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

Is the Charleton Tribunal compromised? *** Mod Note Post #1 ***

Options
  • 28-11-2017 2:17pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭


    The opening statement the Charleton Tribunal made made it quite clear when evidence needed to be supplied.

    http://disclosuretribunal.ie/en/DIS/Pages/Opening_Statement
    Are you a witness to this matter? Then, the tribunal needs your help and needs it urgently. Many have already indicated publicly and in various circumstances that they have some knowledge. Now the opportunity has arrived to cooperate in this inquiry. The tribunal wants to know the detail of that; who did what, who said what, when, in what terms, who communicated with whom, by whatever means, and in what terms. What evidence have you of this beyond what you are saying? The details are central. The tribunal needs the detail. Today, the tribunal is calling for all those people with knowledge of the matters in the terms of reference (a) to (o) inclusive to provide a written statement and to forward this to Elizabeth Mullan, solicitor to the tribunal at Dublin Castle, Dublin D02 Y337. That statement should be detailed and should be received by close of business on this day fortnight, the 13th of March 2017. In that statement, every person should indicate whether they wish to assert any form of ostensible legal professional privilege against disclosure of evidence or documents or any form of ostensible journalistic privilege. If there is any such assertion against giving a complete account of events, then that’s not ruled out, but at least we know what needs to be further explored.

    While the tribunal has already made a range of orders preserving or requiring the handing over of documents, if any person has a phone, computer, electronic records or paper records, relevant to the terms of reference, then these should be brought to the tribunal within the same timeframe.

    The Department of Justice did not supply vital emails until they were forced to do so. <snip>

    Is the Charleton Tribunal compromised? Can the DoJ and Gardai be trusted? Will McCabe ever get justice?




    ******



    Mod note:

    There is nothing to support any suggestion that the Tanaiste deliberately lied about the emails. As matters stand, the position is that she did not inform the Dail or the Taoiseach of same. If that changes and someone has a reliable source to support such a view that is fine, but for the moment, please stick to the information that is in the public domain and don't speculate. As per the charter:

    Allegations of lying are taken very seriously. Simply calling someone a liar is not acceptable without proof, the onus is on you to provide the proof that they are deliberately and intentionally trying to deceive.


«13

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    It's possible that despite the cries from Fine Gael, having these revelations come out before it's complete, might help.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,080 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    The opening statement the Charleton Tribunal made made it quite clear when evidence needed to be supplied.

    http://disclosuretribunal.ie/en/DIS/Pages/Opening_Statement



    The Department of Justice did not supply vital emails until they were forced to do so. The Tanaiste even lied about the same emails in the Dail.

    Is the Charleton Tribunal compromised? Can the DoJ and Gardai be trusted? Will McCabe ever get justice?


    Yes, no, and maybe.

    There doesn't seem to be a penalty to not handing over documents there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    It's possible that despite the cries from Fine Gael, having these revelations come out before it's complete, might help.

    It seems plausible to me that this is exactly why there were cries about it.

    Does anybody still believe at this stage that those in power actually want the truth to come out? It's becoming plainly obvious that they just want this story to go away without having to actually change their ways or force others to change theirs.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,528 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    The opening statement the Charleton Tribunal made made it quite clear when evidence needed to be supplied.

    http://disclosuretribunal.ie/en/DIS/Pages/Opening_Statement



    The Department of Justice did not supply vital emails until they were forced to do so. The Tanaiste even lied about the same emails in the Dail.

    Is the Charleton Tribunal compromised? Can the DoJ and Gardai be trusted? Will McCabe ever get justice?

    How is it compromised?

    It may have been delayed in its work and it may have to revisit some issues, but how is it compromised?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Nettle Soup


    Odhinn wrote: »
    Yes, no, and maybe.

    There doesn't seem to be a penalty to not handing over documents there.

    I thought there was a penalty...a quick google.

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1979/act/3/enacted/en/print.html
    (d) by act or omission, obstructs or hinders the tribunal in the performance of its functions, or
    A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding £10,000 or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.

    I might be wrong on above...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,336 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    blanch152 wrote:
    It may have been delayed in its work and it may have to revisit some issues, but how is it compromised?

