The great Bail debacle

Carawaystick

The IT has a story about a judge O'Connor in Tralee setting bail for a woman at 100 euros, and then seeing she had more money in her possession ordered it to be counted and then reset bail at the sum of cash she had.

judge O' Connor wrote:

Hold on! Take all that out ...and the rest that you put back in....hand the whole lot over, and the rest

It hardly seems an objective way to set bail.
and a little casual racism with a reference to these people

ohnonotgmail

Carawaystick wrote: »

The IT has a story about a judge O'Connor in Tralee setting bail for a woman at 100 euros, and then seeing she had more money in her possession ordered it to be counted and then reset bail at the sum of cash she had.




It hardly seems an objective way to set bail.
and a little casual racism with a reference to these people

link?

and a little casual racism with a reference to these people

what did he say that you consider racist?

livedadream

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/district-court/woman-with-bundles-of-cash-in-court-accused-of-bleeding-system-1.2667384?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fcrime-and-law%2Fcourts%2Fdistrict-court%2Fwoman-with-bundles-of-cash-in-court-accused-of-bleeding-system-1.2667384

and for those who cant be arsed paying

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/madam-youre-bleeding-the-system-402612.html

seems fair enough bit cheeky to have a grand in cash on you and then say you cant afford the grand bail....

judges comments weren't ideal either though.

Judge O’Connor said: “These people couldn’t give two hoots… Madam, you’re bleeding the system.”

he leaves the 'these people' comment open to accusations of racism because she is Romanian, he could have been referring to criminals in general though...

questionmark?

Great to see some positive action by a judge. Too many abusing the system and this woman was clearly taken the proverbial out of the system. There was no racism, unless your a professional at been offended.

colm_mcm

Bail was set at €1000, she didn't have that much apparently, bail reduced to €100. Pulls out €1600 and peels off €100.

mickoneill31

Carawaystick wrote: »

It hardly seems an objective way to set bail.

I agree with your statement. Why ask people how much they want to pay?

Judge O’Connor asked if she had cash for bail and after consulting with Ms Munteanu, Mr Enright said Munteanu told him she didn’t have much but could offer €100.

She said she only had €100. If she'd said a fiver would that have been enough? Just set it at a grand for everybody that seems to be taking the piss. You get it back when you turn up for court.

ohnonotgmail

However the judge agreed to defer the matter for an interpreter, and remanded her in custody with consent to bail on a bond of €1,000. Judge O’Connor asked if she had cash for bail and after consulting with Ms Munteanu, Mr Enright said Munteanu told him she didn’t have much but could offer €100.

Lets be honest she was taking the proverbial. and she claimed she needed an interpreter but was able to understand her own solicitor?

livedadream

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I agree with your statement. Why ask people how much they want to pay?

Judge O’Connor asked if she had cash for bail and after consulting with Ms Munteanu, Mr Enright said Munteanu told him she didn’t have much but could offer €100.

She said she only had €100. If she'd said a fiver would that have been enough? Just set it at a grand for everybody that seems to be taking the piss. You get it back when you turn up for court.

he asked her if she had CASH for bail not if she had the 1000 euro.

she was remanded first then he said okay thatll be 1000 euro for bail, do you have cash? she told her solicitor she didnt but could offer 100 euro and then proceeded to take that 100 euro from a stack of approx 1450 euro CASH she had in her purse.

not including the sterling she had, its safe to say she had enough to post bail and was taking the piss.

from my understanding Pat Enright is a great solicitor, but fluent in Romanian he is not. she could clearly understand what was being said and was just trying to delay proceedings.

seamus

Bail by definition should be subjective.

The amount should be enough that the person can't afford to lose it, and appropriately weighted for the scale of the crime. For some people a €1,000 bond might leave them eating beans for two months, for a millionaire it's completely meaningless.

This woman demonstrated her means in court and the judge assessed the level of bail appropriately.

Speedwell

If I had 1450 in cash and 1200 or so of that had to go for rent and bills, I wouldn't "have" 1000, either. Does everyone have a bank account?

ezra_

Carawaystick wrote: »

The IT has a story about a judge O'Connor in Tralee setting bail for a woman at 100 euros, and then seeing she had more money in her possession ordered it to be counted and then reset bail at the sum of cash she had.




It hardly seems an objective way to set bail.
and a little casual racism with a reference to these people

From the IE:

Bail set a 1000
Women asked for 100 as she couldn't afford it, judge agrees
Women pulls out a roll of cash.
Judge puts back up the bail to what she has.

Not seeing the issue here...

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Carawaystick wrote: »

It hardly seems an objective way to set bail.
and a little casual racism with a reference to these people

This is the problem. People such as you tripping over themselves to get offended on others behalf.

