Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
garda corruption alive and well
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ok, so she was pulled over for 'erratic driving' 3 days after her partner was pulled over for...well for what exactly?Little CuChulainn wrote: »She probably was stopped. I'm asking why you think it's part of the conspiracy.
Either they're two terrible drivers or there's something else going on.
Sure -and the reason for the stop again?Little CuChulainn wrote: »I think you'll find the batons came out after he failed to stop. They were most likely going to smash a window and pull him out of the car.
Really? He would have been fine? Again, the reason for the stop was what exactly?.....taken in it's proper context i.e. this isn't a one off event.Little CuChulainn wrote: »That's what happens to people who fail to stop in accordance with the law. If he'd simply followed the instruction he was given he would have been fine.
I don't think anyone got 'run over'. Notwithstanding that, being victimised and harassed are certainly contributory factors to the way things unfolded.Little CuChulainn wrote: »Evading arrest is not a good reason to run people over.
Well, I'll use your own word for this - Bollocks! They do no such thing. They work within the laws of the land. They have NOTHING to do with that freeman nonsense. Of course, I guess it might suit someones agenda to tar them with that brush.Little CuChulainn wrote: »They do in that they interpret the law to suit themselves.
Thanks for confirming that it was random nonsense that you posted in this regard. As regards the 'game', it's all very well for you lot to have fun at this poor mans expense - it's no 'game' to him (nor do I see it that way - nor do I get the impression that anyone in I.I. feel that way - they are serious and genuine about what they want to achieve insofar as I can see).Little CuChulainn wrote:Is that not the game?
To suppress them. Evidently they are making ground in tackling the malfeasance that exists in said systems. In so doing, presumably they are ruffling the feathers of those that prefer not to be held accountable and prefer for there not to be transparency.Little CuChulainn wrote:To what end?
No, it most definitely is NOT bollocks.Little CuChulainn wrote:That's just bollocks.
You're absolutely wrong on that count. One of them followed due process before the day of the court and - as per court rules, lodged the necessary paperwork to ask a particular question. When he stood up to ask said question, the county registrar ordered him to sit down. The gardai then removed people from the court on the back of this. On the back of that, a private prosecution is being taken.Little CuChulainn wrote:Their actions in the court house show that they aren't interested in following the law when it doesn't suit them and are only interested in putting on a show.
Are we to use the laws that are already in place selectively by those in a position of authority?
The ability to spell is kind of a prerequisite to getting your point across on a discussion board. If I'm going to be declared insane as part of that discussion, I'd hope the superior being that's going to bestow that classification upon me can at least achieve a minimum level of intellect.Little CuChulainn wrote:Today I learned sanity is directly related to ability to spell.
There's proof of all manner of wrong doing - and it's there in spades. You said I had no proof of one particular aspect (regarding J.D's partner) and I provided you with that. You still believe that she should be arrested? A woman in her 50's being questioned about munitions and weapons? please...:rolleyes:mynamejeff wrote:lol so still no proof once again ??
why dont you try throwing up some verifiable facts in this care , thats three times i ve asked you now , could it be there isnt any do you think ?
You still believe that it's right that she lost her job on the back of this garda 'investigation'?0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
Really?mynamejeff wrote: »what proof did you provide ? exactly ? what indisputable proof ? what proof at all ? 4 th request now and still nothing but rambling nonsense
I'll try again. LINK. Skip forward to 18:15 . You said we didn't know if the lady had lost her job as a consequence of whatever the Gardai said to her employers. She provides the email showing same.
Insofar as I can recall from what I've read, all three individuals who appear in that interview witnessed approximately 20 gardai (many of them understood to be based out of Harcourt Street, many of them armed) bust their way in to their family home. But I guess not only are you asserting that J.D. is not of sound mind, but that the other two are either the same or liars? All three? You think that's a good use of taxpayers money (let alone what else it is)?
Can you explain to me the need for 20 gardai? Just explain that in isolation. Joe's Dad and Partner - they are a physical threat that requires 20 gardai to drive all the way down from Dublin? Joe himself appears to be a big man - but he's a middle aged man. You telling me that someone said, jaysus lads, we'll need 20 of us for this job? Or were they to leave a different impression upon Mr. Doocey and his family? I don't know where you live but I haven't seen the guards patrol in groups of 20.
That's to your question. I'm still waiting on an answer to mine re. whether you think it's coincidental that J.D. was stopped in the middle of Ballina - only a few hours after a court hearing that implicated garda malpractice? Is it further coincidence still that someone reported Ann Edwards as driving erratically on the other side of the country 48 hours later? You think it was necessary on the back of that - that her car was searched?
Furthermore, you think it's a good use of tax payers money that she had an advanced welcoming crew of Gardai to meet her when she arrived at her family home in Wexford earlier tonight (Wednesday)? You think it stops at being a waste of taxpayers money that later in the evening, there's another guard camped outside her family home in an unmarked car?
Pure unadulterated intimidation - and on the taxpayers time and at the taxpayers expense.
Subconsciously I guess I was trying to do you a favour. Go back and read the nonsense you've been writing and perhaps you'll see why.:Dmynamejeff wrote:Also i dont know why your are quiting one poster with what another poster said0 -
-
-
-
-
makeorbrake wrote: »Ok, so she was pulled over for 'erratic driving' 3 days after her partner was pulled over for...well for what exactly?
Either they're two terrible drivers or there's something else going on.
Sure -and the reason for the stop again?
Really? He would have been fine? Again, the reason for the stop was what exactly?.....taken in it's proper context i.e. this isn't a one off event.
