Jobstown 6 Not Guilty

FrancieBrady · 13-07-2017 04:41PM

seamus wrote: »

What did he have no answer to?

To what Murphy was asking for, (and giving reasons why) that there should be an inquiry.

Leo the Brave deflected to moralising about the protest itself (which is all well and good BUT wasn't the subject being discussed) much like Enda did anytime he was put under pressure in the House. Familiar and pathetic FG tactic.

Captain Obvious · 13-07-2017 04:43PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

To what Murphy was asking for, (and giving reasons why) that there should be an inquiry.

Leo the Brave deflected to moralising about the protest itself (which is all well and good BUT wasn't the subject being discussed) much like Enda did anytime he was put under pressure in the House. Familiar and pathetic FG tactic.

He told him he had a fair trial and there was no conspiracy against him. Seems a pretty firm response.

13-07-2017 04:47PM

seachto7 wrote: »

HOw much is Paul on a year? Did he pay all his own court fees?

It's very rare for any accused person on indictment to pay their own court fees in a criminal trial.

Without the liberal extension of free criminal-legal-aid, any prosecution by the DPP on indictment would amount to a de facto punishment, given the scale of legal costs associated with Circuit Court trials.

For this reasons, most applications for legal aid are determined on the basis of the gravity of the charges, not simply the means of the individual.

FrancieBrady · 13-07-2017 04:48PM

Captain Obvious wrote: »

He told him he had a fair trial and there was no conspiracy against him. Seems a pretty firm response.

How can Leo know that without even the internal inquiry complete? (an internal inquiry that isn't going to look at what happened in court, but however)

He then proceeded to bravely climb on to the higher moral ground and insinuate some more.

13-07-2017 04:54PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How can Leo know that without even the internal inquiry complete? (an internal inquiry that isn't going to look at what happened in court, but however)

He then proceeded to bravely climb on to the higher moral ground and insinuate some more.

Murphy was tried and acquitted. Pity. He was hoping to be jailed, from where he could lead the Revolution. As it is now, the Revolution is not getting any support.

Murphy also said in the Dail that people lost their jobs over the court case. Who lost their job(s)? Is it legal for someone to be sacked because of a court case?

FrancieBrady · 13-07-2017 04:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Murphy was tried and acquitted. Pity.

Yet another poster who is sad because a miscarriage of justice didn't happen. Sweet.

RustyNut · 13-07-2017 05:01PM

Captain Obvious wrote: »

He told him he had a fair trial and there was no conspiracy against him.

The guards said that Paul Murphy said "Will we let her go, or will we keep her here all night"

That turned out not to be true. Just because someone says something doesn't make it true. An independent inquiry would clear it all up.

13-07-2017 05:02PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yet another poster who is sad because a miscarriage of justice didn't happen. Sweet.

It would be helpful if you had posted the rest of my post, so I'll post it here. "Murphy was tried and acquitted. Pity. He was hoping to be jailed, from where he could lead the Revolution. "

I never said I disagreed with the verdict.

13-07-2017 05:06PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It would be helpful if you had posted the rest of my post, so I'll post it here. "Murphy was tried and acquitted. Pity. He was hoping to be jailed, from where he could lead the Revolution. "

I never said I disagreed with the verdict.

I think most people consider it to be beyond credibility, that you would have been genuinely dejected had Paul Murphy been found guilty.

Those who are saying it's a 'pity' that he was acquitted, are clutching at straws.

I say this as someone who has no time for Paul Murphy or many of his misguided political beliefs. But these bizarre postulations that this acquittal is a setback for Paul Murphy are wholly transparent, and indeed rather pathetic.

FrancieBrady · 13-07-2017 05:08PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It would be helpful if you had posted the rest of my post, so I'll post it here. "Murphy was tried and acquitted. Pity. He was hoping to be jailed, from where he could lead the Revolution. "

I never said I disagreed with the verdict.

