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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

I know its hilarious but ...

  • 07-01-2005 12:28pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭


    I got this forward at work. The story itself is class but the judges decision at the end is a bit weird. If you assume that the sun reporter reported it correctly, (quite a large feat at times), does anyone else think the case should not have been thrown out. The incident involved has no relation to the charges involved.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,317 ✭✭✭Chalk


    gardai falsifies evidence.

    man may have been over the limit but gardai did not mention that there was a major distraction going on in the car so as to perhaps increase mans punishment.

    some makes it up , you go free

    thats how it works
    thats why scum wander the streets freely, since gards cant even tell the time when there filling in there reports..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭vorbis


    yeah but shouldn't that only affect sentencing. I mean the "distraction" doesn't take away from the fact that he was over the limit. Imagine if it did!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,317 ✭✭✭Chalk


    it wouldnt have ,

    the gard decided that the judge didnt need to know this, when the judge found out the gard was withholding evidence she had to throw it out.

    perhaps the mitigating circumstances would have changed nothing for the fella, but what about the girl, she could be seen as liable from the fellas point of view.

    he gard decided to make decisions for the judge so the judge threw the gards case out, happens all the time.

    also
    a roadside test is only as reliable as the gard who oversees it.
    if the gard can lie about what happened, surely he can lie about the alcohol, as any good tv lawyer would point out.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,707 ✭✭✭skywalker


    always have to laugh at the use of "sex act". was she reading a screenplay while giving him a **** or something?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,225 ✭✭✭JackKelly


    skywalker wrote:
    always have to laugh at the use of "sex act". was she reading a screenplay while giving him a **** or something?
    lol biggrin.gif


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭vorbis


    um but if the defence wanted to bring up the sex act, then they could have. It was hardly being hidden from the court.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Boggle


    have to admit I kinda feel sorry for the gard in this case... he probably only intended to spare the girls blushes as she was only a teen and he may not have realised how big a deal it was.

    I assume he took the case as all but closed as yer man was over the limit and crashed into a wall. He must have assumed he didn't need to go into the details of how the crash happened.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,978 ✭✭✭445279.ie


    [QUOTE=Chalkalso
    a roadside test is only as reliable as the gard who oversees it.
    [/QUOTE]


    They don't do "roadside tests"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 211 ✭✭dictatorcat


    didn't anyone notice the date at the top? it's alleged to have occured the day before .......april fools day!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 73 ✭✭captainplanet


    GUARD.
    thank you.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement