Should another Garda Commissioner resign?

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?

KingBrian2

She is doing a good job so no.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

Uncle Ben

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

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.

hardCopy

They should have made an external appointment to begin with.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.....

Lurkio

Kristopherus wrote: »

+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.

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.

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.

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?

Lurkio

Deleted User wrote: »

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.

Lurkio

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.

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.

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...

listermint

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?

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.

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.

Lurkio

Deleted User wrote: »

**** 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.

Lurkio

bubblypop wrote: »

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

The conclusions, no. That an investigation is ongoing, yes. At the moment we have no idea what, or if any, action has been taken.

Lurkio

Lurkio wrote: »

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

Yes but only one of which the Garda Commissioner (the topic of this thread) is involved in.

Unless you expect her to resign because two other Gardaí whom she ought to be able to trust misled her?

ED E

hardCopy wrote: »

They should have made an external appointment to begin with.

This.

We can't fix AGS without somebody who hasn't come out of Templemore at the helm.

Water John

Good article in The Irish Examiner by Tom Clonan.
Gives the example of how females were being treated in the army and the disclosure of same. How Michael Smith stepped up as the line politician and dealt with it.

www.irishexaminer.com/.../ugly-lies-about-the-man-telling-the-truth-400532. html

Lurkio

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes but only one of which the Garda Commissioner (the topic of this thread) is involved in.

Unless you expect her to resign because two other Gardaí whom she ought to be able to trust misled her?

I would expect her to resign if there was no consequences for these Gardaí prior to the matter becoming public knowledge.

ED E wrote:

We can't fix AGS without somebody who hasn't come out of Templemore at the helm.

I think it could be done with a genuinely independent supervisory board, with a mechanism to stop it being loaded with "yes" men thrown in by the government. I think we will not see that any time soon, however, given the wish of FF, FG and to a lesser extent Labour to avoid changing the status quo in any real way.

Water John

If we want to reform the AGS, we simply can look north of the border.

KingBrian2

Lurkio wrote: »

I would expect her to resign if there was no consequences for these Gardaí prior to the matter becoming public knowledge.



I think it could be done with a genuinely independent supervisory board, with a mechanism to stop it being loaded with "yes" men thrown in by the government. I think we will not see that any time soon, however, given the wish of FF, FG and to a lesser extent Labour to avoid changing the status quo in any real way.

Some change has already been made but faster improvements have to be made.

hatrickpatrick

finbar10 wrote: »

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.

This. In my view, any time it is ever discovered that somebody would have suffered as a result of dishonesty had they not managed to document proof of that dishonesty, those caught in the act of being dishonest should see their heads roll or at the very least suffer very serious consequences.

So in my view, the two officers who were caught red handed conspiring to damage McCabe in this manner should be in deep sh!t. The only remaining question is how high up the chain of the command this plan went. Whatever that turns out to be, everybody implicated along the way should similarly face serious consequences.

The only way we're going to change the culture of whistleblower suppression (not just in the Gardai but in all walks of life, and not just in Ireland but across the democratic world) is if anybody who is caught either engaging in or ordering / authorising such suppression is harshly dealt with, to the point at which it stops being worth the risk to get involved in this kind of sh!te.

Water John

It is probable that there was no arranged conspiracy. I speculate, the officers took it upon themselves to do what they thought their leader might want.

Which of Shakespeare's characters says ' would any one rid me etc'?

It's the same in other areas, no actual conspiracy but, I know when to scratch some ones back as my turn will come some day and I'll be looked after.

Lurkio

One of the Gardaí at the meeting was a superintendent, according to the radio this morning.

Baggy Trousers

I hear there is a superb article by Conor Brady in the Sunday Times if anyone has access.

hatrickpatrick

Statement from Noirín O'Sullivan today.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/nóir%C3%ADn-o-sullivan-denies-trying-to-impugn-mccabe-s-integrity-1.2660147?m

Can't copy and paste the statement as it's presented in the Irish Times' own PDF plugin. But essentially, she confirms (in a roundabout way) that McCabe's credibility was challenged, and has referred the issue of the 2008 recordings to GSOC. This part I can paste, from the text of the accompanying article:

“Whatever its source, the net charge that is now being made is that the credibility and motivation of Sergeant McCabe was challenged,” her statement says.
“Having regard to the nature and seriousness of the allegations, and the duty to assist the Commission in its task of establishing the facts and truth, I cannot see how it would be in any way unreasonable, improper or avoidable to appropriately test and cross examine the evidence of all persons giving evidence to the Commission including Sergeant McCabe.”

