Edward M wrote: » 5 million is the figure being bandied about this morning that McCabe is to be offered. Would be a good settlement now.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » And I'd argue that a proportion of that should come directly from Callinan's personal funds, as the named individual responsible for defaming McCabe. Not just an office or organisation, the individual himself. That might go some way towards scaring the sh!t out of any other douchebag who's contemplating doing anything similar - as it stands right now, the message to douchebags in power is "get caught being a douchebag, face no consequences other than reputational damage". It's not good enough.
dulpit wrote: » I heard somewhere last week that McCabe didn't sue Callinan directly, as it would likely result in him getting €0, at least the state will pay his award..
elperello wrote: » First rule of suing. Follow the money. Seriously though, as much as we might like to see Callinan in bother I would advise caution. It is essential to the operation of public services that the State underwrite damages in cases like this. Unless we want everyone in authority to close down on making any decision about any issue the State must be prepared to be the ultimate guarantor.
elperello wrote: » First rule of suing. Follow the money. Seriously though, as much as we might like to see Callinan in bother I would advise caution. It is essential to the operation of public services that the State underwrite damages in cases like this.Unless we want everyone in authority to close down on making any decision about any issue the State must be prepared to be the ultimate guarantor.
rob316 wrote: » He has to be face some sort of financial penalty though. But he won't I know
STB. wrote: » Caution against what ? The point the person is making is that Callinan should also be held personally accountable. You just dont get to resign having been caught by the bollox. There has been a case here that the state was required to defend. It resulted in tribunals and serious cases of wrong doing. Allowing such abuse of power without personal accountability would be a dangerous precedent to make. Accountability lies with Callinan in the first instance. Now what is the punishment ?
elperello wrote: » Caution against tying the fate of the plaintiff to the financial standing of a State employee. As regards punishment let the law take it's course.
mickdw wrote: » Fair enough, you can't have a situation where McCabe depends on callinan personal wealth to compensate him however in a case where the state employee acted knowingly and fraudulently outside the powers of the job held, all pension payments over and above the basic state pension rate should be open to claw back until any costs to the state as recovered. Chance of this happening: zero.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » And I'd argue that a proportion of that should come directly from Callinan's personal funds, as the named individual responsible for defaming McCabe.
tayto lover wrote: » Not going to come from Callinans money.what if his defence is "my information on Mc Cabe came from a Superintendant close to McCabe or from the Press Officer who was briefed by someone else". He heard it in "good faith" from a trusted source so to speak. Shyt always flows downhill so I could only envisage a junior rank ending up with any blame. Waste of time to sue Callinan imo.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » Not if the state wont cover Callinans legal fees. Even if McCabe never received a penny from Callinan the legal fees alone would do serious damage to Callinan.
tayto lover wrote: » Can't see that happening either. He would claim he was acting as an agent of the state and that the information he "received" on Mc Cabe was supplied to him from a junior officer. He would say he was led to believe it was all true. Plus there was a complaint made by Miss D to back up his claim.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » except none of the things he did were consistent with his role. When you are acting ultra vires as he was you cannot depend on the state to back you up.
tayto lover wrote: » Was it not more intra vires though?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » I dont think trying to tarnish the good name of one of your officers is a normal part of the office of commissioner on An Garda Siochana.
bubblypop wrote: » And, what was that exactly? I mean people seem to jump on the hero bandwagon a bit too eagerly. Yes the man had a hard time, his superiors treated him badly. But what did he do to make him a hero? He told the world that superintendents were cancelling tickets for friends & acquaintances, but why would the whole country think that made him a hero? Since when did the majority of public think tickets were so important? The amount of posts I see in here where people complain about gardai doing check points or seizing vehicles etc..... Yes, it was right to show wrong doing, there should have been a better reaction by garda management. But, a hero? Seems a bit much.
holyhead wrote: » It looks like Callinan was a bully and a thoroughly nasty individual. To smear a man's name for merely highlighting malpractice proves that Callinan was wholly unsuited to be Garda Commissioner. When the head of an organisation demonises someone for highlighting malpractice what message does that send to others. Callinan has damaged the office of Garda Commissioner and in a most malicious fashion bullied a member of the organisation he himself was head of and has cost the taxpayer millions in redress payments for his heinous actions. A man is entitled his good name and Callinan bent over backwards to, without cause, take it away from someone. It is right that the state makes sure that a state employee is appropriately compensated for being the victim of gross misconduct. Yes in an ideal world Callinan should have to sell his house and shirt off his back and should be stripped of his pension but this is Ireland where only the little people pay for misdemeanours. Callinan's name is destroyed and that probably is as good as it's going to get. Personally if I saw him I would kick him in the balls as hard as I could. I hate the man. He is an odious repulsive bastard who deserves to rot in hell.
Mrsmum wrote: » I would like to see a public statement of apology from AGS to Maurice McCabe.
Seth Brundle wrote: » Mrsmum wrote: » I would like to see a public statement of apology from AGS to Maurice McCabe. Why? McCabe and his family were apologised to by the current commissioner and McCabe apparently accepted it. What is the need for AGS to publicly make the apology?
Seth Brundle wrote: » Why? McCabe and his family were apologised to by the current commissioner and McCabe apparently accepted it. What is the need for AGS to publicly make the apology?
Muahahaha wrote: » tayto McCabe was cleared of the Ms.D allegations by the DPP in 2008, the Garda file on the alleged incident said as much. That should have been the end of it but Callinan then evolved that 2008 dismissed allegation of sexual assault into telling John McGuinness TD that McCabe fiddles with his own kids in 2014, a full six years later. None of McCabes children have alleged anything of the sort so this was clearly Callinan out to destroy McCabes character. The defence that he got this information as an agent of the state wont stand up to scrutiny because it was a complete fabrication in the first place. If he did want to use that defence in a civil case then he will be asked to produce the junior Gardai he claims told him. It would be lies on top of other lies.
Deise Vu wrote: » Your sequence of events omits Tusla. The original allegation was dismissed by AGS / DPP. It was only when the child was getting counselling in her teens that the allegations were resurrected and we had the GUBU situation where, allegedly, cut and paste errors were made. Tusla, not AGS then opened files on McCabes kids. If I was Callinan's counsel I would be telling him to beat the drum for the wonderful work of AGS and asking what could a fella do in the light of what Tusla had reported but question McCabe's integrity and motives. Of course we can all have suspicions as to why Tusla made such egregious errors but unless someone in Tusla admits something, Callinan is bombproof in my opinion. He can legitimately state that his information was based on investigations carried out by Tusla.