No, you somehow managed to infer Murphy disagreed with it. Hilarious.

cajonlardo · 13-07-2017 05:08PM

Deleted User wrote: »

He was hoping to be jailed

Why did he present such a skilled and unassailable defense so? Why not just mount a token effort and secretly rejoice in being sent down?

mynamejeff · 13-07-2017 05:15PM

RustyNut wrote: »

The guards said that Paul Murphy said "Will we let her go, or will we keep her here all night"

That turned out not to be true. Just because someone says something doesn't make it true. An independent inquiry would clear it all up.

did it turn out not to be true ? or did it turn out that there wasnt a video of it ?

RustyNut · 13-07-2017 05:19PM

mynamejeff wrote: »

did it turn out not to be true ? or did it turn out that there wasnt a video of it ?

An independent inquiry would probably clear that up.

13-07-2017 05:21PM

mynamejeff wrote: »

did it turn out not to be true ? or did it turn out that there wasnt a video of it ?

It was said, but by a female protester, NOT Paul Murphy.

FrancieBrady · 13-07-2017 05:24PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It was said, but by a female protester, NOT Paul Murphy.

Maybe, if he wanted to go to jail, he should have said it, direct to camera.

golfball37 · 13-07-2017 05:33PM

mynamejeff wrote: »

did it turn out not to be true ? or did it turn out that there wasnt a video of it ?

The video showed the Gardai were wrong. Some coincidence that 3 of them heard the exact same thing. Leo agreed but declined to answer yesterday in the dail as he prefers tv cameras. The dail is a joke

mynamejeff · 13-07-2017 05:37PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It was said, but by a female protester, NOT Paul Murphy.

if so then she is guilty of the offences that murphy were charged with no ?

is joint enterprise what the prosecution was going for so ?
if one person in a established group commits and offence then all parties are guilty of the offence ?
designed for use in organised crime cases

is she one of the next batch of "protesters" that are in the next trial ? the ones murphy wanted no trial for ?

mynamejeff · 13-07-2017 05:41PM

golfball37 wrote: »

The video showed the Gardai were wrong. Some coincidence that 3 of them heard the exact same thing. Leo agreed but declined to answer yesterday in the dail as he prefers tv cameras. The dail is a joke

the politics aside ( i dont care for either side tbh )

what im saying is just because there wasn't a video of it for proof means it didnt happen was the successful defense stance.

is that what happened here ?

seamus · 14-07-2017 08:18AM

Murphy plans on making a complaint to Dail authorities that he's been defamed under Parliamentary privilege by Varadkar.

https://www.todayfm.com/News/Paul-Murphy-Accuses-Taoiseach-Of-Defaming-Him

The irony is off the scale.

He's such a pathetic hypocrite, I wonder does he even see it? How can anyone consider this man to be fit to represent a constituency, never mind fit to lead?

Professor Moriarty · 14-07-2017 08:34AM

seamus wrote: »

Murphy plans on making a complaint to Dail authorities that he's been defamed under Parliamentary privilege by Varadkar.

https://www.todayfm.com/News/Paul-Murphy-Accuses-Taoiseach-Of-Defaming-Him

The irony is off the scale.

He's such a pathetic hypocrite, I wonder does he even see it? How can anyone consider this man to be fit to represent a constituency, never mind fit to lead?

Publicity seeking. He and his merry band of Trots have no interest in the people who they purport to represent. He's trying to agitate for revolution in pursuance of political ideology. It's a failed ideology but that doesn't matter to the deluded and fanatical Trots.

wowy · 14-07-2017 08:39AM

seamus wrote: »

Murphy plans on making a complaint to Dail authorities that he's been defamed under Parliamentary privilege by Varadkar.

https://www.todayfm.com/News/Paul-Murphy-Accuses-Taoiseach-Of-Defaming-Him

The irony is off the scale.

He's such a pathetic hypocrite, I wonder does he even see it? How can anyone consider this man to be fit to represent a constituency, never mind fit to lead?

