Jobstown 6 Not Guilty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How squeamish would people here be about the separation of powers if this story turns out to be true. Chilling is not the word for it.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2017/07/03/chilling-4/

Doherty has confirmed making a complaint to Gardai.

http://www.thejournal.ie/catherine-kelly-regina-doherty-gardai-3477559-Jul2017/?utm_source=shortlink

20Cent wrote: »

Doherty has confirmed making a complaint to Gardai.

http://www.thejournal.ie/catherine-kelly-regina-doherty-gardai-3477559-Jul2017/?utm_source=shortlink

I am dying to know just why Doherty would think the article warranted a complaint to the Gardai.

Would us ordinary people not go to a solicitor?
Will any journalist ask her/grill her on what exactly she thought she was doing complaining to the Gardai.

VinLieger wrote: »

This is fvcking disgusting and she needs to be properly brought to account for it.

Also a classic example of the streisand effect which our political class still seem unable to grasp an understanding of.

She won't be as long as there are people willing to turn a blind eye to what went on after Jobstown.

Always much easier to point at the working class and blame than pointing at the powerful and very very flimsy separation of powers.

spoonerhead wrote: »

Without going into it too much, we feel more vulnerable as we have less than others. Our local 'left alternative' also feed into that by saying it's us who will pay the price for any higher income tax breaks.

It's always worth remembering, that the wealthiest earners in this country, account for the majority of our tax income. The "middle earners" account for the second, and the lower end earners account for the least of our tax intake.

As of I think 2016, 38% of the workforce, were contributing no income tax as they fell below the threshold.

I think that is always worth remembering, because effectively the minority carry our tax intake, not the majority, and definitely not the lower income workers, that the left would have you believe.

A tax break to the high earners is always a shrewd move to ensure they stay put in Ireland. The economic and taxation plans of the left and some of the left, which would target high earners to "stick it to the man" on behalf of lower income workers, would effectively crash our tax revenue streams, and result in an unprecedented hike in taxation for the middle and especially the lower, who as I say, contain a 38% portion of the tax base, contributing nothing.

It's why I always find some independants and group on the left so difficult to take seriously, and I worry why people listen to them. They typically preach or proclaim situations, whereby their solutions are the EXACT opposite of what you would want to happen.

I can't find the link, but the CSO I think have last years figures for the tax base up for public consumption. It's always worth reading as it shows, with no opinion or bluster, who and what makes up our tax base, and our revenue streams.

And you also see year on year, it's never really changing. The concern there is that we are not widening the tax base, and we still rely heavily on high earners to prop up the intake. A situation that will turn to calamity should the support of the left and independants continue to grow and grow, as any of these people with brains (which likely they do when it comes to their money) will know they will be the populist targets

EDIT: Found a good report from IBEC I love. It was from 2014, but it very much still holds true today, and as its title, debunks most of the myths you hear in politics. Especially from the left. In short, we have one of the most progressive systems in operation, where the middle and high pay most, the lower incomes pay least, and contrary to the wonderful myths during the recession, well, have a read and you will see who really did what during the recession, from a taxation perspective

The top 1% of all income tax cases in Ireland are
responsible for 9.1% of the income and pay 30.4% of the taxation, the top 5% pay almost 55% of all taxation from
22.7% of the income. In effect this means that those persons or households with over 100,000 in income
account for over half of all tax paid, underlining the extreme redistributive effects of the Irish tax system.

http://www.ibec.ie/IBEC/Press/PressPublicationsdoclib3.nsf/vPages/Newsroom~new-ibec-report-debunking-irish-income-tax-myths-29-09-2014/$file/Debunking+Irish+income+tax+myths.pdf

seamus wrote: »

Of course, that's not the whole story.

We have no idea what complaint was made and we have only the words of Catherine Kelly to go on, who is not the sharpest tool in the box and pretty hysterical.

Considering that, according to Kelly, the Gardai cautioned her not to contact the Minister or send her anything, it seems most likely that the minister made a complaint of harassment.

The fact that Kelly has tweeted over 500 times in a year just about Regina Doherty would support this. It's obsessive, bordering on harassment.

Any individual is entitled to make a complaint to Gardai about unlawful behaviour.

With the facts presented, I see no wrong doing on the part of Doherty.

Could you link to your source here?

Rick Shaw wrote: »

What was unlawful about Kellys actions? Bit of a leap there I think.

