Hayes thinks the 3 should be sent back to Chile?

Gemsbok15

Senator Brian Hayes of Fine Gael when debating the Columbia 3's return with Sinn Feins Daithi Doolan on 98FM Late Night Talk, constantly spoke about how the 3 men should be sent back to CHILE, should finish their sentences off in CHILE, and that they should be returned to the CHILEAN authorities, and that if their return was a virtual death sentence, then so be it, good to see that if a Fine Gael led coalition was to happen then a lack of empathy and Geographic confusion would reign supreme, now that instills confidence in me to vote for the Fine Gaels!

murphaph

That's gas! How long did they let him go on about Chile before stopping him?

Gemsbok15

He rambled on about Chile for about 4 or 5 minutes before Daithi decided to inform him of his confusion, excellent!

Dave!

lmao! Anyone got an audio clip by any chance? It'd be nice to hear him being corrected

MrJoeSoap

Typical, we listen to that show every night in work and I just happened to be off last night. Don't suppose anyone was taping it??? (Really pushing my luck there I know)

Cork

Did Daithi Doolan let us know what these 3 individuals were doing in Columbia or even a date for IRA decommissioning?

Brian Hayes in fairness has always been a democrat and with radio live debate I think the ocasional slip of the tougue is allowed.

murphaph

Cork wrote:

Did Daithi Doolan let us know what these 3 individuals were doing in Columbia or even a date for IRA decommissioning?

Brian Hayes in fairness has always been a democrat and with radio live debate I think the ocasional slip of the tougue is allowed.

Totally agree, but it's sill funny!

A Dub in Glasgo

Cork wrote:

Did Daithi Doolan let us know what these 3 individuals were doing in Columbia

He probably does not know... just like the rest of us

or even a date for IRA decommissioning?

An irrelevance to this thread and the subject

Brian Hayes in fairness has always been a democrat and with radio live debate I think the ocasional slip of the tougue is allowed.

A true democrat who ignores the gross human rights abuses of the country he so favours. A slip of the tongue which is rather revealing.

Cork

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

A true democrat who ignores the gross human rights abuses of the country he so favours. A slip of the tongue which is rather revealing.

It is a slip of the tougue. As for gross human rights abuses - I think the Provisional movement themselves have ignored these more than Brian Hayes.

But with live debate - you do get slips of the togue or you can easily loose your train of tought.

Did Daithi Doolan let us know how these 3 got into the country?

Blackjack

It would seem to be a bit of a quandry this one.
Given that the men were caught leaving the country on false passports and that is the only offence for which there is any evidence, the reaction from certain political parties is a bit odd.

While we may feel think or believe that they were up to no good (and I don't buy the Birdwatching BS either) there is no evidence to confirm they were doing anything else.

Mark Brennock wrote a good article in todays Irish Times (subscription required). Basically his point is that while everyone may believe they are guilty, there is no proof. The dubious manner under which these persons are sentenced in a country with a poor record for Human Rights is called into question and given that the only provable offence is a passport one (for which normally being caught travelling under a false passport is to be returned to the country from which you came) why should they spend 17 years in Jail.

Indeed, in the first lenghty trial it would appear they were found not guilty and the trial judge suggested the two main prosecution witnesses should be investigated for perjury. This was overturned by a tribunal held in private, where the men were not permitted to be represented.

If we are going to Jail the Columbia 3 for what we believe they did, or allow them to be jailed for something we believe they did, rather than what can be proven, then we're no better than the Kangaroo courts and murder of innocent people that were carried out by the Provos anytime throughout the last 30 years.

jank

Blackjack wrote:

It would seem to be a bit of a quandry this one.
Given that the men were caught leaving the country on false passports and that is the only offence for which there is any evidence, the reaction from certain political parties is a bit odd.

While we may feel think or believe that they were up to no good (and I don't buy the Birdwatching BS either) there is no evidence to confirm they were doing anything else.

Mark Brennock wrote a good article in todays Irish Times (subscription required). Basically his point is that while everyone may believe they are guilty, there is no proof. The dubious manner under which these persons are sentenced in a country with a poor record for Human Rights is called into question and given that the only provable offence is a passport one (for which normally being caught travelling under a false passport is to be returned to the country from which you came) why should they spend 17 years in Jail.

Indeed, in the first lenghty trial it would appear they were found not guilty and the trial judge suggested the two main prosecution witnesses should be investigated for perjury. This was overturned by a tribunal held in private, where the men were not permitted to be represented.

If we are going to Jail the Columbia 3 for what we believe they did, or allow them to be jailed for something we believe they did, rather than what can be proven, then we're no better than the Kangaroo courts and murder of innocent people that were carried out by the Provos anytime throughout the last 30 years.

Whats this!!?? Some sense at last on this politics board.

Well said. Agree with everything you said.

Blackjack

Blackjack wrote:

If we are going to Jail the Columbia 3 for what we believe they did,

Agreed you couldn't advocate that.
You cannot be jailing people for something you think they may have done but you have no proof of.

or allow them to be jailed for something we believe they did, rather than what can be proven,

This is where it gets grey.We can prove that they are fugitives from columbian justice.

then we're no better than the Kangaroo courts and murder of innocent people that were carried out by the Provos anytime throughout the last 30 years.