How is Varadkar's statement defamatory if it's an honestly held opinion based on publicly available information?

The left's hypocritical use of Dail Privilege is ridiculous. Paul Murphy himself used Dail Privilege to accuse the Gardai of a conspiracy, SF used it to falsely accuse people of being tax evaders and Catherine Murphy used it to bypass a court order about reporting on DOB. But as soon as Leo says something "mean" about Paul Murphy, he's off crying about defamation and abuse of Privilege. Pathetic.

McMurphy · 14-07-2017 11:30AM

seamus wrote: »

Murphy plans on making a complaint to Dail authorities that he's been defamed under Parliamentary privilege by Varadkar.

https://www.todayfm.com/News/Paul-Murphy-Accuses-Taoiseach-Of-Defaming-Him

The irony is off the scale.

He's such a pathetic hypocrite, I wonder does he even see it? How can anyone consider this man to be fit to represent a constituency, never mind fit to lead?

It's just going tit for tat now, People reporting Murphy accusing the guards of perjuring themselves, Murphy retaliating by claiming defamation.

They're all as bad as each other, bunch of kids. Clownish kids at that.

Murphy was acquitted though, and there's serious questions to be answered as to what appears to be a conspiracy to have him convicted.

1 guard misheard Murphy? Believable.
2 guards mishearing him? Questionable.
3 guards mishearing Murphy, making a specifc remark? Unbelievable.

Good work guards. Keep the spotlight on yourselves and your little corrupted, closed shop cess pit.

Donal55 · 14-07-2017 02:15PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Publicity seeking. He and his merry band of Trots have no interest in the people who they purport to represent. He's trying to agitate for revolution in pursuance of political ideology. It's a failed ideology but that doesn't matter to the deluded and fanatical Trots.

If Murphy and the other clowns weren't around just imagine how 'hunky dory' everything would be in this country.

No mention of McCabe, no issues with IW, no problems with DOB,Callanan, AG, Norin O Sullivan, etc etc.

I personally cannot stand Murphy or Coppinger or some of the others but without them I dont think FG/FF, most of the Indos and even SF would be touching or highlighting most of the problems here.

Murphy, Coppinger,Wallace and Daly are worthwhile catalysts.

Professor Moriarty · 14-07-2017 02:27PM

Donal55 wrote: »

If Murphy and the other clowns weren't around just imagine how 'hunky dory' everything would be in this country.

No mention of McCabe, no issues with IW, no problems with DOB,Callanan, AG, Norin O Sullivan, etc etc.

I personally cannot stand Murphy or Coppinger or some of the others but without them I dont think FG/FF, most of the Indos and even SF would be touching or highlighting most of the problems here.

Murphy, Coppinger,Wallace and Daly are worthwhile catalysts.

That's a very fair point. Society needs outliers, otherwise there would be no challenge to the status quo. I just don't think that Murphy is the type of person who actually care in a meaningful way about Irish society. For him it's just a personal agenda. Murphy is an idealist who places his Trotskyism above everything else and so he spends his time outside the tent pissing in while doing nothing tangible for his constituents. Personally, I'd have far more time for the likes of Shortall and what she's trying to do with the Social Democrats.

For Forks Sake · 14-07-2017 08:11PM

seamus wrote: »

He's such a pathetic hypocrite, I wonder does he even see it? How can anyone consider this man to be fit to represent a constituency, never mind fit to lead?

He has no intention of leading anything, perpetually sitting on the sidelines whinging is a lot easier than actually having to formulate workable solutions.

McMurphy · 14-07-2017 08:22PM

For Forks Sake wrote: »

He has no intention of leading anything, perpetually sitting on the sidelines whinging is a lot easier than actually having to formulate workable solutions.

This thread isn't about Murphy's politics, it's about him almost being framed by the state, on a charge that had a possibility of life imprisonment attached to it. A charge that almost stuck, only video evidence contradicted garda testimony, resulting in a judge having to resort to (I imagine it's unprecedented) ordering the jury to concentrate on video evidence, as opposed to the gards testimonies, as what was on video contradicted what was presented as being the truth under oath. (I would have to wonder if this is why the guards are wanting to make filming their actions illegal?)

