Questions about double jeopardy (?) and the data protection act.

Aezur

My friend got too drunk on RAG week 2017 (about 18 months ago) and allegedly tried to bite one of the arresting garda. He also had a small amount of marijuana on him. (Which the garda gave back to him, oddly enough)
He awoke battered and bruised, black eyes, chipped teeth and no memory, so went to the doctor to assess the damage and record his wounds.
A few days later the garda arrived at his house, informed him of what he had done (as he did not remember), told him he fell when in their custody, and fined him a few hundred for being drunk and disorderly, which he paid.

He is currently on work experience in a different county, and today the gardai showed up to his work and served him a summons for drunk and disorderly, attempted assault of a garda, and drug possession.

My questions are;
If they have already fined him for the d&d, are they allowed to take him to court over the same crime? (Not his other crimes in that incident, just the d&d)
And the only people that have his current work experience address are the social welfare office, so does the data protection act not apply to guards?

sexmag

The guards don't fine people for being drunk and disorderly, the arrest and charge people who then receive a summons and then it's up to the judge what the punishment is.

Being drunk and biting a guard isn't something you get a fixed penalty for,it's not like speeding, it's an assault.

Sounds like the guards were pulling a fast one.

Does he have any record of this "fine" he paid?

Also guards are allow acquire information that allows them to perform their duties,serving a summons would be one of them duties.

Fred Swanson

The Gardai can issue fixed penalties for some public order offences.

sexmag

Fred Swanson wrote: »

The Gardai can issue fixed penalties for some public order offences.

Yes for public urination etc but certainly not for assault or possession, that's up to a judge to determine

ohnonotgmail

Aezur wrote: »

He awoke battered and bruised, black eyes, chipped teeth and no memory, so went to the doctor to assess the damage and record his wounds.
A few days later the garda arrived at his house, informed him of what he had done (as he did not remember), told him he fell when in their custody, and fined him a few hundred for being drunk and disorderly, which he paid.

does this make sense? He bites a guard while drunk and the guy ends up sleeping in his own bed? would they really release somebody that drunk?

GM228

sexmag wrote: »

The guards don't fine people for being drunk and disorderly, the arrest and charge people who then receive a summons and then it's up to the judge what the punishment is.

Both being intoxicated in a public place and disorderly conduct in a public place are fixed charge penalty offences of €100 and €140 respectively. You must get a FCPN long before you end up with a summons, Gardaí can not skip the FCPN stage.

Either the OPs "friend" got one and didn't pay, didn't get one, or did get one and paid, but it's an administrative error.

The issue of assault and drug possession however is a different issue.



What the OPs "friend" states simply does not add up, for example you will not be charged with mere possession of drugs, rather you will be charged with possession with intent to supply or sell, the Guards would not give the drugs back, that simply does not happen, the drugs are their evidence in any prosecution, and if the "friend" did attempt to bite the Guard they would have been arrested then and there.

Claw Hammer

GM228 wrote: »

What the OPs "friend" states simply does not add up, for example you will not be charged with mere possession of drugs, rather you will be charged with possession with intent to supply or sell,

There is a charge of possession only under Section 3 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977. It is frequently charged.

GM228

Claw Hammer wrote: »

There is a charge of possession only under Section 3 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977. It is frequently charged.

Sorry, of course you are correct, my bad. I think I had the National Drugs Strategy in the back of my mind which has indicated that preparations of Cannabis (and certain other controlled drugs) in small amounts in your posession potentially becoming subject to the next exemption order, similar to the way preparation of cocaine containing not more than 0.1 per cent of cocaine base is now exempt (where preparation is compounded with one or more other ingredients in such a way that the cocaine cannot be readily recovered), but I would imagine the quantities/percentage will be higher.

Sorry I'm swaying off topic now, but it does not take away from the fact that a Guard giving you back your drugs and then subsequently charging you with posession simply does not happen, huge evidential issue with that.

mynamejeff

its possible that he got a FCPN for drunkenness on the night the summons may relate to the assault or attempted assault on the garda( which requires a file to the dpp) and the drugs which may have had to be tested.

then again its was rag week and im sure it was frantic so whos to know what happened

although the garda did not give back the drugs then summons him for them

GM228

mynamejeff wrote: »

its possible that he got a FCPN for drunkenness on the night the summons may relate to the assault or attempted assault on the garda( which requires a file to the dpp) and the drugs which may have had to be tested.

then again its was rag week and im sure it was frantic so whos to know what happened

although the garda did not give back the drugs then summons him for them

A S2 or S3 assault on a Guard does not require a file to be sent to the DPP if the prosecution is sanctioned by an Inspector or higher grade.

mynamejeff

GM228 wrote: »

A S2 or S3 assault on a Guard does not require a file to be sent to the DPP if the prosecution is sanctioned by an Inspector or higher grade.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1994/act/2/section/19/enacted/en/html

Assault on a Member of An Garda Siochana is an specific offence requiring a direction from DPPs .

not usually used as its indictable and could lead to a costly trial.

GM228

mynamejeff wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1994/act/2/section/19/enacted/en/html

Assault on a Member of An Garda Siochana is an specific offence requiring a direction from DPPs .

not usually used as its indictable and could lead to a costly trial.

A person who assaults a member of the Gardaí can be charged under S19 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994 or a S2, 3 or 4 assault under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997.

A Guard can and do initiate the prosecution without DPP direction once an Inspector or higher sanctions it, minor assaults and attempted assaults are usually dealth with under the 1997 Act, in fact S4 and even summary or indictable under S19 of the 1994 Act are dealth with this way.

Claw Hammer

mynamejeff wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1994/act/2/section/19/enacted/en/html

Assault on a Member of An Garda Siochana is an specific offence requiring a direction from DPPs .

not usually used as its indictable and could lead to a costly trial.

It can be tried either way. Very few defendants will insist on a jury trial, because of the possibility of a very high sentence compared with the likelihood of a non-custodial sentence in the District Court.

Mr. Incognito

1. Go to a solicitor

2. Ignore every reply on this thread

3. Go to a solicitor.

Aezur

Thanks for all the replies.
He went to his court date and requested additional time to mount a defense as his summons was served 3 weeks before his court date. I gave him the 'Get a solicitor, Get a solicitor, Get a solicitor' speech, as his uncle had advised him to go in with no representation and plead guilty, which seems ill advised considering the serious nature of his charges.

To the people saying the story doesnt make much sense... Well that's kinda why I asked here. So much didnt add up. My housemate collected him from the station and walked him home. Why did they give him his weed back? Why did they sign him into the custody of a random friend (1st number in his phone apparently)? Why fine him 2 days later and then wait 1.5 years to move forward with the case?

I'll update when he gets sentenced for anyone interested.