Senior Garda who cancelled 744 penalty point notices won't be charged

josip

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/1201/924240-senior-garda-cancelled-774-penalty-points-notices-in-17-counties/

WTF? At this stage, I accept a lot of what goes on in this country and can shrug it off but this has me mad.
I have a lot of respect for the Gardai, but surely charges should be brought against this guy for this?

GSOC said it has now closed its investigation and will not pursue criminal or disciplinary proceedings because the cost would outweigh the benefit.

Captain Obvious

It's not enough to prove he cancelled points. It has to be proven that he did so without good cause or reason. In any case, what charge would you bring?

begbysback

Section 12 offences against penalty points

Tabnabs

In any other job that would be gross misconduct and they would get the sack, immediately. But not the Gardai, or, it seems, many other civil servant fcuk ups...

Ballstein

Was it not a case of the login details of a a senior officer being used by multiple guards to cancel points? Think it was the details of an Inspector in Pearse St.

Odhinn

josip wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/1201/924240-senior-garda-cancelled-774-penalty-points-notices-in-17-counties/

WTF? At this stage, I accept a lot of what goes on in this country and can shrug it off but this has me mad.
I have a lot of respect for the Gardai, but surely charges should be brought against this guy for this?

They've been more or less a law unto themselves for decades. Penalty points is the least of what they've been at.

WoollyRedHat

Captain Obvious wrote: »

It's not enough to prove he cancelled points. It has to be proven that he did so without good cause or reason. In any case, what charge would you bring?

Em, dismissal for misconduct and abuse of power Captain? The proof he did it without good cause or reason is the fact there was no explanation given as to why they were wiped in the first place in most cases-
'The report adds that 72% of all cancelled fixed charge notices were simply recorded as "cancelled", with no further explanation given'

Captain Obvious

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Em, dismissal for misconduct and abuse of power Captain? The proof he did it without good cause or reason is the fact there was no explanation given as to why they were wiped int he first place.

I asked what charge. Dismissal is not a criminal charge.

And no, absence of proof to the contrary is not proof of the claim.

Nettle Soup

Nothing surprised me about the Gardai anymore. They are a law onto themselves. They have zero respect for our elected representatives either.

server down

Captain Obvious wrote: »

It's not enough to prove he cancelled points. It has to be proven that he did so without good cause or reason. In any case, what charge would you bring?

Obstruction of justice.

server down

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I asked what charge. Dismissal is not a criminal charge.

And no, absence of proof to the contrary is not proof of the claim.

What legitimate reason do you think he could give for cancelling 744 tickets?

Nettle Soup

A new report says 1 senior Garda cancelled 744 fixed charge penalty notices across 17 counties and the credentials of retired senior Gardai were used to authorise cancellations.

Nice. He tried to hide it too!

Captain Obvious

server down wrote: »

Obstruction of justice.

Under which section of law?

seamus

Ballstein wrote: »

Was it not a case of the login details of a a senior officer being used by multiple guards to cancel points? Think it was the details of an Inspector in Pearse St.

I think this is the main issue around it.

In order to bring any kind of charges; be they legal or disciplinary; you need a lot more evidence than spreadsheets.

You need to be able to prove that it wasn't a case of credentials being shared. Which is probably was.

And no, a Garda's credentials being shared isn't gross misconduct on his part unless you can prove that this practice was specifically classified as misconduct and you can prove that it wasn't SOP.

That is, an organisation can state that sharing credentials is not permitted. But if everyone does it, and management know about it, then you can't discipline a single individual for engaging in the practice because it's de facto been approved by management.

This is the issue here. The amount of effort required to separate the wheat from the chaff and bring any meaningful charges out of it, way outstrip any benefit you might get from it.

At best, GSOC now have the data to require wide-sweeping reforms and to have these practices stopped.

Nettle Soup

GSOC said it has now closed its investigation and will not pursue criminal or disciplinary proceedings because the cost would outweigh the benefit.

Classy. How will they ever change????????

Ulysses Gaze

josip wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/1201/924240-senior-garda-cancelled-774-penalty-points-notices-in-17-counties/

WTF? At this stage, I accept a lot of what goes on in this country and can shrug it off but this has me mad.
I have a lot of respect for the Gardai, but surely charges should be brought against this guy for this?

Why?

givyjoe

josip wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/1201/924240-senior-garda-cancelled-774-penalty-points-notices-in-17-counties/

WTF? At this stage, I accept a lot of what goes on in this country and can shrug it off but this has me mad.
I have a lot of respect for the Gardai, but surely charges should be brought against this guy for this?

