Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

27-05-2019 4:01pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

I get migraine. Who can I blame?! Seriously, she got a payout for migraine? I'm missing a trick here obviously. I always thought I was unlucky to have migraine but apparently it could be someone's fault and I could make them give me money.

Jeez, I had a stress-related heart attack in the midst of bullying by the boss (who finally left after causing umpteen troubles for management) and had to retire early from job on medical advice.... I must have a case for millions going by that.

The Rape of Lucretia · 27-05-2019 4:04pm

Deleted User wrote: »

What an incredibly inarticulate speaker she is!

Don't think that's really true. I thought she was quite articulate in what she wanted to say. She was on a sticky wicket though, and the public mood already against her, so every imperfect phrase or word is being picked on like vultures on the last of a carcass. But the truth is, she spoke well. It's what she was trying to say that was weak.

listermint · 27-05-2019 4:04pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Shes using Josephas Madigans family firm, Josepha was involved in obstructing planning permission for an apartment development that was sought by the owners of the Dean so there's suspicion they leaked it to the media to retaliate knowing full well how bad it would look due to the insurance hikes cus of bogus claims and that Maria's claim would never stand up to public scrutiny.

Ah yeah I was being rethorical though :P

27-05-2019 4:06pm

Previous...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/elections2019-tds-swing-controversy-hurt-fg-at-polls-taoiseach-says-926807.html

She will probably find something to sue Fine Gael for. I would say they are terrified of her.

Snow Garden · 27-05-2019 4:07pm

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Don't think that's really true. I thought she was quite articulate in what she wanted to say. She was on a sticky wicket though, and the public mood already against her, so every imperfect phrase or word is being picked on like vultures on the last of a carcass. But the truth is, she spoke well. It's what she was trying to say that was weak.

Spoofer!

holyhead · 27-05-2019 4:08pm

It would be nice if those who make false claims were made to pay the normally awarded amount, for the injury they claimed, to the establishment they were suing. Even allowing for insurance it is stressful for a business to be facing fraudulent insurance claims. Her claim was nonsense and indicative of a compensation culture which is now sadly rife here. She's a c**t of the highest order and if I saw her I would say as much. These people need to be ostracised socially. Varadkar should have her resign her Dail seat

Hoboo · 27-05-2019 4:10pm

listermint wrote: »

Well a solicitor would have had to advised on that.

As clients wouldn't know that sort of information.

Who's the solicitor in all of this.

Any client with a half a brain and an education should. It's basic stuff.

ToBeFrank123 · 27-05-2019 4:11pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Jeez, I had a stress-related heart attack in the midst of bullying by the boss (who finally left after causing umpteen troubles for management) and had to retire early from job on medical advice.... I must have a case for millions going by that.

Definitely.
And not to minimise your case, but I got a bit stressed reading your story.
Can I be included as a party to the claim?

SEANoftheDEAD · 27-05-2019 4:12pm

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/elections2019-tds-swing-controversy-hurt-fg-at-polls-taoiseach-says-926807.html

"The TD has also not publicly responded to further media queries about a personal injuries action filed in the name of Maria Bailey against Aer Lingus, her former employer, in 2004. She began working with the airline in 2000 with the ground staff and later went on to be a politician." - Irish Examiner.

It seems the rabbit hole runs deeper and this woman might have a history of making claims... Would love to know more about this part of the story.

If true, resigning from FG isn't enough, this woman needs to see the inside of a cell.

cameramonkey · 27-05-2019 4:13pm

Some one needs to do a mashup of that interview. It's a classic in absolute bull and a great example of car crash interviews.

i take my hat off to that woman for her absolute lack of self awareness verging on sociopathy.

27-05-2019 4:14pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Shes using Josephas Madigans family firm, Josepha was involved in obstructing planning permission for an apartment development that was sought by the owners of the Dean so there's suspicion they leaked it to the media to retaliate knowing full well how bad it would look due to the insurance hikes cus of bogus claims and that Maria's claim would never stand up to public scrutiny.

No doubt the hotel “settled” for a trivial sum like €20K-€30K, these things rarely get to the scrutiny of a judge in the courtroom to minimise defendant’s legal expenses. There is a huge gamble on what way the judge will lean in view of the evidence and proportionality of culpabilities. In theory the hotel could counter-sue for damages to their furnishings & reputation etc, but it is highly unlikely they would resort to this.

SirGerryAdams · 27-05-2019 4:15pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Shes the one who dropped the case, so its her fault for not letting the judge decide, nobody made her take the case, nobody made her lie about every aspect of the case and nobody made her drop the case.

In none of this is she in any way a victim, everything she has done and the repercussions that resulted have been entirely of her own making.

I think she dropped the case because of the media backlash and the constant attention they were giving her.

Look at this thread, look at the first page, people making judgements right away without any facts or letting the judge decide.

The judge might have thrown it out of court in which case you could jump on her case then. Or the judge might have awarded something in which case you could complain about the justice system.

A lesson can be learned to not have trial by social media.

I mean, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the hotel was liable...maybe the floor was slippy or who knows what was there. But of course everyone jumped in right away, just looking at a headline and claimed she was trying to con money out of the hotel.

dasdog · 27-05-2019 4:16pm

cameramonkey wrote: »

Some one needs to do a mashup of that interview.

https://twitter.com/RichieMcCormack/status/1133023449302142976

recedite · 27-05-2019 4:17pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

the legal profession is a blight on society. parasitic. fundamentally dishonest.

True. The justice system exists primarily to provide a good living for the legal profession. That's why it costs so much money for a citizen to get any kind of justice. And the more money you have, the more justice you can buy.

Speaking of which, anyone know how much the hotel has shelled out so far?

lbc2019 · 27-05-2019 4:18pm

listermint wrote: »

Well a solicitor would have had to advised on that.

As clients wouldn't know that sort of information.

Who's the solicitor in all of this.

Josepha Madigans husband afaik

Plumbthedepths · 27-05-2019 4:18pm

Snow Garden wrote:

Spoofer!

T.R.O.L. or Maria?

brooke 2 · 27-05-2019 4:19pm

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Josepha Madigan needs to be hauled in over it too.

The fcuking shady sneaky world these treacherous leeches exist in needs to be exposed for all to see.

Just do a hard weeks work like the rest of us plebs have to do.

Just listened to the full interview on SOR. Iirc, she said she was visiting Sandyford when she and two friends decided to hop on the Luas and go into the Dean hotel. Would one of the friends have been Josepha, I wonder? She was still in the Madigan firm at the time....Maria Bailey refusing to say if she was advised by her.

On another note, this does seem very targeted. Would really love to know who released the info to the press. It has dirty tricks written all over it.

Wheety · 27-05-2019 4:20pm

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

I think she dropped the case because of the media backlash and the constant attention they were giving her.

Look at this thread, look at the first page, people making judgements right away without any facts or letting the judge decide.

The judge might have thrown it out of court in which case you could jump on her case then. Or the judge might have awarded something in which case you could complain about the justice system.

A lesson can be learned to not have trial by social media.

I mean, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the hotel was liable...maybe the floor was slippy or who knows what was there. But of course everyone jumped in right away, just looking at a headline and claimed she was trying to con money out of the hotel.

Hey, the other trol was here first.

The Rape of Lucretia · 27-05-2019 4:22pm

Snow Garden wrote: »

Spoofer!

Not at all. I think many comments here are prejudiced and, not having answered many questions to their satisfaction, want to find fault with all aspects of her interview.
In fact, if her aim was to deflect, avoid answering specific points, and distract with issues like right to privacy, media hounding, etc, she did it pretty well. A typical frustrating 'politicians' answers if you will. But quite skilfully, robustly, and yes, articulately, done.
If anything, I think the weakness was with ORourke, who I guess must indeed know her - he did not press her several times when she was there to be skewered, and a more Paxman type tenacity, would not have let her off with some of the evasive 'answers'.

VinLieger · 27-05-2019 4:22pm

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

I think she dropped the case because of the media backlash and the constant attention they were giving her.

Look at this thread, look at the first page, people making judgements right away without any facts or letting the judge decide.

The judge might have thrown it out of court in which case you could jump on her case then. Or the judge might have awarded something in which case you could complain about the justice system.