Only video evidence was there, Murphy and five of his cohorts could have been jailed, due to garda misrepresentation of the facts.

That's a pretty big deal

Murphy and his party are currently languishing somewhere around the 3/4% mark in current polls, and in Dail numbers.

Pretty irrelevant tbh.

But you go ahead and discuss Murphy, and Murphy's flavour of politics. It most probably is easier to swallow than discussing what looks like political and police corruption.

Anyway, Murphy sidelines rabble rabble rabble, go on.

FrancieBrady · 14-07-2017 08:51PM

Rick Shaw wrote: »

This thread isn't about Murphy's politics, it's about him almost being framed by the state, on a charge that had a possibility of life imprisonment attached to it. A charge that almost stuck, only video evidence contradicted garda testimony, resulting in a judge having to resort to (I imagine it's unprecedented) ordering the jury to concentrate on video evidence, as opposed to the gards testimonies, as what was on video contradicted what was presented as being the truth under oath. (I would have to wonder if this is why the guards are wanting to make filming their actions illegal?)

Only video evidence was there, Murphy and five of his cohorts could have been jailed, due to garda misrepresentation of the facts.

That's a pretty big deal

Murphy and his party are currently languishing somewhere around the 3/4% mark in current polls, and in Dail numbers.

Pretty irrelevant tbh.

But you go ahead and discuss Murphy, and Murphy's flavour of politics. It most probably is easier to swallow than discussing what looks like political and police corruption.

Anyway, Murphy sidelines rabble rabble rabble, go on.

True, for democrats this has gone way beyond Murphy and his politics.

Bishopsback · 14-07-2017 09:08PM

Rick Shaw wrote: »

This thread isn't about Murphy's politics, it's about him almost being framed by the state, on a charge that had a possibility of life imprisonment attached to it. A charge that almost stuck, only video evidence contradicted garda testimony, resulting in a judge having to resort to (I imagine it's unprecedented) ordering the jury to concentrate on video evidence, as opposed to the gards testimonies, as what was on video contradicted what was presented as being the truth under oath. (I would have to wonder if this is why the guards are wanting to make filming their actions illegal?)

Only video evidence was there, Murphy and five of his cohorts could have been jailed, due to garda misrepresentation of the facts.

That's a pretty big deal

Murphy and his party are currently languishing somewhere around the 3/4% mark in current polls, and in Dail numbers.

Pretty irrelevant tbh.

But you go ahead and discuss Murphy, and Murphy's flavour of politics. It most probably is easier to swallow than discussing what looks like political and police corruption.

Anyway, Murphy sidelines rabble rabble rabble, go on.

Good post, but its not about what you say.
That's an allegation as yet unproven.
Serious questions have been raised and need answering, but you're jumping the gun as to the outcome.

BillyBobBS · 14-07-2017 09:24PM

Donal55 wrote: »

If Murphy and the other clowns weren't around just imagine how 'hunky dory' everything would be in this country.

No mention of McCabe, no issues with IW, no problems with DOB,Callanan, AG, Norin O Sullivan, etc etc.

I personally cannot stand Murphy or Coppinger or some of the others but without them I dont think FG/FF, most of the Indos and even SF would be touching or highlighting most of the problems here.

Murphy, Coppinger,Wallace and Daly are worthwhile catalysts.

Absolutely. Ireland is rife with corruption and our "fair and balanced" media are unwilling to tackle it. If it wasn't for these guys they'd have us believe we are the best little country on the planet.

RustyNut · 15-07-2017 05:13AM

Bishopsback wrote: »

Serious questions have been raised and need answering

This is the biggest issue. Take the personalities and looney left/raving right, individuals politics out of it and there are serious questions to be answered.

Jobstown 6 Not Guilty

Comments