That's very true, but it doesn't address whether his credibility and motivations were attacked, or whether her lawyers were instructed to do that. There's a difference between cross examining evidence, and attacking the person giving the evidence. That has not been clarified in any way by this statement - if anything, the above reads as a tacit suggestion that his credibility was indeed attacked.

My prediction, if recent history is anything to go by, is that AGS will obstruct GSOC in any way they can, and GSOC will subsequently be scapegoated and hung out to dry if they either are unable to make a conclusion due to lack of co-operation, or upset the apple cart by confirming that McCabe has indeed been subject to further bullsh!t by AGS.

What it does make clear is that O'Sullivan is attempting to pass the buck, shift the focus, and draw a line under unresolved matters. To that end, she fits in perfectly with the Irish establishment, so there's nothing remotely surprising about any of this.

Uncle Ben

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Statement from Noirín O'Sullivan today.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/nóir%C3%ADn-o-sullivan-denies-trying-to-impugn-mccabe-s-integrity-1.2660147?m

Can't copy and paste the statement as it's presented in the Irish Times' own PDF plugin. But essentially, she confirms (in a roundabout way) that McCabe's credibility was challenged, and has referred the issue of the 2008 recordings to GSOC. This part I can paste, from the text of the accompanying article:



That's very true, but it doesn't address whether his credibility and motivations were attacked, or whether her lawyers were instructed to do that. There's a difference between cross examining evidence, and attacking the person giving the evidence. That has not been clarified in any way by this statement - if anything, the above reads as a tacit suggestion that his credibility was indeed attacked.

My prediction, if recent history is anything to go by, is that AGS will obstruct GSOC in any way they can, and GSOC will subsequently be scapegoated and hung out to dry if they either are unable to make a conclusion due to lack of co-operation, or upset the apple cart by confirming that McCabe has indeed been subject to further bullsh!t by AGS.

What it does make clear is that O'Sullivan is attempting to pass the buck, shift the focus, and draw a line under unresolved matters. To that end, she fits in perfectly with the Irish establishment, so there's nothing remotely surprising about any of this.

Got her arse kicked by Policing Authorty. Time for change.

Water John

Uncle Ben, I can understand your reaction. Problem is the deep seated culture in the org. As we have seen cutting off the head of the Hydra has little effect.
It would have been really some thing to have seen the previous incumbent getting that bollicking.

The Policing Authority may have the advantage of stepping it away from dept of Justice.
The mix in the Dail ensures things will be outed.

N O'S has a short run now to go with the winds of change. That includes the two on the tape being seen to. Her timetable is set. She rolls with it or gets off.
That break of trust involved with how McCabe was treated did more damage to the previous Govn't than all the IW protests.
It really stuck in peoples craw.

K-9

The new police authority showing their teeth on this, the Commissioner faced a 4 hour grilling on this last night and she will face 2 public sessions in the next couple of weeks.

Water John

As you say, the next round is in public. She had better up her game. She had better get with the play whether she believes in it or not, if she wants to stay in the job.
Now with the range of voices in the Dail, there is no 'move on, nothing to see here'.
There one or two cheerleaders in the media cannot gloss it over.
Fair play to Michael Clifford. He has stayed with it.

We need a modern, open police force that has the trust of the public.

Uncle Ben

John McGuinness TD is now stating he cannot place confidence in the Garda Commissioner. She really is the gift that just keeps giving.

Phoebas

Uncle Ben wrote: »

John McGuinness TD is now stating he cannot place confidence in the Garda Commissioner. She really is the gift that just keeps giving.

I don't think anyone will be listening to McGuinness, at least not until he explains why he took a secret meeting with the former commissioner and kept it secret for over two years.

K-9

On a serious level this isn't a problem 1 Commissioner can change or a few new rules and procedures either. The change in mindset needs to come from the top which is why Callinane's attitude and the conduct of senior officers is such a serious matter.

Loads of reforms aren't going to make any difference if the top brass ignore them and encourage the lower ranks to forget the spirit of them.

As for McGuinness, he really should have taped the conversation like McCabe did with others! Do I believe him? Tbh it would have been great for the publicity so maybe there was a higher principle there and he was waiting for all inquiries to finish.

enricoh

Uncle Ben wrote: »

John McGuinness TD is now stating he cannot place confidence in the Garda Commissioner. She really is the gift that just keeps giving.

Fair play to him, one of our top politicians imo. Saw ff's justice spokesman niall collins on tv last week and he was abysmal. Nothing to see here, public not interested in it. Asked about mc cabe n all he wanted to talk about was increasing garda salaries n numbers. Must be an election coming n votes need to be bought!