    It isn't compromised in its own right but it demonstrates a weakness with tribunals that don't have the necessary powers to investigate like other bodies.

    It's relying on voluntary disclosures of evidence rather than being able to go in and physically acquire evidence.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,080 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    It isn't compromised in its own right but it demonstrates a weakness with tribunals that don't have the necessary powers to investigate like other bodies.

    It's relying on voluntary disclosures of evidence rather than being able to go in and physically acquire evidence.

    ...if that;s the case it was never intended to find the full truth, lets face it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,683 ✭✭✭flutered


    It's possible that despite the cries from Fine Gael, having these revelations come out before it's complete, might help.
    when ms fitz is on the stand awaiting mcdowells questions, i recon she will have a rather squeaky bum


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,290 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    If we are taking the DoJ's word that they have indeed done a full trawl then I suspect it is compromised.

    The DoJ does not have the full confidence of the government at the moment. How can the tribunal continue under those circumstances?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    If we are taking the DoJ's word that they have indeed done a full trawl then I suspect it is compromised.

    The DoJ does not have the full confidence of the government at the moment. How can the tribunal continue under those circumstances?

    It really speaks to Fine Gael to show no confidence in a department they've presided over under two governments, to cover for a <snip>minister. I'm sure any genuine hard workers in the Dept. of Justice really appreciate that. 'We look after our own' indeed.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Nettle Soup


    It really speaks to Fine Gael to show no confidence in a department they've presided over under two governments, to cover for a lying minister. I'm sure any genuine hard workers in the Dept. of Justice really appreciate that. 'We look after our own' indeed.

    Something tells me the civil servants in DoJ won't give a toss. They have seen ministers come and go and seem to have no respect or fear of them. Our permanent government seems to be broken as well as the FFG one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,080 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    Something tells me the civil servants in DoJ won't give a toss. They have seen ministers come and go and seem to have no respect or fear of them. Our permanent government seems to be broken as well as the FFG one.

    It's a "cultural" issue in the DOJ, as they say. There is a mentality that goes along the lines of 'The security of the state is tantamount and nothing can be allowed undermine the state. The Gardai are a pillar of the state, therefore nothing can be allowed undermine the Gardai'. Having heard more or less those words from from a former commissioners mouth, nothing suprises me, although I can't lay claim to know how prevalent it is. Current events are frightening when viewed with that in mind however.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,319 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    No it not compromised, the only people peddling this line as some online. It should do its job and go from there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,155 ✭✭✭✭Esel


    markodaly wrote: »
    No it not compromised, the only people peddling this line as some online. It should do its job and go from there.

    It has been compromised, in the sense that it has been impaired.

    Not your ornery onager



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,290 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    No it not compromised, the only people peddling this line as some online. It should do its job and go from there.

    The government doesn't have confidence in one of its major participants and list a Tanists because it withheld information.
    A tribunal is thoroughly compromised until that is sorted out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,080 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    markodaly wrote: »
    No it not compromised, the only people peddling this line as some online. It should do its job and go from there.

    You might explain this in light of the clear lack of co-operation that was highlighted in the DOJ.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,080 ✭✭✭Odhinn




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,130 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    It isn't compromised in its own right but it demonstrates a weakness with tribunals that don't have the necessary powers to investigate like other bodies.

    It's relying on voluntary disclosures of evidence rather than being able to go in and physically acquire evidence.

    That's like asking a whale where all the plankton went and expecting him to fess up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,528 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    flutered wrote:
    when ms fitz is on the stand awaiting mcdowells questions, i recon she will have a rather squeaky bum

    Is she under any compulsion to give evidence?

    I suspect she'll try not to now that she's gone from government.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Is she under any compulsion to give evidence?

    I suspect she'll try not to now that she's gone from government.

    Tribunals here need to be able to compel evidence


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Stheno wrote: »
    Tribunals here need to be able to compel evidence
    ...and it's that need is the reason why it's not mandatory!
    Turkeys don't vote for Christmas


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Nettle Soup


    Odhinn wrote: »

    Thanks Odhinn, great article.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,528 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Is she under any compulsion to give evidence?

    I suspect she'll try not to now that she's gone from government.


    Some of the slurs on Fitzgerald's character are unbelievable, this being one.

    She has been quite clear that she will clear her name at the Tribunal.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,080 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Some of the slurs on Fitzgerald's character are unbelievable, this being one.

    She has been quite clear that she will clear her name at the Tribunal.

    She might show that it was the civil service to blame for not forwarding e-mails etc, but at the end of the day it's a matter of record she claimed complete ignorance of garda strategy to the dail, despite having received briefings on both that strategy and how to respond to questions on it.


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,410 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Odhinn wrote: »
    She might show that it was the civil service to blame for not forwarding e-mails etc,
    ...so she had no control or authority over her department.
    No matter what way one looks at it, she proved herself unfit for office!


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,080 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    This is from March of this year, but is still relevant -

    "
    Mr Justice Charleton will establish whether there was a smear campaign within An Garda Síochána against whistleblower and Garda sergeant Maurice McCabe.

    But this newspaper can reveal that several senior members of the force have contacted Garda Headquarters in recent days to request instructions and guidance because they either want to submit evidence, or fear they will be called as witnesses.
    A number of senior officers voiced concern that this instruction was not forthcoming.

    The issue has caused consternation in Garda Headquarters.
    And in further revelations, Ms O'Sullivan - who is at the centre of the Charleton Inquiry - has appointed some of her closest associates to the liaison team with the judge involved.

    These are understood to include retired assistant commissioner Mick O'Sullivan and former chief superintendent Brendan Mangan.
    It can also be revealed that Detective Superintendent Tony Howard has been made go-between for the force and Judge Charleton.

    This is despite the fact that the officer is a close associate of both Commissioner and her husband Detective Chief Supt Jim McGowan.

    It can also be revealed that Detective Superintendent Tony Howard has been made go-between for the force and Judge Charleton.

    This is despite the fact that the officer is a close associate of both Commissioner and her husband Detective Chief Supt Jim McGowan."
    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/associates-will-form-ring-of-steel-around-garda-chief-in-inquiry-35517875.html

    "worrying" hardly covers it.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    All of the allegations by Keith Harris and his partner have been thrown out by the Tribunal


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,319 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Looks like the Tribunal is doing its job in the matter of Garda Harrisson, who looked like he was jumping on a bandwagon. It looks like the Judge here is no fool and will not tolerate them either.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Nettle Soup


    https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1130/924069-concerns-raised-over-tribunal-unit-within-the-gardai/

    The Acting Garda Commissioner Dónall Ó Cualáin has written to the Minister for Justice passing on the concerns of a senior official about the operation of the Disclosures Tribunal unit within the gardaí.
    The unit is responsible for co-ordinating documentation for the inquiry.
    The issues were raised by the head of Garda Human Resources John Barrett, who is concerned that the unit is not representing all gardaí at the tribunal.
    He has said that the unit should have been outsourced so that coordination with the tribunal is handled externally.
    A garda spokesman has confirmed that the Acting Garda Commissioner wrote to the Minister for Justice Charlie Flanagan under Section 41 to bring to his attention an internal concern raised with the Acting Commissioner, relating to the Garda Disclosures Tribunal Coordination Office.
    In a statement, the Department of Justice confirmed it had received a Section 41 letter this week in relation to the Disclosures Tribunal.
    Labour TD Alan Kelly has said he has deep concerns about the unit and it must be shut down.
    He said he has been raising this with the minister in a series of 25 parliamentary questions since May and he called on the minister to deal with it immediately.


    The Gardaí are spooked.

    Chairman Peter Charleton requested that gardaí submit an affidavit on the methodology of their searches for the tribunal.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 68,290 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    markodaly wrote: »
    Looks like the Tribunal is doing its job in the matter of Garda Harrisson, who looked like he was jumping on a bandwagon. It looks like the Judge here is no fool and will not tolerate them either.

    Is it safe though.
    There seems to be more emerging every day about the quality of the info it is getting if it gets it at all.


Advertisement