Don't know where else to post this

asherbassad

Barely There wrote: »

I'm sure your method of dealing with the Guards is far better.

No, very simple. "I do not consent to any searches, officer. I also refuse to give my name unless you explain to me why I need to do so and under what statute you seek this information."

asherbassad

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah, if a Gardaí asks for your name, there's an obvious reason for it. Just give them your name, answer whatever other questions they'd like to ask. We're only hearing one side of the story, so for all we know the OP might have acted aggressively and the Gardaí acted in due response.

But there isn't. That's why the guard HAS to explain to you why he wants your name and also why you are compelled to give it.

Gatling

Sounds like an anti water protest thread

asherbassad

One eyed Jack wrote: »

But you yourself said earlier -





By that standard, you're suggesting that the OP must have had something to hide because they were afraid of the Gardaí?

Otherwise, your double standards simply don't make any sense.

I'm leaning more towards the latter than the former.

You've missed the point OOJ. It was reverse-psychology.....with a smidgen of sarcasm.

The people who think the cops are never wrong, even when they smash someone's camera are the same people who think anyone who doesn't like his email being read is a subversive. "Nothing to hide, nothing to fear" is their mantra. I was throwing it in their faces about filming the cops...which is in fact perfectly lawful.

asherbassad

Deleted User wrote: »

You're getting angrier.

And funnier.

Give Google a break, think about the matter. Drop the search warrant stuff, you are just digging and digging and digging.

The OP is not Public Dance Hall. He is a human being...:D:D

Come on then, smiley. Explain to all.
Isn't a warrant needed to search a vehicle? You expect the driver to sit by the side of the road for 2 hours while the cop runs off and gets one? Because that's pretty much what he needs, isn't it?

Tones66

Deleted User wrote: »

:D

Says poster who asked was search warrant needed for a stop and search!



Thats not some established fact, it is a claim by someone who had drink taken, who accepts he reacted wrongly, and that he has had a panic attack on at least one occasion.

So you go with some parts of the statement and other parts of the statement are not established facts.

Tones66

Tones66 wrote: »

So you go with some parts of the statement and other parts of the statement are not established facts.

Well, obviously, he is in a position to know what he did, he concedes that he reacted badly, that he took drink, that he suffered a panic attack.

However, in commenting on what others did, they may have a very different version. He says he was put in some choke hold, the 3 people who didn't have drink on them and have made no concession that they reacted wrongly may describe it differently.

asherbassad

Deleted User wrote: »

If you are googling, and cutting and pasting that info from the Citizens Information page, I suggest you scroll back up and start with the basics...

The first line, the heading "personal searches", the next heading "search warrants" which refers to authority to enter premises.

There is no such thing as getting a search warrant to stop a random fellow walking down a street. None. Nil. nada. It would not be applied for. It would not be obtained. There is no Judge or PC in the country that would countenance it. Your continued insistence only shows that you are not even thinking about the issue and just hoping to Google your way out of it (Public Dance Halls...:D:D).

It's just...nonsense. The issue has nothing to do with warrants. The issue is the standard statutory powers of stopping, and whether the Gardai exceeded them.

My initial question was whether a search warrant was needed to search someone. Absent legislation then it seems that it is. There is no way that a cop is just going to stop someone and then say "wait here while I wake up the judge". Anyone knows that.
But you just sneered like a kid. Was I wrong in asking whether a search warrant was needed to search someone, or a premises or a vehicle? You tell me.

You can continue on your sneering crusade all you want, I don't give a shit. You can also look down your nose at people who use the internet to try and ascertain facts...."googling their way out of it" as you would condescendingly put it. Would you prefer I just posted information that I pulled out of a hat? Is that what you do? Is that your thing.....scoffing?

So tell me this one more time...because you said this was about stopping and whether they exceeded their powers. Well what are their powers to stop AND SEARCH?

And if they didn't have or couldn't cite any statute and couldn't provide any reasonable proof or evidence why they thought the OP had been in the commission of a crime then what would they need to search him?

Tones66

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, obviously, he is in a position to know what he did, he concedes that he reacted badly, that he took drink, that he suffered a panic attack.

However, in commenting on what others did, they may have a very different version. He says he was put in some choke hold, the 3 people who didn't have drink on them and have made no concession that they reacted wrongly may describe it differently.