Harassment is illegal for one. There are also a few other things you could pick out of the article like subjudice or defamation, but harassment seems like the most likely.

VinLieger wrote: »

I do cus shes a political figure and now a government minister, she needs to get thicker skin if shes bothered by 500 tweets. She could you know just not look at them? Its not as if shes calling or sending her mail everyday, social media has this wonderful option where you can switch it off and ignore it.

That's a bit of a cop-out to be fair. If it wouldn't be OK to do this to a "normal" person, then it's not OK to do it to a politician.

There's a world of a difference between having to grow a thick skin and get used to people directly criticising you, and having to tolerate harassment.

This seems to be a case of Catherine Kelly assuming a conspiracy exists and so seeing one rather than looking coldly at the facts of the situation. The fact that she calls Jobstown a "show trial" illustrates the poor level of critical thinking she applies to her content.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Wait a minute here. Are you saying that Garda can turn up at a flight and just caution a person like that? Without any investigation?

You don't know there wasn't any investigation. You're making assumptions.

And yes a Garda can "turn up" and caution a person just like that. How else do you think they do it? With balloons and a brass band?

Where is your source for the 500 tweets and harassment stuff?

Um, Twitter?

I am sure there are many many journalists who would have that many tweets about Trump since he was elected.

Yeah, probably. Has Trump made a complaint to the Gardai about harassment?

Rick Shaw wrote: »

But from the story, I got that Kelly had been instructed to desist from tweeting Doherty, or any material relevant to her.

Can't understand why Regina didn't just block her. Seems bizarre to me.

Apparently she did block her.

But harassment (assuming that's what it is) doesn't require that the harassed person is being directly communicated with. It's a pretty broad thing.

Ultimately whether or not Doherty should have made the complaint is a different matter.

The claim here is whether this is more evidence of corruption or collusion. And on the base facts, I would say it's not. A complaint is made, Gardai are obliged to investigate, and have issued a caution (or more likely an ASBO) on foot of it. That's the process regardless of who has made the complaint, and which appears to have been followed.

I agree that Doherty should have a thicker skin and just ignore people shouting from the sidelines. And that going to the Gardai instead of ignoring it makes her look like she can't take the heat.

But she is legally entitled to make a complaint just like the rest of us, no actual wrong has been done except to Doherty's own public image.

seamus wrote: »

That's a bit of a cop-out to be fair. If it wouldn't be OK to do this to a "normal" person, then it's not OK to do it to a politician.

There's a world of a difference between having to grow a thick skin and get used to people directly criticising you, and having to tolerate harassment.

This seems to be a case of Catherine Kelly assuming a conspiracy exists and so seeing one rather than looking coldly at the facts of the situation. The fact that she calls Jobstown a "show trial" illustrates the poor level of critical thinking she applies to her content.

Wheres the line between harrassment and criticism?

Again she can block kelly which she did so kelly no longer tweeted at her she simply tweet about her, if there was anything factually incorrect in those tweets regina can as suggested go down the libel route.

Harassment in this case is a ridiculous claim

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you read the article, and the statement from the gardai:

That statement was by Doherty's spokesperson and not the Gardai. That person is just giving a "no comment" line.

Is signing a Garda's notebook at an airport the way a caution is administered?

I don't believe so. But then she didn't say she signed the notebook, rather a "page of notes" on a "small notebook" - which from her description would appear to not be the Garda's original notebook - that for some reason she decided not to read.

It's also worth noting that we don't actually know what the caution was. There's an official adult caution, and then there's the caution a Garda can give you when notifying you that you are being investigated, or arrested, or questioned. Or any number of other things.

Her account is incredibly vague, bordering on unverifiable.

seamus wrote: »

That statement was by Doherty's spokesperson and not the Gardai. That person is just giving a "no comment" line.

Ok, but read on:

An Garda Síochána does not comment on outstanding cases involving named individuals

I don't believe so. But then she didn't say she signed the notebook, rather a "page of notes" on a "small notebook" - which from her description would appear to not be the Garda's original notebook - that for some reason she decided not to read.

It's also worth noting that we don't actually know what the caution was. There's an official adult caution, and then there's the caution a Garda can give you when notifying you that you are being investigated, or arrested, or questioned. Or any number of other things.

Her account is incredibly vague, bordering on unverifiable.

But you are satisfied that there is nothing to see here? Incredible.

I'd prefer state resources be directed to investigate Doherty's shady company dealings rather than a few mild tweets.