One for the legals

Irishphotodesk

Can someone explain to me if it is legal for a barrister to put a client into their car and transport them from the courts, for the express purpose of evading the media ?

Asking for a friend !

My understanding is that it would impact on the members of the media's constitutional right to work and would be illegal

28064212

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

My understanding is that it would impact on the members of the media's constitutional right to work and would be illegal

Their right to work isn't being impeded. They don't have a right to a good story

splinter65

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Can someone explain to me if it is legal for a barrister to put a client into their car and transport them from the courts, for the express purpose of evading the media ?

Asking for a friend !

My understanding is that it would impact on the members of the media's constitutional right to work and would be illegal

This is ridiculous.
You think that there is a law which states that members of the public are forced to make themselves available to the press?!?

hullaballoo

Did you miss a chance to snap Dwyer because his JC bundled him into their car?

Just to turn the question around, what basis do you have for believing there is any issue with so doing?

Robbo

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

My understanding is that it would impact on the members of the media's constitutional right to work and would be illegal

You don't have a very good understanding of the law in this area. No photographer is deprived of their (by no means strong) right to a livelihood here, they merely missed out on an opportunity because they were easily outwitted.

What your're asking for is akin to a sports photographer asking the scorer of a goal if he'd mind taking the shot again as he hadn't his gear set up in time.

Irishphotodesk

splinter65 wrote: »

This is ridiculous.
You think that there is a law which states that members of the public are forced to make themselves available to the press?!?

Please enlighten me as to which part of my question said that the public are forced to be made available for the media, I asked is it legal for a barrister to shield a client from the media.

Can a barrister legally put a person into their personal vehicle for the purpose of denying the media an image ?

If you don't know the answer is ok to admit it or not give any response

Salary Negotiator

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please enlighten me as to which part of my question said that the public are forced to be made available for the media, I asked is it legal for a barrister to shield a client from the media.

Can a barrister legally put a person into their personal vehicle for the purpose of denying the media an image ?

If you don't know the answer is ok to admit it or not give any response

Yes, of course they can. Why do you think they couldn’t?

HeidiHeidi

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please enlighten me as to which part of my question said that the public are forced to be made available for the media, I asked is it legal for a barrister to shield a client from the media.

Can a barrister legally put a person into their personal vehicle for the purpose of denying the media an image ?

If you don't know the answer is ok to admit it or not give any response

What a bizarre question!


How would you prove that that was their intent, for starters?

SusieBlue

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please enlighten me as to which part of my question said that the public are forced to be made available for the media, I asked is it legal for a barrister to shield a client from the media.

Can a barrister legally put a person into their personal vehicle for the purpose of denying the media an image ?

If you don't know the answer is ok to admit it or not give any response

Absolutely bizarre line of reasoning. The media have no right, legal or otherwise, to any such images, of anyone.

What laws do you think they have broken, pray tell?

un5byh7sqpd2x0

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please enlighten me as to which part of my question said that the public are forced to be made available for the media, I asked is it legal for a barrister to shield a client from the media.

Can a barrister legally put a person into their personal vehicle for the purpose of denying the media an image ?

If you don't know the answer is ok to admit it or not give any response

Yes they can. On what basis do you think it's illegal?

Irishphotodesk

hullaballoo wrote: »

Did you miss a chance to snap Dwyer because his JC bundled him into their car?

Just to turn the question around, what basis do you have for believing there is any issue with so doing?

For one thing.... Mr Dwyer is in custody and would be in a prison van escorted by prison officers ergo completely different scenario.

What basis ... Let's say the media person involved is tasked with providing the national media with images from court cases, and a barrister using his/her private vehicle transports the client to and from the court in an effort to avoid being photographed by the media, to me it would be a direct attempt at denying the media person their opportunity to do their job, this my reason for asking .... Is it legal ? Or illegal to transport someone in and out of the courts.

I'm sure people would be up in arms if every person before the courts were shielded from the media.

Irishphotodesk

Will Purple Snow wrote: »

Yes they can. On what basis do you think it's illegal?