If he's in a position to know what he did then he's also in a position to know what was done to him. He was put in a choke hold while handcuffed. Inexcusable. As for the drink aspect, he did have drink taken and that is valid however, I've rarely seen people change drastically after four spread out bottles especially when he said it takes him 10 to get drunk so slightly disingenous to lean on that. Mistakes were made by both parties but the Gardai are more to blame imo

Deise Vu

Not sure Where I should Post this

Hi Guys,
So the other night I was robbed of €1,000. I struggled with the burgler but I was hit over the head and knocked out. The wife rang the cops and, when I came to an hour later, there were three cops standing in front of me. I described the burgler and the first cop said:
""Jaysus that sounds like the lad we shtopped down the lane."
"Great!!" says I "what's his name?".
"Arra, we ashked but he wouldn't tell us" replies the guard. "Shure what can you do?"
"I suppose, I at least got my money back".
" Well noooo.... d'ye see, he wouldn't let us search him either".
"Tell me this menace is in jail and my money with him?"
Garda shuffles nervously " Ye have to undershtand he took out a phone and shtarted filming us. Shure with dat Rodney King fella we can't be shtruggling with people in the street anymore. Shure we had to bid him goodnight and tell him to take care."

So AH, should I get some legal advice on this? The incompetence of these three cops has me €1K out of pocket and a menace is walking the streets. They should be sacked immediately.

Tones66

Deise Vu wrote: »

Not sure Where I should Post this

Hi Guys,
So the other night I was robbed of €1,000. I struggled with the burgler but I was hit over the head and knocked out. The wife rang the cops and, when I came to an hour later, there were three cops standing in front of me. I described the burgler and the first cop said:
""Jaysus that sounds like the lad we shtopped down the lane."
"Great!!" says I "what's his name?".
"Arra, we ashked but he wouldn't tell us" replies the guard. "Shure what can you do?"
"I suppose, I at least got my money back".
" Well noooo.... d'ye see, he wouldn't let us search him either".
"Tell me this menace is in jail and my money with him?"
Garda shuffles nervously " Ye have to undershtand he took out a phone and shtarted filming us. Shure with dat Rodney King fella we can't be shtruggling with people in the street anymore. Shure we had to bid him goodnight and tell him to take care."

So AH, should I get some legal advice on this? The incompetence of these three cops has me €1K out of pocket and a menace is walking the streets. They should be sacked immediately.

Asinine isn't the word

asherbassad

Sarah Crooked Treadmill wrote: »

They can search a person on the street with reasonable cause. Reasonable cause seems to be anything at all, making it farcical really.

Hence the reluctance to be filmed or recorded telling you why you are being questioned, searched and detained.

asherbassad

kupus wrote: »

you acted like a dick. you get treated like a dick. shock horror realities of life stuff.
sweet jesus are the people who are telling him go to a solicitor wrapped up in cotton wool all their lives.

Actually, it doesn't appear he acted like a dick at all.....but he didn't get treated like a dick, he got assaulted. There's a slight difference.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I wouldn't allow myself to be filmed for the purposes of social media either

granturismo

OP has over 8000 posts and titled the thread 'Don't know where else to post this' - maybe the legal discussion forum might be more appropriate.

I've just read the whole of this thread and I think the most important question has yet to be asked....













Were you getting a Big Mac or quarter pounder or what? I'd love a Big Mac now.

VisibleGorilla

Op you didn't nothing wrong, filming them is a good idea, Gardai don't like to have their actions caught on tape.

Document everything as best you can and get yourself to the Garda Ombudsman ASAP.

This is assault plain and simple. Get a solicitor ASAP.

Little CuChulainn

asherbassad wrote: »

Really?

Are you a lawyer?

A garda can ask you to stop at any time. In certain circumstances, such as when you are driving, you must stop if asked to by a Garda. A garda can search you, without your consent, if the garda has reasonable suspicion that you have committed an offence. This includes people under the age of 18. The Garda should tell you why you are being searched.


Search on Arrest
When you are arrested, the Gardai may take goods in your possession if they believe that it is necessary to do so and if the goods are evidence in support of a criminal charge. The Gardai may search you after your arrest without a search warrant and the goods seized may be kept and used as evidence at your trial.


The OP said he didn't consent to being searched. The Guards, from what I can gather, didn't tell him why he was being searched without his consent because it didn't get that far. He told them he wanted to record the proceedings and that when they cuffed him and put him in a choke hold.

Are you telling me that a Guard can just walk up to you in the street and say "turn around, face the wall, spread your legs" and then proceed to search you?

Come on Atticus, enlighten us.

asherbassad wrote: »

Necessity for a Search Warrant
In most cases, a search warrant is necessary before a Garda may search a person, a vehicle or a premises. However, certain legislation entitles the Gardai to go on premises without a warrant, for example, the Intoxicating Liquor Acts, the Public Dance Halls Act, and the Health Acts.

