Summons valid?

Whoareyou70

Thanks everyone for their opinions.

It was a small amount (€50) for personal usage.

I've contacted a solicitor for further advice but was also interested on what other people had to say on the matter.

It would be a shame if there was lasting consequences in what I see as a harmless offence but this is the system we are apart of I guess.

Irishphotodesk

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I don't disagree with the checks/balances aspect but personal responsibility is needed, the OP in their post admits they were in possession of drugs at a festival (we don't know if this is for sale/supply or personal usage) - but if they know they were in possession of illegal substance(s) when CAUGHT, accept whatever the consequences are when brought before a court.

A solicitor will know how to minimise the sentencing and in some cases allow the person who is guilty of an offence to get off scott free because of .... as you put it checks/balances (clerical/admin errors should be ammendable/accepted in court in my opinion).

do you believe a person - when caught red handed - should not be prosecuted because of an admin error ? (ie. checks/balances done incorrectly) - as an example. a person caught in possession of child porn should be allowed to go free because the warrant was out of date by a day - the facts still remain the same, person caught red handed (in the case I'm thinking of ...it was a judge who was then allowed to retire afterwards, its a case which sticks with me)

A delay in prosecution is unfair on the accused too though, as they are left to stew while waiting the outcome of the case.

It's funny you use the example of child porn. Iirc several years ago the State discontinued cases of possession of child porn against a number of accused as the State didn't have the resources at the time to investigate the cases fully. (I believe the Gardaí who would have usually worked in the area were moved across to investigate financial wrong-doing). Hard one to balance but I know (locally, not professionally) of one of the accused and the accusation, which was never fully tried in Court, still hangs over him.

Wailin

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

I have given two opinions.

I think it would be best you keep your opinions to yourself in future.


Mod
This forum is for legal discussion

Irishphotodesk

Whoareyou70 wrote: »

Thanks everyone for their opinions.

It was a small amount (€50) for personal usage.

I've contacted a solicitor for further advice but was also interested on what other people had to say on the matter.

It would be a shame if there was lasting consequences in what I see as a harmless offence but this is the system we are apart of I guess.

If a solicitor can be caught in possession of drugs going into a prison and continue to practice you should be given probation act (assuming first offence).

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

A delay in prosecution is unfair on the accused too though, as they are left to stew while waiting the outcome of the case.

It's funny you use the example of child porn. Iirc several years ago the State discontinued cases of possession of child porn against a number of accused as the State didn't have the resources at the time to investigate the cases fully. (I believe the Gardaí who would have usually worked in the area were moved across to investigate financial wrong-doing). Hard one to balance but I know (locally, not professionally) of one of the accused and the accusation, which was never fully tried in Court, still hangs over him.

werent the cases dismissed on request from the defence as opposed to a nolle prosequi?

Claw Hammer

Possession of drugs is an either way offence capable of being prosecuted summarily or on indictment. For this reason there is no time limit for the issue of a summons. Whatever defence the o/p might have, delay in the application for a summons is not going to work.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Possession of drugs is an either way offence capable of being prosecuted summarily or on indictment. For this reason there is no time limit for the issue of a summons. Whatever defence the o/p might have, delay in the application for a summons is not going to work.

This is incorrect. Summons for section 3 personal use is 6 months. Section 15 offences on summons is 12 months as its a hybrid offence. No limit on indictment only which this isnt.

Claw Hammer

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

This is incorrect. Summons for section 3 personal use is 6 months. Section 15 offences on summons is 12 months as its a hybrid offence. No limit on indictment only which this isnt.

Section 27 of the misuse of drugs act allows from trial on indictment for Section 3.
Under Section 177 of the courts of justice act 2006 the 6 month limit does not apply even if the trial is suummary.

grogi

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

what is a stretch ? do you disagree that both situations the "defendant" was in possession at the time of the alleged offences ?

have a google for judge, child porn possession and you will find the case .... if you get stuck add kerry.

I strongly believe that the law enforcement should follow the law and if the case comes with such gravity, it should be spotless and admin errors free. The procedures are there for good reasons and should not be dismissed because it is more convenient.

Claw Hammer

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Section 27 of the misuse of drugs act allows from trial on indictment for Section 3.
Under Section 177 of the courts of justice act 2006 the 6 month limit does not apply even if the trial is suummary.

You sir, have blown my mind. I need to check this further.

Claw Hammer

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I need to check this further.

You sure do!

nuac

Mod
This discussion is becoming heated. Also forum rules discourage discussion re small amounts of drugs. Therefore closing this discussion.