Do you have any case law to support your belief that they can ? I'm genuinely curious.

I don't have a basis for believing it's legal or illegal to do it, hence the reason for asking the question ... In the hope that someone might provide some legal insight into the legality of the situation.

magicbastarder

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

for the purpose of denying the media an image ?

can you find the statute in irish law which states 'denying the media an image' is illegal?
it's a bizarre question, surely how the client gets to court has to make absolutely no allowances for whether that inconveniences photographers. unless you're arguing for a mandatory walk of shame.

Irishphotodesk

SusieBlue wrote: »

Absolutely bizarre line of reasoning. The media have no right, legal or otherwise, to any such images, of anyone.

What laws do you think they have broken, pray tell?

I'm not saying the media have a right , I'm asking about the legality of a barrister using their private vehicle to transport a person in and out of the courts for the express purpose of shielding them from the media.

28064212

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I'm asking about the legality of a barrister using their private vehicle to transport a person in and out of the courts for the express purpose of shielding them from the media.

Bolded part is irrelevant. Un-bolded part is legal (y'know, providing they are not breaking any traffic laws).

magicbastarder

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I'm not saying the media have a right , I'm asking about the legality of a barrister using their private vehicle to transport a person in and out of the courts for the express purpose of shielding them from the media.

now you're just confusing me.
if the media don't have a right, how can he be denying them a right they don't have?

ohnonotgmail

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Do you have any case law to support your belief that they can ? I'm genuinely curious.

I don't have a basis for believing it's legal or illegal to do it, hence the reason for asking the question ... In the hope that someone might provide some legal insight into the legality of the situation.

it is legal until it is expressly made illegal. So on what basis do you think it is illegal?

HeidiHeidi

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I'm not saying the media have a right , I'm asking about the legality of a barrister using their private vehicle to transport a person in and out of the courts for the express purpose of shielding them from the media.

Again, how would you go about proving that that was their express purpose?

Irishphotodesk

magicbastarder wrote: »

can you find the statute in irish law which states 'denying the media an image' is illegal?
it's a bizarre question, surely how the client gets to court has to make absolutely no allowances for whether that inconveniences photographers. unless you're arguing for a mandatory walk of shame.

Please re-read what I have said I have never said denying the media an image is illegal.

I have asked about the legality of a barrister transporting a client to and from the court.

Let's take out the reason for the barrister doing such an action is it legal to transport a person into an area of the courts building where a member of the public otherwise would not have access.

ohnonotgmail

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please re-read what I have said I have never said denying the media an image is illegal.

I have asked about the legality of a barrister transporting a client to and from the court.

Let's take out the reason for the barrister doing such an action is it legal to transport a person into an area of the courts building where a member of the public otherwise would not have access.

there is no law against it that i am aware of and i cant imagine why such a law would exist.

magicbastarder

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I have asked about the legality of a barrister transporting a client to and from the court.

why would - or could - this be illegal?

chunkylover4

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please re-read what I have said I have never said denying the media an image is illegal.

I have asked about the legality of a barrister transporting a client to and from the court.

Let's take out the reason for the barrister doing such an action is it legal to transport a person into an area of the courts building where a member of the public otherwise would not have access.

The only place that a barrister has access to in the Four courts that the public do not is the law library where they certainly wouldn't be bringing a client. Similarily in other court buildings, a client would not be brought into the bar room. The bar Council do not have rules on a barrister giving a lift to a client. It would be criminal conduct to force someone into your car against their will and transport them somewhere. Why are you asking this? As others have said it just comes accross as non-sensical.

martingriff

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please enlighten me as to which part of my question said that the public are forced to be made available for the media, I asked is it legal for a barrister to shield a client from the media.

Can a barrister legally put a person into their personal vehicle for the purpose of denying the media an image ?

If you don't know the answer is ok to admit it or not give any response

Why should be made available for an image. Surely a journalist can write a story without 1. Wouldn't incamera laws be illegal then.

Also you do realise is part of the public and wanting an image would be forcing them to be available to the media

Irishphotodesk

magicbastarder wrote: »

why would - or could - this be illegal?