It's absolutely sickening. Literally because there was so much systemic abuse of the system.. it's 'too much effort' to bring disciplinary charges against those who did wrong.

It seems to be, 'if we charge one, we have to charge them all..' but that would be too much effort /cost. Safety in numbers.

valoren

Captain Obvious wrote: »

It's not enough to prove he cancelled points. It has to be proven that he did so without good cause or reason. In any case, what charge would you bring?

Loss of revenue?

Assuming 80 euro per fixed charge, that's a 59,520 loss to the exchequer. Not millions but still.

In the PULSE system, the reason field is mandatory but can be fooled highlighting it and hitting the spacebar, no text required. Reading about the McCabe situation, they would be putting in reasons such as 'bees attacking livestock' or 'late for swimming lesson'. Even where they are cancelled for seemingly legitimate reasons such as medical emergencies then where is the actual proof to back it up? Oh yes I forgot, that would actually involve work....

For the ridiculous reasons that didn't warrant cancellation there should be consequences but there won't be. Most were simply put in as 'cancelled'. Cancelled why? For what reason? Oh, so it was Guards logging in and cancelling notices using credentials from retired Guards so we're only wasting our time? Right so, thus concludes our thorough investigation. Case closed.

We all know deep down this is a case of doing a favour for a friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend and that the Guard in question faces no sanctions of accountability. It's another case of 'move along, nothing to see here'.

GSOC investigators received data relating to the issuing of 1.6 million fixed charge notices and 74,373 cancellations of fixed charge notices in the years 2009 to 2012.

Assume half of the cancellations are legitimate. that would leave 37186 and at say 60 on average per fine then we're talking millions. 2.23 million.

LOL, yet people still get done for 50 bags of weed. Costs outweigh the benefits my arse. :rolleyes:

seamus

valoren wrote: »

Loss of revenue?

"Loss of revenue" is not a crime. The Gardai are a not a business so "loss of revenue" is not a disciplinary matter a Garda can be charged with.

So, what's the charge? What's the actual crime?

And how would you go about proving it, beyond a reasonable doubt?

valoren

seamus wrote: »

"Loss of revenue" is not a crime. The Gardai are a not a business so "loss of revenue" is not a disciplinary matter a Garda can be charged with.

So, what's the charge? What's the actual crime?

And how would you go about proving it, beyond a reasonable doubt?

It's just a guess. Fraud for pretending to be an ex-Guard? I dunno.

Who polices the police I suppose. No one it seems.

Nothing will be done. Too costly and a waste of time and energy.

Nettle Soup

seamus wrote: »

So, what's the charge? What's the actual crime?

So you completely agree, the senior Garda should be not be disciplined in any way? Pretend like it never happened.

WoollyRedHat

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I asked what charge. Dismissal is not a criminal charge.

And no, absence of proof to the contrary is not proof of the claim.

Section 6 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 could be used.

What about evidence that this particular officer cancelled points outside of his jurisdiction?

ohnonotgmail

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Section 6 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 could be used.

What about evidence that this particular officer cancelled points outside of his jurisdiction?

Did he? Or was it just somebody logged in with his credentials that cancelled those points?

Captain Obvious

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Section 6 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 could be used.

Possibly, it requires proving deception and "induces another to do or refrain from doing an act" though.

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

What about evidence that this particular officer cancelled points outside of his jurisdiction?

His jurisdiction is the Republic of Ireland.

GM228

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Section 6 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 could be used.

And how has the Guard dishonestly made a gain for himself or a loss to another person?

6.—(1) A person who dishonestly, with the intention of making a gain for himself or herself or another, or of causing loss to another, by any deception induces another to do or refrain from doing an act is guilty of an offence.

(2) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on conviction on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or both.

seamus

Nettle Soup wrote: »

So you completely agree, the senior Garda should be not be disciplined in any way? Pretend like it never happened.

Yeah that's nothing like I said at all.

But I'm not into kangaroo courts and dismissals made for publicity. Everyone is entitled to due process.

Find out what the charges are. Then have a think about how you would go about prosecuting them.

And you'll quickly to come to a realisation that all you will have is another black hole for money to pour into with less than satisfactory results at the end.

Rather than engaging in wild goose witch hunts, use the money to drive procedural changes and improve morale in the force, and you'll get a better police force. Spend the money attempting (and failing) to prosecute one or two Gardai, and you gain nothing.

suicide_circus

The consequence for this large scale breach of procedures and corrupt practices?

Absolutely nothing.

server down

seamus wrote: »

Yeah that's nothing like I said at all.

But I'm not into kangaroo courts and dismissals made for publicity. Everyone is entitled to due process.

Find out what the charges are. Then have a think about how you would go about prosecuting them.

And you'll quickly to come to a realisation that all you will have is another black hole for money to pour into with less than satisfactory results at the end.

Rather than engaging in wild goose witch hunts, use the money to drive procedural changes and improve morale in the force, and you'll get a better police force. Spend the money attempting (and failing) to prosecute one or two Gardai, and you gain nothing.

Why? Why would it fail?

suicide_circus

server down wrote: »

Why? Why would it fail?

Because we don't do consequences for those in public office in ireland.

server down

seamus wrote: »

"Loss of revenue" is not a crime. The Gardai are a not a business so "loss of revenue" is not a disciplinary matter a Garda can be charged with.

So, what's the charge? What's the actual crime?

And how would you go about proving it, beyond a reasonable doubt?

Honestly mate. You are part of the problem.

I’d bet without much searching I’d find police officers fired for much less in many sane jurisdictions.

ohnonotgmail

server down wrote: »

Honestly mate. You are part of the problem.

I’d bet without much searching I’d find police officers fired for much less in many sane jurisdictions.

how can you fire somebody who has already retired?

Gijoseph

Some people are hell bent on excusing our glorious police force. One being the biggest government shill on boards.

server down

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

how can you fire somebody who has already retired?

Take his pension.

As for an investigation. It should be easy enough to work out a link between the 744 people left off and police officers.

Then fire them. No pension.

ohnonotgmail

server down wrote: »

Take his pension.

As for an investigation. It should be easy enough to work out a link between the 744 people left off and police officers.

Then fire them. No pension.

and what disciplinary offence have they committed?

suicide_circus

I don't care if it costs a million plus to go after these guys. The reputation of AGS is in the toilet. Wrongdoers in the organisation and those retired need to be dragged over the coals kicking and screaming. Justice needs to be seen to be done. Any money spent on the prosecutions can be seen as an investment in the future of policing in this state. I currently have no faith in the gardai to be good and honourable.

JeffKenna

I wonder out of these 744 people who had penalty points squshed, how many went on to kill or injure people on the road?

server down

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and what disciplinary offence have they committed?

Gross misconduct.

Are we seriously saying there’s no violation in using a senior officer’s password to let your friends and family off tickets, thus interfering with justice?

ED E

If anyone else else has access to your credentials, thats a breach. A big one. It circumvents all access controls Garda IT have put in place. Thats grounds for dismissal in any normal organization. But Gardai are trained to embezzle in templemore so....

ohnonotgmail

server down wrote: »

Gross misconduct.

Are we seriously saying there’s no violation in using a senior officer’s password to let your friends and family off tickets, thus interfering with justice?

ED E wrote: »

If anyone else else has access to your credentials, thats a breach. A big one. It circumvents all access controls Garda IT have put in place. Thats grounds for dismissal in any normal organization. But Gardai are trained to embezzle in templemore so....

not if it was condoned by senior management.

Nettle Soup

suicide_circus wrote: »

The consequence for this large scale breach of procedures and corrupt practices?

Absolutely nothing.

Yeah what a message that sends...:o

Nettle Soup

seamus wrote: »

Yeah that's nothing like I said at all.

But I'm not into kangaroo courts and dismissals made for publicity. Everyone is entitled to due process.

Find out what the charges are. Then have a think about how you would go about prosecuting them.

And you'll quickly to come to a realisation that all you will have is another black hole for money to pour into with less than satisfactory results at the end.

Rather than engaging in wild goose witch hunts, use the money to drive procedural changes and improve morale in the force, and you'll get a better police force. Spend the money attempting (and failing) to prosecute one or two Gardai, and you gain nothing.

Stop waffling and answer the question.

Do you think the senior Garda should be disciplined in any way?

Nettle Soup

Gijoseph wrote: »

Some people are hell bent on excusing our glorious police force. One being the biggest government shill on boards.

It's actually hard to fathom how someone can train their mind to be so blinkered.

GM228

server down wrote: »

Gross misconduct.

Gross misconduct is only a term to describe a serious breach of for example your terms and conditions, or for something like theft, bullying etc.

The question is what is the breach?

seamus

server down wrote: »

Honestly mate. You are part of the problem.

I'm part of the problem? Asking for due process? Yeah, let's combat corruption with more corruption! To hell with due process! Let's start disciplining people because the public is angry! That's worked really well in the past.

server down wrote: »

Why? Why would it fail?

Why would it succeed? Do you have access to the full body of evidence that GSOC have compiled?