Now that bit is where I think you are being overly subjective.
Colombia is a democracy.
The provo's were never a democracy.

But I suppose you could point to the irony of "provo's" decrying one court decision made behind closed doors when they themselves made all of theirs behind closed doors.
You might call it hypocrisy...

Gemsbok15

Gemsbok15 wrote:

Senator Brian Hayes of Fine Gael when debating the Columbia 3's return

Given that this thread is about being pedantic,I'd have asked Hayes what pinochet would have done...

That said Gemsbok,you've made a mistake too...
Hmmmm are you sure you mean columbia there?
Thats a river in the USA afaik.

The 3 men in question were in a country called colombia

AngelofFire

In future Brian Hayes should be given a map of the world, before he does a radio interview the muppet

Blackjack

Earthman wrote:

Agreed you couldn't advocate that.
You cannot be jailing people for something you think they may have done but you have no proof of. This is where it gets grey.We can prove that they are fugitives from columbian justice.Now that bit is where I think you are being overly subjective.
Colombia is a democracy.
The provo's were never a democracy.

But I suppose you could point to the irony of "provo's" decrying one court decision made behind closed doors when they themselves made all of theirs behind closed doors.
You might call it hypocrisy...

This is the thing. I doubt I could call either the Columbian version justice, nor could I call the Republican version justice either. The point is (and I'm not having a go) is that if we are going to jail someone for what we believe they are guilty of, as opposed to what we can prove them to be guilty of, then we can impose the appropriate sentance. If we can't prove their guilt, then we should not be able to impose a guilty sentance.
This is the Hypocritical issue - if we are unable to prove them to be guilty of any offence, then why should they be charged with the offence?.
If we believe that because they are involved with an illegal organisation, then we have the power to charge them with that (seperate issue altogether).

However, the Irish state does not have (and I expect some legal opinion to correct me if appropriate) the power to extradite people to Columbia, given that no Extradition treaty exists.
If the Columbian Government are found to be incorrect and having illegally imprisoned these 3, do we really want to listen to the propoganda that will ensue?. Personally, no.

Hammered when typing. May require correction.

Blackjack

Blackjack wrote:

I doubt I could call either the Columbian version justice, nor could I call the Republican version justice either.

I don't know about that.It is a democracy.We don't know what made the appeal judges decide what they did and the fact is that they made a decision and were entitled to do so.The decision is an unfortunate one, if one is a supporter of the colombia 3 but if these were ordinary Irish citizens with out the background that they have and if they were convicted in a rogue country,views might be different.

I would suggest that the central difficulty here is that the story of observing a peace process amongst drug dealing murdering louts such as the farc are... is so muddilly implausable,one would have to question the motives of those who had anything to do with them.

That background thought would not help one to ignore the fact that they are now fugitives from justice in that foreign democratic country.
It's their fault not ours and it would be difficult to wiggle out of an international moral responsibility to uphold the rule of law.

It's going to be interesting to see how this pans out.

cal29

Even if Mcdowell signs an extradition treaty with Colombia it is highly unlikely that an Irish court would allow the extradition of Irish citizens to Colombia

Irish Courts have ruled in the past not to send maze escapers back to the north based on the treatment of the prisioners left in the prison after the escape which would be nothing compared to the conditions in Colombian jails

Also extradition has been refused based the absense of the likely hood of a fair trial for example Patrick ryan

so it would appear that the probably the most that will happen is that Connolly will be charged with having a false Irish passport

Either way I dont think they will be going to Chile

RosConor

Looks like hiring grease monkies to wright your lines dosn't work after all....

You'd think he'd know though, its all over the news. Its kinda sad that the representitive for hundreds of people could make that mistake.

Gemsbok15

Hayes' gaff about the Chilean 3 is in this weeks Phoenix

Thomond Pk

You actually could extradite an accused to Chile their justice system is possibly the best in Latin America in terms of transperency. Brian obviously wasn't invited to the opening of their embassy on Wellington Road last year.

linux

Gemsbok15 wrote:

Senator Brian Hayes of Fine Gael when debating the Columbia 3's return with Sinn Feins Daithi Doolan on 98FM Late Night Talk, constantly spoke about how the 3 men should be sent back to CHILE, should finish their sentences off in CHILE, and that they should be returned to the CHILEAN authorities, and that if their return was a virtual death sentence, then so be it, good to see that if a Fine Gael led coalition was to happen then a lack of empathy and Geographic confusion would reign supreme, now that instills confidence in me to vote for the Fine Gaels!

Personally I dont think the 3 will be going anywhere, there extradition is a damp squid! Columbian Justice is known to be a farce by all human rights organisations, so I reckon poor Brian is fighting the best case for his election campaign possible and long may it continue HA!

zuma

and that if their return was a virtual death sentence, then so be it,

I hope he realises that its against EU law to send people to a certain death sentence!!!

Britain, the US bestest of best friends, refuses to extradite murderers to the US, for example, if they face the Death sentence.