A lesson can be learned to not have trial by social media.

I mean, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the hotel was liable...maybe the floor was slippy or who knows what was there. But of course everyone jumped in right away, just looking at a headline and claimed she was trying to con money out of the hotel.

We know the facts, she lied multiple times, even if the judge ruled in her favour that wouldn't make what she did right in the eyes of the public, the justice system would be at fault but so would she.

Again nobody made her drop the case if things got to hot for her thats her problem and nobody elses, she probably should have had second thoughts on becoming a TD whether this would be a good idea to continue on with especially in light of all the recent media coverage the insurance hikes due to dodgy claims has been getting.

brooke 2 · 27-05-2019 4:22pm

Hardtochoose wrote: »

Yes and rightly so. I don’t think it should be forgotten that it was Josepha Madigan who advised her to take the case. She’s equal parts, if not more at fault here. The legal profession in this country are the ones encouraging claims such as this. FG are so out of touch with reality on this issue. Insurance costs are one of the biggest issues in this country at the moment and for 2 of their TDs to be caught out in this let’s be honest, fraudulent claim, is hugely damaging.

Did not know that Josepha had advised her. She refused to say so in the SOR interview.

Peatys · 27-05-2019 4:23pm

Sardonicat wrote: »

She also said she was unable to run for 3 months, despite doing a 10k 3 weeks later.

And out a lot sooner to train for the 10k

McCrack · 27-05-2019 4:25pm

brooke 2 wrote: »

Just listened to the full interview on SOR. Iirc, she said she was visiting Sandyford when she and two friends decided to hop on the Luas and go into the Dean hotel. Would one of the friends have been Josepha, I wonder? She was still in the Madigan firm at the time....Maria Bailey refusing to say if she was advised by her.

On another note, this does seem very targeted. Would really love to know who released the info to the press. It has dirty tricks written all over it.

It wasn't targeted - it was a discovery application for her medical records which was held in open court (as it should be) and the information came to light and obviously her social media posts (Longitude and 10k run) are in public so it wasn't difficult to see the lies

brooke 2 · 27-05-2019 4:25pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Listening back to the whole thing now.. the arrogance and indignation out of her is incredible! The way she's talking to the interviewer is shocking, and the ranting about the media and social media is just icing on the cake

Lots of victim-hood nonsense too, and tries to deflect every question put to her with: that's for a judge to decide.

For a judge to decide.......even though the case has been withdrawn. :rolleyes:

VinLieger · 27-05-2019 4:25pm

Peatys wrote: »

And out a lot sooner to train for the 10k

Indeed she maintained her average time going of the records people have found which after an "injury" and 3 weeks of not running she would have been unlikely able to do.

The Rape of Lucretia · 27-05-2019 4:25pm

brooke 2 wrote: »

On another note, this does seem very targeted. Would really love to know who released the info to the press. It has dirty tricks written all over it.

It certainly does. But this is colouring her own view so strongly does she feel that injustice and victimisation - unfortunately for her, to the obscuring of how the public is seeing her, and how little that injustice counts for with them.

joeysoap · 27-05-2019 4:26pm

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

I think she dropped the case because of the media backlash and the constant attention they were giving her.

Look at this thread, look at the first page, people making judgements right away without any facts or letting the judge decide.

The judge might have thrown it out of court in which case you could jump on her case then. Or the judge might have awarded something in which case you could complain about the justice system.

A lesson can be learned to not have trial by social media.

I mean, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the hotel was liable...maybe the floor was slippy or who knows what was there. But of course everyone jumped in right away, just looking at a headline and claimed she was trying to con money out of the hotel.

We know how the courts work, she could have a bottle in both hands, another one balancing on her head, wearing roller blades and chances are she’s still get a payout.

Calhoun · 27-05-2019 4:26pm

Marcusm wrote: »

Ah that’s not fair. She was not chosen for being a woman. She was chosen because her dad is a long standing FG councillor. It’s not pro-female bias, it’s simple nepotism.

Hahahaha exactly, that's the secret of Irish politics. The whole gender imbalance is a beautiful smokescreen for nepotism.

