles. A sad day for the legal system and the stability of the country, one of the pillars of the country has failed to do its job and administer justice in a civilized manner.

Dangerous times as mob mobilization has happened for a lot less.

Lol. In Ireland? Hmm, we don't do "mobs", we're all too busy avoiding MABS.

Adamantium

ShaggyQueen wrote: »

We don't know that though, do we. He could well have broken laws, there's just not enough proof to convict him and he pleaded ignorance. Personally I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't have known about loans & deals of that magnitude.

Stop, just STOP.

We can't start convicting people based on what they might have done. In this reality we live in we have no way of travelling back to the past and witnessing events in a third person bubble. We'd every person on the planet in prison block ala 1984, if we started that.

If you were wrongly convicted of a crime, would it right to sentence you because there is not proof to convict you?

You said yourself, it's in the bold.

What people are looking for is not justice or law, it's revenge.

This isn't the Sioux Indians or the Japanese Emperors comitting suicide based on moral, honor deficits. He's definetly failed on those counts, but that's a different argument and court systems all around the world base their judgements on the case/evidence presented.

Moral deficits are gargantuan, sprawling, impossible to define standards, because everybody has a different standard, look at boards, 10 million people shouting, but are they are to sensitive to mob hysteria and would they fall foul of groupthink, that's why the old systems went the way of the dinosaur. That enviornment discourages authentic independent thought.

And we settled with something slightly more scientific, because the mob would try to set the standards like they did in the past and it was uneven, unclear.

Busted Flat.

There was never going to be a guilty verdict in this case or any other trial to take place in the future, in connection with this bank. There were to many powerful politicians and wealthy people that had soft loans. Hopefully people will take this on board at the local elections.

RollieFingers

#justiceforthefitz

Muise...

andrewdeerpark wrote: »

The prosecution is this case was a shambles. A sad day for the legal system and the stability of the country, one of the pillars of the country has failed to do its job and administer justice in a civilized manner.

Dangerous times as mob mobilization has happened for a lot less.

You know what I think of as mob mobilisation (apart from the online mob)?

People scrambling for ridiculous loans, signing contracts that Faust would shy away from, and blowing the economy up in a huge bubble.

I think these times are about as dangerous as warm milk.

RayCon

Christ I fcuking hate this country at times.

RobbingBandit

fedor.2. wrote: »

RIP

Brava, you funny ****er.

I look outside the window of the room I am in; the skies are still blue, people are still walking the streets, cars are driving by as are buses, some time some where this ****er Fitzpatrick will get what is coming to him the justice system in this rats nest of a country won't harm ***** like this guy or Quinn or Bertie etc.

Stavros Murphy

Adamantium wrote: »

Stop, just STOP.

We can't start convicting people based on what they might have done. In this reality we live in we have no way of travelling back to the past and witnessing events in a third person bubble. We'd every person on the planet in prison block ala 1984, if we started that.

If you were wrongly convicted of a crime, would it right to sentence you because there is not proof to convict you?

You said yourself, it's in the bold.

Give over. There's some stuff no amount of sugar would make palatable to swallow. He was found not guilty. There you go.The Court has spoken. Fair enough. I'll give the eulogies of how wrong it would be to cast aspersions on a man more sinned against than sinning a miss.

ShaggyQueen

Adamantium wrote: »

Stop, just STOP.

We can't start convicting people based on what they might have done. In this reality we live in we have no way of travelling back to the past and witnessing events in a third person bubble. We'd every person on the planet in prison block ala 1984, if we started that.

If you were wrongly convicted of a crime, would it right to sentence you because there is not proof to convict you?

You said yourself, it's in the bold.

Candie wrote: »

Well you could have broken laws too, or me or anyone. Should anyone be convicted on what they could have done, or on what they have been proved to have done?

And of course no one should be convicted without enough proof. Why would anyone state that like it's some sort of deception or some exception in this case?

If there isn't enough proof you don't convict, if there is you do. It's quite black and white.

He didn't plead ignorance, he pleaded not guilty. As upheld by the court after considering all the evidence.

Yeah you'll both have to point out where I said he should have been convicted if there wasn't enough evidence. I'm just pointing out to the 'he done nothing wrong' posters that he could well have done wrong, and I believe he did, there's just not enough evidence to convict.

Yeah he pleaded not guilty, but ignorance was basically his defence.

Anyway, wrong charges brought against him in any case

jonnny68

Ireland is one of the most corrupted countries in Western Europe, the golden circle of bankers ride off into the sunset after playing a significant part in the destruction of Ireland while people go to jail for not paying a TV licence or an old age pensioner gets sent down for protesting against American military in Shannon.

ThisRegard

Busted Flat. wrote: »

There was never going to be a guilty verdict in this case or any other trial to take place in the future, in connection with this bank. There were to many powerful politicians and wealthy people that had soft loans. Hopefully people will take this on board at the local elections.

None of whom I imagine were on the jury, so is completely irrelevant.

Phoebas

Busted Flat. wrote: »

There was never going to be a guilty verdict in this case or any other trial to take place in the future, in connection with this bank. There were to many powerful politicians and wealthy people that had soft loans. Hopefully people will take this on board at the local elections.

The kind of people who think that they can remedy this by the way they cast their vote in the local elections probably don't bother to vote in elections.

Kermit.de.frog

jonnny68 wrote: »

Ireland is one of the most corrupted countries in Western Europe, the golden circle of bankers ride off into the sunset after playing a significant part in the destruction of Ireland while people go to jail for not paying a TV licence or an old age pensioner gets sent down for protesting against American military in Shannon.

I hate to disappoint you but this was a randomly chosen jury of 12 which in all likelyhood represented most, if not all, of Ireland's class divide.

Sean Fitzpatrick is innocent of these charges. This was proved and is therefore fact. Hence he was acquitted.

MRnotlob606

Busted Flat.

Why was the case taken in the first place, when the regulator and senior financial advisor's new in advance of the loan deal. What sort of legal muppetts decided to bring this to trail going by what was known about the states involvement in the decision to approve these loans. How much did this farcical case cost the state on top of the liquidation of the bank.

Busted Flat.

ThisRegard wrote: »

None of whom I imagine were on the jury, so is completely irrelevant.

The case was so weak as to fail, nothing to do with the jury.

jonnny68

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I hate to disappoint you but this was a randomly chosen jury of 12 which in all likelyhood represented most, if not all, of Ireland's class divide.

Sean Fitzpatrick is innocent of these charges. This was proved and is therefore fact. Hence he was acquitted.

Ah one of his lackeys , or just plain stupid and gullible.

sopretty

Well begorrah. It would be a great little country if you could just sink the f*ck*n thing. :mad: