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

Should another Garda Commissioner resign?

Options
  • 17-05-2016 11:52pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    So following on from Martin Calinane's resignation and indeed Alan Shatter's as well are we faced with another resignation from the Commissioner's position?

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/immediate-crisis-of-trust-in-garda-commissioner-735853.html

    The barrister representing Commissioner O'Sullivan was instructed to "challenge the motivation and credibility of Sgt. McCabe" but this "was in relation to the corruption and malpractice allegations". He added "it was an error on my part" when he said he was to challenge Sgt. McCabe's integrity.

    I'm not seeing much difference there tbh, surely questioning his credibility leads to doubts about his integrity?

    All of this is ironic considering it appears the Commissioner accepted the word of 2 officers which was later contradicted by a taping of a conversation by Sgt. McCabe.

    With Michael Martin leading the opposition questions into this affair are we seeing the first high profile casualty of the minority Government?

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



«13456764

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭KingBrian2


    She is doing a good job so no.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,843 ✭✭✭Uncle Ben


    K-9 wrote: »
    So following on from Martin Calinane's resignation and indeed Alan Shatter's as well are we faced with another resignation from the Commissioner's position?

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/immediate-crisis-of-trust-in-garda-commissioner-735853.html

    The barrister representing Commissioner O'Sullivan was instructed to "challenge the motivation and credibility of Sgt. McCabe" but this "was in relation to the corruption and malpractice allegations". He added "it was an error on my part" when he said he was to challenge Sgt. McCabe's integrity.

    I'm not seeing much difference there tbh, surely questioning his credibility leads to doubts about his integrity?

    All of this is ironic considering it appears the Commissioner accepted the word of 2 officers which was later contradicted by a taping of a conversation by Sgt. McCabe.

    With Michael Martin leading the opposition questions into this affair are we seeing the first high profile casualty of the minority Government?

    I thought MM and FF have been very quiet on this issue in contrast to Indos and Shinners. Will also be interesting to see how Govt Independents react.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,907 ✭✭✭✭Kristopherus


    KingBrian2 wrote: »
    She is doing a good job so no.

    +1. And some of the morons calling for her head should have a good look at themselves in the mirror:mad:


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,274 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Well I think, to give the benefit of the doubt, she would normally take the word of two officers. But had to retreat when the tape came up.
    The issue seems to then have been buried.
    Again, it's the cover up is the issue.

    People stop looking at it through political eyes of whatever shade, just the facts as we know them.
    Fairplay to Mick Clifford. I would listen carefully to his view.


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Uncle Ben wrote: »
    I thought MM and FF have been very quiet on this issue in contrast to Indos and Shinners. Will also be interesting to see how Govt Independents react.

    Some FF TD's didn't seem on message today, going with nothing to see here, whereas Martin was asking the difficult questions. The Minister didn't give the most convincing vote of confidence so maybe lessons were learned from Shatter and Callinane.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    K-9 wrote: »
    I'm not seeing much difference there tbh, surely questioning his credibility leads to doubts about his integrity?

    His credibility was challenged in relation to specific allegations of corruption he made against named individuals. And they were cleared by the enquiry.

    Fair play to McCabe and all that, but he was wrong in these allegations so it was reasonable to challenge his credibility on them. The people about whom he made serious allegations against have rights too.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,843 ✭✭✭Uncle Ben


    The garda commissioner could knock this on the head immediately by stating whether she instructed her barristers on this matter refarding McCabe's integrity.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,843 ✭✭✭Uncle Ben


    Phoebas wrote: »
    His credibility was challenged in relation to specific allegations of corruption he made against named individuals. And they were cleared by the enquiry.

    Fair play to McCabe and all that, but he was wrong in these allegations so it was reasonable to challenge his credibility on them. The people about whom he made serious allegations against have rights too.

    Just as well McCabe taped the interviews. We'd have more credibility doubts regarding himself otherwise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 97 ✭✭finbar10


    For me, the crux of the issue is that the whistleblower, Maurice McCabe, would have been in all kinds of difficulty if he hadn't taped his conversations. It would merely have been his recollection versus the notes made by two senior officers of their meetings.

    IMO the situation as it stands is unacceptable. Perhaps the commissioner just took at face value the purported "evidence" that seemingly was due to be provided by these two officers (that is, until McCabe's recording of the meetings surfaced). Maybe she can provide a satisfactory explanation in clarifying her own role. If not, then she should go.

    As it stands, while the right kinds of words have been uttered about the role of whistleblowers, there's still the suspicion that the reality for whistleblowers under this commissioner is a hostile one.

    As an ordinary member of the public, this incident would put certain doubts into the back of my mind about the evidence in general given by senior Gardaí. It's probably a pity that McCabe didn't delay the production of his tapes until after these officers' notes had been submitted as evidence. The comparison between the two might have been quite interesting! Then again, maybe the potential discrepancies between these notes and McCabe's actual recordings might have been a bit oversold by the commissioner's legal team. Not having seen them we just don't know. This incident, though, if left unresolved does tend to drag down the general reputation of the force.

    It's still very possible the commissioner may be able to provide some perfectly adequate clarifications. However, if not and things are left unresolved as they are right now, then she should go.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,816 ✭✭✭Baggy Trousers


    Yes I believe so. The Gardai have really learned no lessons here.
    They tried to blackguard McCabe at every opportunity and they would have shafted him (on the malice lie) except that he had the foresight to tape the conversations. Unbelievable really.
    O'Sullivan is talking out of both sides of her mouth and Fitzgerald, as usual, is weak on all this.

    What does all of this do for the "whistleblowers charter".
    Who would be a whistleblower now.
    McCabe is a brave brave man. Distinguished.

    What do the permo Garda defenders think now?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,843 ✭✭✭Uncle Ben


    Yes I believe so. The Gardai have really learned no lessons here.
    They tried to blackguard McCabe at every opportunity and they would have shafted him (on the malice lie) except that he had the foresight to tape the conversations. Unbelievable really.
    O'Sullivan is talking out of both sides of her mouth and Fitzgerald, as usual, is weak on all this.

    What does all of this do for the "whistleblowers charter".
    Whoul would be a whistleblower now.
    McCabe is a brave brave man. Distinguished.

    What do the permo Garda defenders think now?

    Speaks volumes that a man within the force should need to actually tape the conversation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭hardCopy


    They should have made an external appointment to begin with.


  • Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭1st dalkey dalkey


    "They tried to blackguard McCabe at every opportunity and they would have shafted him (on the malice lie) except that he had the foresight to tape the conversations."

    I don't know whether that was O'Sullivan's doing or not. But it is central to the whole thing. It is quite clear what would have happened if McCabe didn't record the meeting. It was a complete set up. Cowardly and shameful.

    If she knew, she has to go. If she didn't, the two officers have to go.

    If nothing happens, if this piece of skulduggery is to be accepted as fair practice, we should all insist on having recorders every time we deal with the Garda.


  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    To be fair, I know myself & probably everyone I work with would never just take the word of anyone without some evidence backing it up.

    So, while I honestly don't think Noreen has been much different to any other commissioner, I think that she had to question Mc Cabes motives.
    You can't just believe everything that someone says.


  • Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭1st dalkey dalkey


    There was clearly enough evidence to set up an enquiry and the results show that McCabe was correct on most of his claims.

    The smear effort was just that. An effort to smear him and cast doubt on his integrity and credibility.

    Maybe O'Sullivan was not aware of the tactic being employed by her officers. But now that it is in the open, does she condone it? Is she going to take action against the perpetrators? Or is she going to cover it up and permit clearly dishonest officers to continue in their role?

    The core of the issue now is "Can we trust Garda Officers to tell the truth?" If nothing happens to these two officer, then, for me, the answer is clearly in the negative.


  • Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭1st dalkey dalkey


    "It's probably a pity that McCabe didn't delay the production of his tapes until after these officers' notes had been submitted as evidence."

    Indeed. They were very lucky. Clearly McCabe bore them no malice. He could have shafted them.

    If the evidence was submitted and then shown to be a concocted lie we would have to discuss criminal charges against the officers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,274 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    As some one said it looks like her SC is taking a hit for her.

    His instructions clearly changed on production of the tape.
    He says it was an error.
    He assurances to the judge at the original time indicate otherwise.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭Lurkio


    bubblypop wrote: »
    To be fair, I know myself & probably everyone I work with would never just take the word of anyone without some evidence backing it up.
    .

    Yet she seems to have taken the two officers at their word.....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭Lurkio


    +1. And some of the morons calling for her head should have a good look at themselves in the mirror:mad:

    The head of the Gardaí wanted to blacken the character of a whistleblower, ostensibly on the word of two Gardaí - one of senior rank. When a tape is produced that counters the two Gardaí this approach is dropped without further mention. Apart from the questions that the line of 'the commissioner has to defend all Gardai' raises about the ability of the Gardaí to police themselves, there are others with regards to these withdrawn allegations and the officers that made them. If she isn't to go, she would want to start explaining exactly why, rather than try to hide behind alleged legalities.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,843 ✭✭✭Uncle Ben


    Lurkio wrote: »
    The head of the Gardaí wanted to blacken the character of a whistleblower, ostensibly on the word of two Gardaí - one of senior rank. When a tape is produced that counters the two Gardaí this approach is dropped without further mention. Apart from the questions that the line of 'the commissioner has to defend all Gardai' raises about the ability of the Gardaí to police themselves, there are others with regards to these withdrawn allegations and the officers that made them. If she isn't to go, she would want to start explaining exactly why, rather than try to hide behind alleged legalities.

    And if she doesn't go she should explain also why the above two don't go instead.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Phoebas wrote: »
    His credibility was challenged in relation to specific allegations of corruption he made against named individuals. And they were cleared by the enquiry.

    Fair play to McCabe and all that, but he was wrong in these allegations so it was reasonable to challenge his credibility on them. The people about whom he made serious allegations against have rights too.

    Sgt. McCabe's allegations were credible though, the report found substance to many, if not all the allegations in the report.

    The general point is the Commissioner seemed to take the word of 2 officers at face value. If it wasn't for Sgt. McCabe's fastidious record keeping the 2 officer's word would probably have been taken over his.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Aubree Salty Narcotic


    Surely the Garda Commissioner should be taking the word of two Senior Gardaí at face value though?

    I'm a bit gutted that they were alerted before committing the lies to evidence to be honest.

    Are we thinking full blown conspiracy here with regards the conflicting statements? Or just a F-Up from two Gardaí that has managed to envelope the Commissioner too?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭Lurkio


    Surely the Garda Commissioner should be taking the word of two Senior Gardaí at face value though?

    I'm a bit gutted that they were alerted before committing the lies to evidence to be honest.

    Are we thinking full blown conspiracy here with regards the conflicting statements? Or just a F-Up from two Gardaí that has managed to envelope the Commissioner too?


    I'm sure they made some form of submission to the Commissoner. As there were two of them, I'm not sure how it can be a fuck up.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ Aubree Salty Narcotic


    Lurkio wrote: »
    I'm sure they made some form of submission to the Commissoner. As there were two of them, I'm not sure how it can be a fuck up.

    **** Up - Two Gardaí decide to stitch up McCabe as they are unhappy with what he's done. Commissioner listen to their statements and takes them at face value. Ultimately the claims are proven false and the Commissioner steps away from them.

    Conspiracy - Commissioner involved in the formation of the plan to stitch up McCabe. Gets caught. Steps away.

    Second one would be a serious, serious problem. Levels above what the first one is.


  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The two senior officers were appointed to investigate McCabe's claims.
    They were appointed to report back to the commissioner at the end of their I'm investigation.

    The commissioner his/her self is hardly expected to carry out internal investigations in AGS.
    Of course she took the word of the two senior officers, they were sent to do a job, that's what they are paid to do.
    It would be some state of affairs if the commissioner didn't believe the people who are appointed to investigate.

    So, if anyone should be stepping aside it's clearly the senior officers who lied.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,864 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    bubblypop wrote: »
    The two senior officers were appointed to investigate McCabe's claims.
    They were appointed to report back to the commissioner at the end of their I'm investigation.

    The commissioner his/her self is hardly expected to carry out internal investigations in AGS.
    Of course she took the word of the two senior officers, they were sent to do a job, that's what they are paid to do.
    It would be some state of affairs if the commissioner didn't believe the people who are appointed to investigate.

    So, if anyone should be stepping aside it's clearly the senior officers who lied
    .

    Then she should be at the fore front of handing them their marching orders as opposed to backing them up.


    Surely...


  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    listermint wrote: »
    Then she should be at the fore front of handing them their marching orders as opposed to backing them up.


    Surely...

    I'd imagine that's going on at the moment.
    You can't expect to he media to be told before the men involved?


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    It's the culture and the way the whistle-blowers got dealt with is the problem. I accept the Commissioner couldn't discount the evidence of 2 officers but it just shows the systemic problem that is there.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    K-9 wrote: »
    Sgt. McCabe's allegations were credible though, the report found substance to many, if not all the allegations in the report.

    Many of them weren't 'though.

    If you read the report - and it's complementary to McCabe for the most part - its does say, for example, that he is 'prone to exaggeration at times'.

    On some of the complaints McCabe made, O'Higgins finds:
    Other complaints made by him have proven to be overstated or exaggerated. Some were unfounded, and some have been withdrawn.

    Challenging his credibility seems fair enough in relation to these specific false allegations.

    If I was the former Commissioner who was accused of being corrupt, I'd certainly be challenging his credibility. Here's what O'Higgins says about that specific complaint.
    The hurtful allegation was based on the belief, unsupported by any evidence, that the commissioner had put Superintendent Clancy on a promotion list.

    If I was Assistant Commissioner Byrne or Chief Superintendent Rooney or Superintendent Clancy, who were accused of corruption by McCabe, I'd be challenging his credibility. Here's what O'Higgins says about those accusations:
    Complaints of corruption in the context of the charter were also made against Assistant Commissioner Byrne, Chief Superintendent Rooney and Superintendent Clancy. In each case the commission has found those hurtful complaints unfounded and those against whom such complaints were made had to live for many years under the strain of those allegations

    There were a large number of complaints against Chief Superintendent Clancy
    examined in detail in this report. He is exonerated of any wrongdoing and is the subject of only occasional and very mild criticism

    ----
    McCabe was certainly correct about many of his complaints, but that shouldn't give him a free pass to throw out unfounded and untrue allegations of corruption about people - which the investigation found he did.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭Lurkio


    **** Up - Two Gardaí decide to stitch up McCabe as they are unhappy with what he's done. Commissioner listen to their statements and takes them at face value. Ultimately the claims are proven false and the Commissioner steps away from them.

    Conspiracy - Commissioner involved in the formation of the plan to stitch up McCabe. Gets caught. Steps away.

    Second one would be a serious, serious problem. Levels above what the first one is.

    Both are actually conspiracies, just one of a lesser order.


Advertisement