Some families have generations as politicians nose in the trough for a long time.

alchemist33 · 27-05-2019 4:26pm

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

I think she dropped the case because of the media backlash and the constant attention they were giving her.

Look at this thread, look at the first page, people making judgements right away without any facts or letting the judge decide.

The judge might have thrown it out of court in which case you could jump on her case then. Or the judge might have awarded something in which case you could complain about the justice system.

A lesson can be learned to not have trial by social media.

I mean, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the hotel was liable...maybe the floor was slippy or who knows what was there. But of course everyone jumped in right away, just looking at a headline and claimed she was trying to con money out of the hotel.

Nobody needed to wait - the damning evidence against her was in her own solicitor's submission. No instructions or supervision were provided for an adult on a swing. And that's even before the clearly incorrect claim that she couldn't run for three months. And I'm being generous to her here.

Peatys · 27-05-2019 4:26pm

Sorry about that wrote: »

I would love to know what her best 10k time is, as she said the 53 mins wasn't good 'for her'. Just to know if she was bs'ing about that too.

Balls.ie checked. Her times are with in 8secs of the previous year

Itssoeasy · 27-05-2019 4:27pm

Btw the dean hotel said in a statement to rte that they haven't received a notice that the Caen has been dropped. Should Maria bailey have said anything about the case before it was officially dropped.

lbc2019 · 27-05-2019 4:28pm

joeysoap wrote: »

We know how the courts work, she could have a bottle in both hands, another one balancing on her head, wearing roller blades and chances are shes still get a payout.

Well if they didnt tell her not to...

The Rape of Lucretia · 27-05-2019 4:29pm

brooke 2 wrote: »

For a judge to decide.......even though the case has been withdrawn. :rolleyes:

To be fair, people are deliberately or unwittingly misquoting this point. Her full line is that 'it would have been for a judge to decide'. Would have been. She is not being illogical here, as people seem to be misunderstanding her to be, and pouncing on this seeming illogicality.

Odhinn · 27-05-2019 4:30pm

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

I think she dropped the case because of the media backlash and the constant attention they were giving her.

Look at this thread, look at the first page, people making judgements right away without any facts or letting the judge decide.

............

...wanted 64k when her expenses were 7k, not forgetting that most of those would have been covered by her medical insurance (and seeing as that was at the beacon I'd wager shes on the very top rate). The running a few weeks after despite claiming otherwise.

angel eyes 2012 · 27-05-2019 4:30pm

doubledeutsch wrote: »

I assume the Hotel was disputing either the cost or the necessity of those medical expenses?

She may have tied herself up in knots in that interview, but ultimately she was right, it was nobody's business except her, the Hotel and the court.

Not correct, journalists have an entitlement to report on cases that are heard in public.

According to the Independent, this matter came before the County Registrar motions court on 20 May, hence how the media were able to report on the matter, such sittings are heard in public and any member of the public can attend.

Kivaro · 27-05-2019 4:30pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Indeed she maintained her average time going of the records people have found which after an "injury" and 3 weeks of not running she would have been unlikely able to do.

Bingo.
And as most people who run know, there is very little chance she did zero training the 3 weeks before that 10K race.
And that would mean she was out running possibly multiple times before the race in order to prep for it.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.

lbc2019 · 27-05-2019 4:30pm

https://twitter.com/bigdirtyfry/status/1132958963253817345?s=21

jon1981 · 27-05-2019 4:31pm

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

I think she dropped the case because of the media backlash and the constant attention they were giving her.

Look at this thread, look at the first page, people making judgements right away without any facts or letting the judge decide.

The judge might have thrown it out of court in which case you could jump on her case then. Or the judge might have awarded something in which case you could complain about the justice system.

A lesson can be learned to not have trial by social media.

I mean, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the hotel was liable...maybe the floor was slippy or who knows what was there. But of course everyone jumped in right away, just looking at a headline and claimed she was trying to con money out of the hotel.

You are missing the point by a light year!!!

She is an adult, a public representative. The Comp culture is down to f**king adults not being responsible for their actions fuelled by a justice system that entertains this ****e!! She should have lead by example! She is a clown.