You still want to throw in a bunch of fcuking smiley faces, Columbo?

asherbassad wrote: »

Not really OOJ. The OP has the right to refuse to answer any questions. Telling him if he has nothing to hide he has nothing to fear is incitement to coercion.

It is not illegal to film the cops and if they order you to stop they are breaking the law.

So if it is illegal for a cop to order you to stop filming it's because they have something to hide and the law concurs that this could be the case.

If you refuse to give your name, the law is on your side. The "nothing to hide nothing to fear" bullsh1t is just playing games to try and make you feel bad about not bending to will.

Asher you have a fundamental ignorance of the law. Quoting random sections from citizens information (which you should be sourcing btw) is only making you look foolish. Like I said before, if you do not know your rights, which you clearly do not, you are better off to proceed under protest and follow it up later.

I mean, where do you get the nonsense that it is illegal for a cop to tell you to stop filming? That's pure tripe. They cab tell you to stop filming as much as they want. You don't necessarily have to obey but they aren't breaking any law by telling you to.

Also, the laws you are quoting on searches are not really relevant to this discussion either. They are more relevant to searches of buildings. Powers of search of the person are very varied.

Whitewinged

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Whatever I regret posting this now

Its probably not the best place to get advice on it op. Only you know what really happened.

Imo you did sound genuinely confused.

Id say like a few others have said, write everything down, take pictures of your scratches and see how you feel tomorrow if you want to take it further. Take care.

steddyeddy

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Look, if they were in an unmarked car, I'd understand. But they pulled up in the squad car, and you wouldn't co-operate. You wouldn't allow them search you, you wouldn't give them your name and you got smart with them threathening to record them. What did you expect?? For them to be like "alright sham, off you go so"?

They put up with so much **** and nonsense from people with attitudes just like yours. How are they supposed to know you're not doing a drop for drugs, after breaking in somewhere etc? You're wandering around at 3am on a Tuesday night, of course that'll raise their interests.

Not to be harsh but you brought it on yourself

I'm smart should I be arrested.

davo2001

Personally, I'd like to hear the Guards side of the story.

MadsL

Royal Irish wrote: »

If this was Murica you'd have been shot.

Jawgap wrote: »

Yeah, there's only one way that's going to end. Anyway, thankfully you were in Ireland, dealing with the Guards - try that in a country with an armed police force (especially somewhere like 'Murica) and you'd be in no fit state to type anything.

Interesting assumptions about the same situation in the US, did you forget that the US has not just legal protections, but also the protection of the 4th Amendment?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Not consenting to a search is protected by the US Consititution, not just some interpretation of an Act.

kissmequick

They thought you were drunk, were whiling away their empty hours, saw an opportunity, presumed/hoped they'd be able to get a bit of leverage outta ya if ya were half-cut, and figured they might as well home in and probably hone in on ya, pass an hour of the night for themselves.... Increase the nightly arrests and look good could be a nice addition to their Staff Files too.... Yeahhhhhh..... Upstanding professional reputable valiant Service-men right there. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Absolutely disgusting thing to happen. That kind of thing does happen a lot and needs to be stopped.


If it was a girl, I reckon they may not have used any force on ya but possibly still would have tried to intimidate ya or manipulate ya verbally.


Tomato tomato. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

MadsL

davo2001 wrote: »

Personally, I'd like to hear the Guards side of the story.

"where are ye after coming from?"

steddyeddy

People can be d1cks and the OP didn't handle that very politely. However it's an abuse of power for a public official to punish those that simply annoy them. They're not there to punish those they don't like they're there to enforce the law. Not their version of it.

Doctors have plenty of annoying patients. Should they punish them for being annoying?

A PhD student in UCD marked a student's exam down because they didn't get on. There's war over this at the moment but a few posters seem to think using power to punish those we don't like is okay.

Hank Scorpio

Can a mod lock this, thanks for all the replies even the negative ones

the dark phantom

Garda ombudsman.

Little CuChulainn

kissmequick wrote: »

They thought you were drunk, were whiling away their empty hours, saw an opportunity, presumed/hoped they'd be able to get a bit of leverage outta ya if ya were half-cut, and figured they might as well home in and probably hone in on ya, pass an hour of the night for themselves.... Increase the nightly arrests and look good could be a nice addition to their Staff Files too.... Yeahhhhhh..... Upstanding professional reputable valiant Service-men right there. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Did you just make up your own motivations for them and present them as fact before using those self made facts to insult their integrity? Yeahhhh... Great argument.

Boom_Bap

Locked at request of OP.