Because barristers have access to areas of the courts building that are not available to members of the public, ergo by transporting a client into the courts building the client is not subject to the security measures placed on members of the public on arrival of the courts.

ohnonotgmail

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Because barristers have access to areas of the courts building that are not available to members of the public, ergo by transporting a client into the courts building the client is not subject to the security measures placed on members of the public on arrival of the courts.

you said they transported the client away from the building not into the building. If you have evidence that a barrister allowed a client to evade court security you should report it to the relevant authorities.

chunkylover4

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Because barristers have access to areas of the courts building that are not available to members of the public, ergo by transporting a client into the courts building the client is not subject to the security measures placed on members of the public on arrival of the courts.

The security measures put in place are simply that. They are not regulated by statute. In the Four Courts, until recently you used to be able to scan a client through the gates with your court card (although obviously you weren't supposed to) however there is now a temporary block on the card once it is used once which prevents this practice so there is an interest in security getting the public the courts through the public entrance. Very few barristers have access to the car park in the complex so the scenario you describe is unlikely to arise too much.

Irishphotodesk

28064212 wrote: »

Bolded part is irrelevant. Un-bolded part is legal (y'know, providing they are not breaking any traffic laws).

Well... There was driving in a bus lane involved and parking in a disabled bay.

chunkylover4

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Well... There was driving in a bus lane involved and parking in a disabled bay.

Has the question now become; is it illegal to drive in a bus lane (answer, it depends) and is it illegal to park in a disabled bay (answer, also it depends)?

Salary Negotiator

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Can someone explain to me if it is legal for a barrister to put a client into their car and transport them from the courts, for the express purpose of evading the media ?

Asking for a friend !

My understanding is that it would impact on the members of the media's constitutional right to work and would be illegal

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

For one thing.... Mr Dwyer is in custody and would be in a prison van escorted by prison officers ergo completely different scenario.

What basis ... Let's say the media person involved is tasked with providing the national media with images from court cases, and a barrister using his/her private vehicle transports the client to and from the court in an effort to avoid being photographed by the media, to me it would be a direct attempt at denying the media person their opportunity to do their job, this my reason for asking .... Is it legal ? Or illegal to transport someone in and out of the courts.

I'm sure people would be up in arms if every person before the courts were shielded from the media.

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Do you have any case law to support your belief that they can ? I'm genuinely curious.

I don't have a basis for believing it's legal or illegal to do it, hence the reason for asking the question ... In the hope that someone might provide some legal insight into the legality of the situation.

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I'm not saying the media have a right , I'm asking about the legality of a barrister using their private vehicle to transport a person in and out of the courts for the express purpose of shielding them from the media.

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Please re-read what I have said I have never said denying the media an image is illegal.

I have asked about the legality of a barrister transporting a client to and from the court.

Let's take out the reason for the barrister doing such an action is it legal to transport a person into an area of the courts building where a member of the public otherwise would not have access.

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Because barristers have access to areas of the courts building that are not available to members of the public, ergo by transporting a client into the courts building the client is not subject to the security measures placed on members of the public on arrival of the courts.

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Well... There was driving in a bus lane involved and parking in a disabled bay.

Op is all over the place.

Irishphotodesk

chunkylover4 wrote: »

The security measures put in place are simply that. They are not regulated by statute. In the Four Courts, until recently you used to be able to scan a client through the gates with your court card (although obviously you weren't supposed to) however there is now a temporary block on the card once it is used once which prevents this practice so there is an interest in security getting the public the courts through the public entrance. Very few barristers have access to the car park in the complex so the scenario you describe is unlikely to arise to much.

The reason the card temporary block was put in place was because (I'm told) that members of the public were not permitted to be given access by card holders, and were to go through the security provided for them.

So I am are getting closer to understanding it may not be illegal but is not common practice and not permitted in the CCJ.

Irishphotodesk

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Well... There was driving in a bus lane involved and parking in a disabled bay.

Quite the scoop - front page even.