The dogs in the street could see she was taking the piss, asking for a translator, sobbing in court, putting on the poor mouth and making a derisory offer of 10% of the required bail. Pulling out a wad of notes just proves the contempt she had for the court.

I'm delighted the judge saw straight through that. We need to start putting the foot down. What do you think would happen in Romania if you were over there and you couldn't afford the bail?

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Speedwell wrote: »

If I had 1450 in cash and 1200 or so of that had to go for rent and bills, I wouldn't "have" 1000, either. Does everyone have a bank account?

Don't commit any crimes then, and you won't need to worry. You don't pay rent being remanded in custody anyway.

Speedwell

Jesus, I'm not a Christian or a criminal, but even I wouldn't put someone on the streets by taking their rent money in bail. I'm guessing that no such argument was raised, or we'd have heard about it, but I can't believe that people on here are advocating this inhumane crap.

I'm not even going to approach the middle-class-values, elitist nonsense about everyone having a bank account, when everyone knows that many people are turned away by banks for a number of reasons.

livedadream

put her on the street? thats a slight exaggeration, do you know many people with over a grand in cash readily available to them (and some sterling for good measure) that are just back from a trip abroad?? youre having a laugh mate.

jesus lad ive a good solid job but defo dont have a wad of €50 notes (in varying currencies) shoved down my bra in case of emergencies like.

Romanian or Irish national doesnt come into it, its the same as if i an Irish national, where Irish is my first language was in court for the same issue, i could ask for an interpreter- i didnt speak English till i was 7, claim i dont have the cash, then produce the money i said i dont have in front the the judge and expect to get away with it?? oh and ps: can i have a bit back for the bus back to Dingle please Judge.

that person was taking the piss.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Speedwell wrote: »

Jesus, I'm not a Christian or a criminal, but even I wouldn't put someone on the streets by taking their rent money in bail. I'm guessing that no such argument was raised, or we'd have heard about it, but I can't believe that people on here are advocating this inhumane crap.

But paying bail isn't compulsory. The alternative is being remanded in custody, so there's nothing to stop you paying your rent and then going to prison whilst awaiting trial. We need deterrents for people to avoid committing crimes, you can't just have it to suit individual circumstances.

schemingbohemia

Speedwell wrote: »

Jesus, I'm not a Christian or a criminal, but even I wouldn't put someone on the streets by taking their rent money in bail. I'm guessing that no such argument was raised, or we'd have heard about it, but I can't believe that people on here are advocating this inhumane crap.

I'm not even going to approach the middle-class-values, elitist nonsense about everyone having a bank account, when everyone knows that many people are turned away by banks for a number of reasons.

Rent money wasn't raised as an issue. So you're saying that someone who has told the court that they can't afford €1000 bail but can afford €100 and then takes the guts of €2k out of their bag is deserving of pity and it's inhumane to treat her in such a way?

livedadream

OSI wrote: »

"Are you resident?" "Yes" "Here's a bank account"

while i agree it ridiculous that people don't have bank accounts these days you do need more that to be fair:

proof of ID:A valid passport
A current Irish driving licence
A National Age Card (issued by An Garda Siochana)
An identification form with a photograph signed by a member of An Garda Siochana
Documents issued by Government departments showing your name
- See more at: http://www.consumerhelp.ie/opening-an-account#sthash.HHzI1jKB.dpuf


you will need one of the following documents with your name on it to prove where you live:

A current utility bill (such as a gas, electricity, telephone or TV bill)
A current car or home insurance policy that shows your address
A document issued by a Government department that shows your address
A list of your tax credits issued by Revenue
A current balancing statement or a C2 certificate from the Revenue Commissioners
A social insurance document that shows your address
A letter from your employer or licensed employment agency stating that you have recently arrived in Ireland and have started work but cannot yet provide evidence of your Irish address. (You will have to provide evidence of your address at a later date)


not everyone has letters like that in their name at a registered address, living at home or in a hostel, no bills, unfortunately ive seen it happen.
its rare but i have seen it.

seamus

Speedwell wrote: »

If I had 1450 in cash and 1200 or so of that had to go for rent and bills, I wouldn't "have" 1000, either. Does everyone have a bank account?

If you had 1450 in cash and needed 1200 for your rent, would you be carrying it all around in your pocket?

Oh and of course, "Maybe she was going to meet her landlord after court".

Sleeper12

Carawaystick wrote:

It hardly seems an objective way to set bail. and a little casual racism with a reference to these people

She cried poverty and said she only had 100. The judge was sympathetic and was accepting the 100. She pulled out a wad of cash in front of the judge. He could have held her for contempt of court for lying to the court. I think she got off lucky. Remember it's bail money and she gets it all back when / if she turns up for the court date

foggy_lad

We must also remember that she appeared in custody after being arrested on foot of a warrant for not appearing at the previous sitting of the court because she had left the country.

Should we not be more concerned about how a woman so poor and destitute she must allegedly steal Hennessey brandy and washing powder from a Supervalu store ends up with so much cash? Bring on the Mini-CAB I say.

Dinny Byrne has Angina

seamus wrote: »

If you had 1450 in cash and needed 1200 for your rent, would you be carrying it all around in your pocket?

Oh and of course, "Maybe she was going to meet her landlord after court".

Putting that sentence in inverted commas doesn't defeat the point.

I have no clue as to whether or not this woman withheld her rent that month for fear of prison, but it's hardly an incredible prospect.

Very poor people in minimum wage jobs, with children to feed, will typically have this much money pass through their hands on a monthly basis.

Too often we are quick to invent bizarre conspiracies about wealthy Romanians, when in reality, plenty of poor people could produce this sum in court if pushed, typically by withholding their rent or other essential bills.

I've been very poor and have nevertheless spent ridiculous sums on basic food and rent. Most of us have probably been in that situation at some point of our lives, not least immigrants.

Anyway, we're talking about bail here. It's not on par with a penal sanction. So although I don't think there's a grand romanian conspiracy here, neither is it a particularly big deal.

riffmongous

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy wrote: »

Don't commit any crimes then, and you won't need to worry. You don't pay rent being remanded in custody anyway.

Well that is simply not true.

It does seem very arbitrary to just ask what they can afford, if the woman had been a bit cuter she would have gotten away with just the hundred

FiannaSuccess

Why did she brandish a wad of cash in front of the judge? That was really stupid inf fairness.

Canadel

seamus wrote: »

This woman demonstrated her means in court and the judge assessed the level of bail appropriately.

Did she? From what I read, she had nearly two grand in cash. But I don't see how that is a demonstration of her means.

FiannaSuccess wrote: »

Why did she brandish a wad of cash in front of the judge? That was really stupid inf fairness.

I imagine she took the Judge at his word regarding the €100 bail. Unfortunately for her it seems the judge has a problem with poor people possessing large amounts of cash. As do many posters here.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

WhiteWalls

Do you get bail money back?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

WhiteWalls wrote: »

Do you get bail money back?

If you attend the court date that you're due, otherwise you forfeit it.

The one's defending her on here, and saying that the judge isn't a man of his word should remember that you have no automatic right to bail. It's at the discretion of the courts, and if you can't meet the conditions then tough luck.

Todd Toddington III

@Canadel
Another lefty who believes we should all be molly coddled with free houses and hugs, including criminals. This woman committed a crime believe it or not, hence she's before a judge who takes pity on her inability to pay the full whack... She's lucky she didn't get done for contempt the p$#s taker. What ever happened to personal responsibility? Well done judge

Canadel

Todd Toddington III wrote: »

@Canadel
Another lefty who believes we should all be molly coddled with free houses and hugs, including criminals. This woman committed a crime believe it or not, hence she's before a judge who takes pity on her inability to pay the full whack... She's lucky she didn't get done for contempt the p$#s taker. What ever happened to personal responsibility? Well done judge

Free houses no. Hugs yes.

Jack Killian

Speedwell wrote: »

If I had 1450 in cash and 1200 or so of that had to go for rent and bills, I wouldn't "have" 1000, either. Does everyone have a bank account?

In that scenario you should keep that in mind before you commit crimes and end up in court.

It's called consequences of choices.

Jack Killian

Canadel wrote: »

I imagine she took the Judge at his word regarding the €100 bail. Unfortunately for her it seems the judge has a problem with poor people possessing large amounts of cash. As do many posters here.

I've a similar problem with electric cars that run on petrol....

Carawaystick

Todd Toddington III wrote: »

This woman committed a crime believe it or not

I missed the report of the crime she was convicted of, please tell us.

ohnonotgmail

Carawaystick wrote: »

I missed the report of the crime she was convicted of, please tell us.

she hasnt been convicted yet but she has plead guilty to theft so i dont think its a stretch to say she has committed a crime.

Canadel

Jack Killian wrote: »

I've a similar problem with electric cars that run on petrol....

Both problems require a lack of reasoning so I can understand why.

Back on topic: Who does that woman think she is possessing money? The cheek. People like her are the problem. Enough is enough. Go home roma roger. :mad:

ohnonotgmail

Canadel wrote: »

Both problems require a lack of reasoning so I can understand why.

Back on topic: Who does that woman think she is possessing money? The cheek. People like her are the problem. Enough is enough. Go home roma roger. :mad:

so a romanian national is in court on theft charges and you assume she is Roma? A bit racist no?

