Liam bloody Lawlor again !!!!

gandalf

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2002/0129/90647513HMLAWLORONE.html

He just hasn't learnt has he. This man is a disgrace to Irish Politics and should be thrown in Jail for the remaining 2.5 months immediately. No allowance for a weekend away, but a proceed straight to jail card !!!

The only reason at this stage imho for his delaying tactics is that he is protecting others. I wonder how many in FF are unable to sleep at night wondering if Liamo will break. At this stage he has to be made an example of, and the more extreme and over the top the better.

Gandalf.

bonkey

He's unbelievable alright.

What scares me is the favours this guy is going to be owed when all this is said and done.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure anything can be done with him. A tribunal has no legal standing AFAIK - nothing which comes out in the tribunal can be taken into account in a court of law. This is one of the reasons I was always against the tribunals in teh first place - even if Lawlor came out and said "I accepted bribes for 100,000,000 which influenced me in my land rezoning capacity", and signed a declaration to that end, when it came to a court case they would still have to prove it from scratch again.

Lawlor knows damn well that his "contempt of court" stints in jail cannot prevent him from being a member of the Dail, and apparently his constituents still love him.

So - how can he be made an example of?

The only way he can be got at (that I am aware of) is by the criminal assets bureau (I think). Although I have a problem with their remit, they would be ideal in a case like this. Why? Because they appear to work off the "guilty till proven innocent" basis. If they slap Lawlor with a charge, he must basically prove that all his assets were legally ome by. Anything he fails (or refuses) to prove the legality of is taken straight off him. IIRC, there is even provision for hjandling offshore assets - local assets can be frozen in their place.

Use this to squeeze the guy. Follow any paper trail he supplies to burn out those who bribed him, and see what comes out.

Of course, its abusing the very things in our system which I object to, and it will never happen anyway. Why not? Because too many politicians have too much to hide. If they hang him out to dry, then they can be equally hung out to dry.

jc

Xterminator

Bonkey, I agree with CAB seemingly the best solution here.

After all the man has proved he is a greedy person with no father , so hitting him in the pocket is the best way to punish him.

May I ask what you mean thouh whebn you say you have a proble with the remit of the CAB?

X

shotamoose

Originally posted by bonkey
Unfortunately, I'm not sure anything can be done with him. A tribunal has no legal standing AFAIK - nothing which comes out in the tribunal can be taken into account in a court of law. This is one of the reasons I was always against the tribunals in teh first place - even if Lawlor came out and said "I accepted bribes for 100,000,000 which influenced me in my land rezoning capacity", and signed a declaration to that end, when it came to a court case they would still have to prove it from scratch again.

I'm completely clueless about the legal situation here, so if someone could enlighten me I'd appreciate it: what, if any, are the charges that can be brought against a politician who did take money in exchange for favours? Is 'corruption' a crime? Because I do think its dodgy that despite all that's emerged in the tribunals, nobody has been to jail except Lawlor, who's only going there for his own stupid obstinacy in refusing to disclose what the Tribunal demand.

bonkey

Originally posted by Xterminator
May I ask what you mean thouh whebn you say you have a proble with the remit of the CAB?

If the CAB turn up on your door tomorrow, they can ask you to prove that every single item in your possession is in fact yours, and paid for my legally obtained means. Anything you fail to supply proof for can effectively be taken off you.

You dont find this disturbing? They need no proof of wrong-doing before taking such action, and once they do so, you are effectively guilty until proven innocent.

In short - their remit flies in the face of our entire judiciary system.

jc

WhiteWashMan

yes, treue.
but its not as if they target just anyone.
god, id be buggered if they came to my house!
but they do need a reason to call on you, they just dont need a legal one.
you know what i mean!

bonkey

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
but they do need a reason to call on you, they just dont need a legal one.

Exactly the problem I have with it - their reason could be as shallow as a personal or professional grudge taken by a high-ranking member of the CAB, or worse, by some politician who has the CAB in their back pocket.

jc

mike65

Originally posted by shotamoose


what, if any, are the charges that can be brought against a politician who did take money in exchange for favours? Is 'corruption' a crime? Because I do think its dodgy that despite all that's emerged in the tribunals, nobody has been to jail except Lawlor, who's only going there for his own stupid obstinacy in refusing to disclose what the Tribunal demand.

Coruption is a jailible offence but only in a court of law, the tribunal while run along broadly judicial lines does not have the power to jail for anything that might be shown to be true in the course of the tribunal. This was a dliberate move by the Dail
when the legistation that governs the tribunals was being drawn up.

Mike.

The Gopher

Did any1 see Lawlor on Prime Time last night?Sheer class-they really had him on the run.When confronted with stastics shpowing something like 80% of his constituents viewed him as our most corrupt politician,and that predictions showed hell be lucky to get 3% of the vote[who the f.uck said theyd vote for him must have been trying to take the piss from the pollsters]he simply claimed they were inaccurate forecasts from "gutter" papers like the Star.Poor Liam,in the end finding out the poll was actually commissioned by that saintly preserve of Dublin 4 the Irish Times.Honestly,youd swear hed been drinking he was making so little sense.

Boston

Originally posted by bonkey


If the CAB turn up on your door tomorrow, they can ask you to prove that every single item in your possession is in fact yours, and paid for my legally obtained means. Anything you fail to supply proof for can effectively be taken off you.

You dont find this disturbing? They need no proof of wrong-doing before taking such action, and once they do so, you are effectively guilty until proven innocent.

In short - their remit flies in the face of our entire judiciary system.

jc

O arnt you just precious, you little rights been infringed upon, awh

sorry i just have to take the piss because the simple fact is these people but scum behind bars, the type of scum whos connections in the past have prevented them from being arrested. even politicians.

Now normally i would bow to your often superior knowleadge of most facts here. but not this time, becausei know alot about CAB,
they are not in anybodies back pocket least of all the politicians, No body (well very few) even know exactly who these people are, for obvious reasons.

as for personal grudges, thats a risk but an extremely unlikely one, as they are told, listen your going after this criminal or that one. or your going after taxi drivers. To The people looking into the tax afairs its just a number they dont know who you at all.
the people from CAB who arrive on your door to take your house and clear out your bank accounts, arnt the sames ones that inspected your tax anyway.

Basically your worrying over nothing at all, your jsut being paranoid. were alot better with them then without

Boston

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
god, id be buggered if they came to my house!

Certainly would be, if they went all the way to london you must be something

bonkey

Originally posted by Boston
Now normally i would bow to your often superior knowleadge of most facts here. but not this time, becausei know alot about CAB,
they are not in anybodies back pocket least of all the politicians, No body (well very few) even know exactly who these people are, for obvious reasons.

I never claimed they were in anyones back pocket, nor did I claim that they were not doing good work.

I simply pointed out what would happen if they were to become influenced by an external power.

Our processes of law have evolved over a long period of time. The concept of "innocent till guilty" is not some nicey-nicey notion who's purpose is to give the guilty every chance of getting off. Its because other systems over time have becomes tools of personal ambition - most typically because of the lack of proper checks, balances and accountability.

The CAB falls squarely into this bracket.

BTW - you cannot claim that no-one really knows who they are, and yet claim that you know for a fact that they are in no-ones back pocket. You, at least, must know them in order for the latter statement to be true, and this more or less rules out the former, doesnt it

jc

Boston

Originally posted by bonkey

by some politician who has the CAB in their back pocket.

jc

I never claimed they were in anyones back pocket

anyway, its not quilty still proven innocent, they cant arrest you, you have to prove you legaly earned all the money you have.
if you can no do so they can be taken away from you, only when CAB proves you actaully did earn the money illeagaly or failed to pay tax on it, can they arrest you, whihc they often do

bonkey

You missed the "could be" earlier in that first sentence that you selectively picked there. Could be, implying possibility, not fact.

Your admirable quoting skills still dont change what I said.

As for not being guilty till proven innocent....prove you earned this money or we will take it off you. What? This is what you term innocence? They can seize any and all of your assets which you fail to prove you purchased, as well as taking any and all of your money that you fail to prove you earned.

In all cases, you must prove the legality of your actions, or you get punished. By most people's definition, this is assumed guilt.

jc

Boston

yea sounds good to me,

How many major drug barrens were taken down by cab or with the help of cab, in the short time they have been around. Now compare that to the success of the garda.

You worrying about what "could" happen, if this and if that, the simple fact is, dont get to full of yourself, you could be fiddling your tax to kingdom come and cab wouldnt look twice at you. so whats your problem, afraid the muderious scum that cab have so far taken down, while not be getting a fair deal?

it aint perfect, but its better then nothing, if we waited for something that was moraly perfect in everyway, we would be drown in a sea of **** 5 miles high long before it came along.

bonkey

Originally posted by Boston
so whats your problem, afraid the muderious scum that cab have so far taken down, while not be getting a fair deal?

Do you have a problem understanding what I'm posting, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Let me say it again. I'll say it simpler, so that you can maybe understand it better.

I have a problem that the CAB could abuse their powers to persecute innocent people in the future.

OK? Goittit? The future. As in....not the past. So I'm not talking about what they have done. I am not talking about what they are doing. I am talking about what they could do.

Is that so hard to understand?

Your rationale, incidentally, can be very easily expanded to say "lets get rid of courts, and implement 'Judge Dredd' style law enforcers, who are judge, jury, and executioner. I mean - whats the problem - the scumbags will definitely get whats coming to them, even more readily than under the current system"

Somehow, I cant see many people thinking of this as a good thing.

jc

Boston

Originally posted by bonkey

I have a problem that the CAB could abuse their powers to persecute innocent people in the future.
jc

So could the gardi, so therefore lets bisband the gardi.

Yes CAB it would be easier in one sense for them to abuse their power, but several time more difficult it another, more likely sense.

Ps i took the piss because you called me obtuse, though i type like a blind monkey suffering from a heroine addiction, my english is actually quiet good.

Gerry

You can use the backspace and delete keys to delete characters, and then correct your mistakes. But then again, its only the internet, and I could get shot for being so un-PC.

Sand

You can use the backspace and delete keys to delete characters, and then correct your mistakes. But then again, its only the internet, and I could get shot for being so un-PC.

Shouldnt make remarks about peoples spelling. Even if its funny because its true:)

Victor

Hmmmmm, Bonkey, don't you live in Switzerland .... and you have problems with the CAB ..... ? Hmmmmm.

bonkey

Originally posted by Victor
Hmmmmm, Bonkey, don't you live in Switzerland .... and you have problems with the CAB ..... ? Hmmmmm.

Yes yes, and I have a Swiss bank account.

Errr....forget I said that. I dont have a Swiss bank account, and in fact I dont even live in Switzerland. You keep those CAB guys away from me y'hear.

jc

gandalf

Well hes going back to Jail for a month witha fine of 12,700 Euro.

Details here

Gandalf.

Boston

hmm interesting, is bonkey your first or last name?

Victor

Originally posted by bonkey
Errr....forget I said that. I dont have a Swiss bank account, and in fact I dont even live in Switzerland. You keep those CAB guys away from me y'hear.jc

I thought you lived in Switzerland. Who keeps on about Switzerland then?

Originally posted by Bonkey 01-02-2002 11:56 AM
As a slight aside, I found it interesting that there is relatively ltitle junk food here in Switzerland.

mike65

Originally posted by gandalf
Well hes going back to Jail for a month witha fine of 12,700 Euro.

Details here

Gandalf.

All well and good but it'll be in the Penthouse suite again, untill
they throw him in with the prolls nothin' will change. You've go to
wonder who he's protecting at this stage...

Mike.

Digi_Tilmitt

The worst thing is not that Lawler has gotton off lightly, it is that the stupid electorate will vote for FF again even after they have been proven corrupt many times.

mike65

Never under-estimate the mentality of the local yokles even
in Dublin, if he's "thier man" people will back him short of 'being pictured in bed with a live girl or a dead boy' to quote an American
pundit/politician talking about someone else entirely!

Mike.

Biffa Bacon

Originally posted by Digi_Tilmitt
The worst thing is not that Lawler has gotton off lightly, it is that the stupid electorate will vote for FF again even after they have been proven corrupt many times.

No some FFers have been proven corrupt. Don't tar them all with the same brush.

Boston

and vote for who FG is just as corrupt as FF, wait on to the land rezoning investigation gets going