Have a look at what GSOC have said. They're not even recommended disciplinary procedures, never mind criminal ones. So it seems that GSOC have no confidence that an actual case can be made of their findings.

ED E wrote: »

If anyone else else has access to your credentials, thats a breach. A big one. It circumvents all access controls Garda IT have put in place. Thats grounds for dismissal in any normal organization.

It's only grounds for dismissals if it's not established process.

If the policy of an organisation is that credentials may not be shared, but it's standard process to do so and everyone knows about it, and management explicitly or implicitly (by looking the other way) allow it, then any attempt to discipline someone for it will fail.

You can't discipline someone for breaking a T&C or a code of conduct when it's accepted standard practice to do so.

This is where Whistleblowers like McCabe come in - pointing out management failings where such breaches are being allowed/ignored.

Nettle Soup wrote: »

Do you think the senior Garda should be disciplined in any way?

Yes, if it can be proven that what he has done is a disciplinary matter. See above.

To illustrate:

You bring this Garda in front of a disciplinary committee. You have a print out of 744 ticket cancellations. You ask him to explain them.

He says, "I don't recall any of them, someone else must have used my login".

You challenge him about this; "why would they"? He says, "Because it's standard practice. If someone didn't remember theirs you logged in for them or texted them your login. Or you left yourself logged into a terminal and they may have used it."

"Are you aware that's in breach of the code of conduct".

"It was standard practice, and we were instructed to share our credentials by our CO on numerous occasions".

---

Now what do you do? You can't prove he cancelled any of them. And you will find 400 other Gardai who will confirm that this was standard process. So what do you do?

server down

GM228 wrote: »

Gross misconduct is only a term to describe a serious breach of for example your terms and conditions, or for something like theft, bullying etc.

The question is what is the breach?

Is it?

The breach is using unauthorised credentials for one. The other is to pervert justice by allowing certain favoured citizens off.

server down

seamus wrote: »

I'm part of the problem? Asking for due process? Yeah, let's combat corruption with more corruption! To hell with due process! Let's start disciplining people because the public is angry! That's worked really well in the past.Why would it succeed? Do you have access to the full body of evidence that GSOC have compiled?

You are not asking for due process. You are literally asking for no process.

Have a look at what GSOC have said. They're not even recommended disciplinary procedures, never mind criminal ones. So it seems that GSOC have no confidence that an actual case can be made of their findings.

Or what the rest of us would see as a cover up.

It's only grounds for dismissals if it's not established process.

If it’s established process to allow junior officers access to senior officers logins to allow certain citizens to be exempt from penalties the the orchestrators of that process need to be fired.

If the policy of an organisation is that credentials may not be shared, but it's standard process to do so and everyone knows about it, and management explicitly or implicitly (by looking the other way) allow it, then any attempt to discipline someone for it will fail.

So fire or discipline the management.

You can't discipline someone for breaking a T&C or a code of conduct when it's accepted standard practice to do so.

I am actually pretty dubious about that. If there’s a code of conduct saying Gardaí can’t search illegally but it’s done regularly do we ignore the personal guards responsibility?

If a police force in the US is totally corrupt from the management down does that make police drug dealing legal? Or acceptable?

server down

Meanwhile in Blighty.

Officer tries to give an inspector going for promotion some interview questions. Gross misconduct charges brought.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/09/25/top-police-officer-admits-gross-misconduct-after-trying-to-help-candidate-in-job-interview-6954841/

seamus

server down wrote: »

So fire or discipline the management.

Off you go. Explain to me in detail how you would go about this.

I am actually pretty dubious about that. If there’s a code of conduct saying Gardaí can’t search illegally but it’s done regularly do we ignore the personal guards responsibility?

That's breaking the law though.

Sharing credentials to a system is not breaking the law.

Cancelling points may be, but that brings us back to the salient issue - proving who cancelled the points and whether those cancellations were justified.

Poor procedural adherence, poor management and poor IT governance have left us with with a big mess of unaccountable actions.

You don't need to prove that a law was broken. You need to have prove who broke it. Can you do that?

WoollyRedHat

Captain Obvious wrote: »

His jurisdiction is the Republic of Ireland.

Pretty sure I read on one of the news sites covering the report that in relation to company policy and clearing penalty points, that he had committed a breach as it was outside his own jurisdiction. Which would make you ask what was going on.

GM228 wrote: »

And how has the Guard dishonestly made a gain for himself or a loss to another person?

You could make an argument that his actions resulted in the other person having gained something from having the points cleared. My understanding is that it is not solely limited to monetary acts.

nice_guy80

Pity I didn't have his number