Vikings

Canadel wrote: »

I imagine she took the Judge at his word regarding the €100 bail. Unfortunately for her it seems the judge has a problem with poor people possessing large amounts of cash. As do many posters here.

Who called her poor?

She had over €1500 cash in her pockets and had just returned from a trip to Romania.

Doesn't sound poor to me.

The judge was right to set bail at the price he did, the woman was abusing the court system at best and he put an end to it. Swiftly.

Canadel

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so a romanian national is in court on theft charges and you assume she is Roma? A bit racist no?

They're all the same. They should all be sent home. Contributing nothing and carrying around wads of cash. Criminals. Judge was absolutely right. Should have taken her clothes too as they were probably bought in a high street shop, or perhaps even custom made.

livedadream

Canadel wrote: »

Both problems require a lack of reasoning so I can understand why.

Back on topic: Who does that woman think she is possessing money? The cheek. People like her are the problem. Enough is enough. Go home roma roger. :mad:

shes not Roma, shes Romanian.

try to keep up.

EndaHonesty

Carawaystick wrote: »

I missed the report of the crime she was convicted of, please tell us.

"She has 21 previous convictions, many of them for theft..."

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/sligochampion/news/romanian-is-told-to-stay-out-of-sligo-27589993.html

She's also banned from Sligo! :pac:

ohnonotgmail

Canadel wrote: »

They're all the same. They should all be sent home. Contributing nothing and carrying around wads of cash. Criminals. Judge was absolutely right. Should have taken her clothes too as they were probably bought in a high street shop, or perhaps even custom made.

well now you are the one who made that association. dont be trying to bluster out of it with hyperbole.

Canadel

livedadream wrote: »

shes not Roma, shes Romanian.

try to keep up.

Capital letters. Punctuation.

Try to keep up.

Jack Killian

Canadel wrote: »

Both problems require a lack of reasoning so I can understand why.

Less of the personal insults please; both are problems because neither exists.

Back on topic: Who does that woman think she is possessing money? The cheek. People like her are the problem. Enough is enough. Go home roma roger. :mad:

who does she think she is possessing money while lying that she has none. People like her who steal stuff in a country they supposedly want to belong to and live in are indeed a problem.

If she wants to steal then yes - let her "go home".

We've enough of our own repeat offenders and scumbags to deal with.

Don't try to turn this into racism - it's not.

ohnonotgmail

EndaHonesty wrote: »

"She has 21 previous convictions, many of them for theft..."

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/sligochampion/news/romanian-is-told-to-stay-out-of-sligo-27589993.html

She's also banned from Sligo! :pac:

do the courts consider that a punishment?

ohnonotgmail

Canadel wrote: »

Capital letters. Punctuation.

Try to keep up.

when in doubt play the man and not the ball, eh?

Canadel

Jack Killian wrote: »

Less of the personal insults please; both are problems because neither exists.

Nothing more personal than punishing someone for being poor surely?

Don't try to turn this into racism - it's not.

Not trying to turn this into anything. It's very clear.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

when in doubt play the man and not the ball, eh?

Played the post.

Try to keep up.

livedadream

Canadel wrote: »

Capital letters. Punctuation.

Try to keep up.

I was not aware my punctuation, or lack thereof, made my argument any less relevant.

Here's the rewrite, are you better able to understand it now?

''She is not Roma, she is Romanian.'

Try to keep up.''

assumptions she is Roma because she has convictions and barring orders etc and is from Romania are not only racist but idiotic.

but like a previous poster said,

when in doubt play the man and not the ball, eh?

Jack Killian

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

when in doubt play the man and not the ball, eh?

Sure isn't that what everyone playing a race card to get out of the consequences of their actions does ?

Forget the brawl / theft / drugs / assault - you're jailing me because I'm [insert appropriate minority group here which probably hates criminals as much as the rest of us]

It's pathetic.

Jack Killian

Canadel wrote: »

Nothing more personal than punishing someone for being poor surely?

The judge was punishing her for her crime and for lying that she was poor.

Not trying to turn this into anything. It's very clear.

You implied that it was getting random foreign/ poor people to go home and nothing to do with her choice to commit crimes while here.

Played the post.

No you didn't. But you knew that.

Try to keep up.

Try to drop the petty sarky stuff if you want an actual discussion as befits a - y'know - discussion board.

Canadel

livedadream wrote: »

I was not aware my punctuation, or lack thereof, made my argument any less relevant.

And I was not aware my not knowing her race, nationality, skin colour, IQ, hair colour, age, favourite football team, made my argument any less relevant.

assumptions she is Roma because she has convictions and barring orders etc and is from Romania are not only racist but idiotic.

I don't care what race she calls herself or where she is from. You, and one or two other posters, do seem to care.

Try to keep up.