This one time I actually thank social media, if not for social media we would not have the details of this case, no awareness, nobody digging, we would not know that one of our public representatives was pulling "what looks like" a fast one.

If it takes Maria Bailey to be the example that stops any Public Rep stepping out of line, then so be it.

Muahahaha · 27-05-2019 4:31pm

"I’m not a legal person; I took legal advice on this… I was told I had a clear-cut case"

In the interview she was asked if Joespha Madigan gave her legal advice. She refused to answer this simple question.

sabat · 27-05-2019 4:32pm

Am I the only one who visualises a certain image everytime they hear the phrase "something in each hand?"

golfball37 · 27-05-2019 4:33pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Did anyone notice that in the interview she said twice "You know me as a person of integrity Sean". I doubt Sean O'Rourke knows her at all, she was literally putting words in his mouth. Id say that weasel words technique is straight out of the Terry Prone playbook for radio interviews, you just say to the interviewer that they know you as an honest person, ergo you must be an honest person. When in fact the interviewer didnt make any pronouncement one way or the other.

Anyway Paddy Power odds on Maria Bailey being suspended from Fine Gael in 2019
Yes 1/2
No 6/4

He does know her- Sean's wife is on the staff of Charlie Flanagan. Small country full of vested interests. No wonder he didn't pursue the 60k question when she twice said she only wanted to recoup her medical expenses.

oneilla · 27-05-2019 4:33pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Previous...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/elections2019-tds-swing-controversy-hurt-fg-at-polls-taoiseach-says-926807.html

She will probably find something to sue Fine Gael for. I would say they are terrified of her.

They will proceed based on legal advice no doubt!

VinLieger · 27-05-2019 4:34pm

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

To be fair, people are deliberately or unwittingly misquoting this point. Her full line is that 'it would have been for a judge to decide'. Would have been. She is not being illogical here, as people seem to be misunderstanding her to be, and pouncing on this seeming illogicality.

Nobody's misquoting her she refused to answer the question

SOR: Just clarify one thing, did you have something in each hand when this happened?

MB: That would have been a case for the judge to adjudicate on ...

SOR: What is your recollection?

MB: Sean, I am not opening a trial here.

holyhead · 27-05-2019 4:38pm

I imagine Varadkar is livid with her. She has brought ridicule on herself and FG. She moans about media crossing a humanity line vis a vis her claim. What about all those homeless who die on our streets Maria? As for this being leaked. If you hadn't sued there could be no leak. This woman is clearly not the brightest light in the harbour.

Bunny Colvin · 27-05-2019 4:40pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Nobody's misquoting her she refused to answer the question

You're replying to somebody there who's just looking for a reaction. Just wasting your time, stick him on ignore like half of the people on here have done.

VinLieger · 27-05-2019 4:40pm

One good thing might come of this, they might actually be finally forced to deal with the insurance industry and compo claims happening and forcing everyone's premiums up.

Odhinn · 27-05-2019 4:45pm

sabat wrote: »

Am I the only one who visualises a certain image everytime they hear the phrase "something in each hand?"

Ye durty fecker.

kyote00 · 27-05-2019 4:45pm

I hear she is now claiming for a car crash near RTE this morning:p

Tzardine · 27-05-2019 4:45pm

VinLieger wrote: »

One good thing might come of this, they might actually be finally forced to deal with the insurance industry and compo claims happening and forcing everyone's premiums up.

Don't hold your breath.

The Rape of Lucretia · 27-05-2019 4:46pm

VinLieger wrote: »

Nobody's misquoting her she refused to answer the question

They are. People are raising a question of why she says that's for a judge to decide when she has also said she has dropped the case. See multiple earlier posts from others. Which would be a fair question if she said that. But as you correctly, she says would have been. Which while still evasive, is not an illogical answer.
This is an example of, contrary to some suggestions, she is being very articulate, and exact with her choice of words. And she wins this exchange with SOR. Had he been better, he would have pressed with various tactics : you must remember as you had only had one drink, surely one of your friends remembers clearly even if you don't, is it in your affidavit, why are you refusing to answer a simple factual question, is it because you may yet take a legal action despite saying you have dropped it, etc. But he doesn't. He let's her off. Well played Maria on that one.

Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

Comments