Why do you keep asking what he was pulled over for? He doesn't even know himself because he decided to take off instead of deal with the Gardaí.makeorbrake wrote: »I don't think anyone got 'run over'. Notwithstanding that, being victimised and harassed are certainly contributory factors to the way things unfolded.
He could certainly raise a defence of mental illness if his paranoia has caused him to act so recklessly.makeorbrake wrote: »Well, I'll use your own word for this - Bollocks! They do no such thing. They work within the laws of the land. They have NOTHING to do with that freeman nonsense. Of course, I guess it might suit someones agenda to tar them with that brush.
No, they pick and choose the laws they wish to follow and ignore context and exceptions of those lawsmakeorbrake wrote: »Thanks for confirming that it was random nonsense that you posted in this regard. As regards the 'game', it's all very well for you lot to have fun at this poor mans expense - it's no 'game' to him (nor do I see it that way - nor do I get the impression that anyone in I.I. feel that way - they are serious and genuine about what they want to achieve insofar as I can see).
Of course it's a game. That's why you have them lying in court rooms looking for ambulances.makeorbrake wrote: »To suppress them. Evidently they are making ground in tackling the malfeasance that exists in said systems. In so doing, presumably they are ruffling the feathers of those that prefer not to be held accountable and prefer for there not to be transparency.
I hate to break your bubble but outside of his locals and people who take a personal interest in these kind of loons, he is not well known.makeorbrake wrote: »No, it most definitely is NOT bollocks.
You're absolutely wrong on that count. One of them followed due process before the day of the court and - as per court rules, lodged the necessary paperwork to ask a particular question. When he stood up to ask said question, the county registrar ordered him to sit down. The gardai then removed people from the court on the back of this. On the back of that, a private prosecution is being taken.
Are we to use the laws that are already in place selectively by those in a position of authority?
He lodged the papers and then decided that this gave him the right to dictate the proceedings of the court room. Where is the law which allows someone to decide the direction of proceedings just because they have lodged a formal request? It doesn't exist. Where is the rule that the court must recognise someone because they shout louder than anyone else? You talk about selectively following laws. Well all you have to do is look at their videos. They part quote laws, ignore subsections and try and force meaning out of laws that doesn't exist.makeorbrake wrote: »The ability to spell is kind of a prerequisite to getting your point across on a discussion board. If I'm going to be declared insane as part of that discussion, I'd hope the superior being that's going to bestow that classification upon me can at least achieve a minimum level of intellect.
It was a pathetic insult to deflect a question.makeorbrake wrote: »There's proof of all manner of wrong doing - and it's there in spades. You said I had no proof of one particular aspect (regarding J.D's partner) and I provided you with that. You still believe that she should be arrested? A woman in her 50's being questioned about munitions and weapons? please...:rolleyes:
You still believe that it's right that she lost her job on the back of this garda 'investigation'?
Zero proof so far. You've provided nothing. The only thing we have proof of is that he has been convicted of harassment and sending threatening texts and that a threatening email was sent from his account to a judge. He claims this was due to some hacking conspiracy.0 -
makeorbrake wrote: »Really?
I'll try again. LINK. Skip forward to 18:15 . You said we didn't know if the lady had lost her job as a consequence of whatever the Gardai said to her employers. She provides the email showing same.
Insofar as I can recall from what I've read, all three individuals who appear in that interview witnessed approximately 20 gardai (many of them understood to be based out of Harcourt Street, many of them armed) bust their way in to their family home. But I guess not only are you asserting that J.D. is not of sound mind, but that the other two are either the same or liars? All three? You think that's a good use of taxpayers money (let alone what else it is)?
Can you explain to me the need for 20 gardai? Just explain that in isolation. Joe's Dad and Partner - they are a physical threat that requires 20 gardai to drive all the way down from Dublin? Joe himself appears to be a big man - but he's a middle aged man. You telling me that someone said, jaysus lads, we'll need 20 of us for this job? Or were they to leave a different impression upon Mr. Doocey and his family? I don't know where you live but I haven't seen the guards patrol in groups of 20.
That's to your question. I'm still waiting on an answer to mine re. whether you think it's coincidental that J.D. was stopped in the middle of Ballina - only a few hours after a court hearing that implicated garda malpractice? Is it further coincidence still that someone reported Ann Edwards as driving erratically on the other side of the country 48 hours later? You think it was necessary on the back of that - that her car was searched?
Furthermore, you think it's a good use of tax payers money that she had an advanced welcoming crew of Gardai to meet her when she arrived at her family home in Wexford earlier tonight (Wednesday)? You think it stops at being a waste of taxpayers money that later in the evening, there's another guard camped outside her family home in an unmarked car?
Pure unadulterated intimidation - and on the taxpayers time and at the taxpayers expense.
Subconsciously I guess I was trying to do you a favour. Go back and read the nonsense you've been writing and perhaps you'll see why.:D
your gona have to try again because as ive repeatedly said to you vids of these people saying stuff and trying to look sad is not EVIDENCE.
just because you say something doesn't make it true. You having real trouble grasping that.
as an aside you claim that she lost her job as a result of the gardai calling to her work and blacking her. any proof no ?
first it wasnt a job it was an internship which possibly might have resulted in a part time job. it was discontinued with reference to clause 11 what ever that is. sure ring her thee and ask her to post the agreement so we can all see .
Any proof of this alleged intimidation ?
dont you agree its easy for some one to allege something when no proof is required. you are now alleging that there is a national conspiracy involving every garda in the country judges solicitors revenue ...... any one else ?
however the massive state conspiracy appears to have provided proof of harassment by your pall JD and are gathering more (from the seized computers )
seriously pal take off the tinfoil hat will ya0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement