Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

Options
1…7475777980…315

Comments

  • Options
    #2282
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,689 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    everlast75 wrote: »
    What are the grounds for throwing her out of the party?

    And when I say grounds, on what proven facts?

    I suspect, as a lot here do, that she was chancing her arm, that she may get some compensation - say 50/50, but that's very different to a fraudulent claim.

    There's a disciplinary procedure within FG. A member of the party can be referred to them if an issue arises. I wouldn't be surprised if in her meeting with Leo Varadkar she doubles down again and is even more defensive. I mean why not ? If she is willing to say the stuff she did in public, why would she be less defensive in private ?


  • Options
    #2283
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 28,568 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    You would wonder if the Dean hotel were hoping it would come to court, where they could have released the CCTV footage ?

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #2284
    cj maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,647 ✭✭✭✭cj maxx


    Someone might have previously posted
    But Leo has overseen some fcuking debacles. This mess , the children’s hospital, the national broadband project .
    Any others ? I’m beginning to think that he was elected just to prove how liberal we’d become on the wave of equality we surfed and gay or not he’s an unmitigated fcuking disaster that we’ll look (and pay) back on for years to come . It’s not like it hasn’t happened before , repeatedly .


  • Options
    #2285
    Deebles McBeebles
    Registered Users Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭Deebles McBeebles


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    I mean, security possibly had a laugh about it, hotel staff members, insurers/prosecution/defence etc etc.

    Lord knows how many people have access to it at this stage, fingers crossed it's leaked on Twitter.

    At least one staff member will have taken a video of it on their phone. Its what people do when they have access to CCTV and something funny happens.

    Whether it ever gets released to the wider public, well, we can only hope.


  • Options
    #2286
    jon1981
    Registered Users Posts: 4,359 ✭✭✭jon1981


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    There's a disciplinary procedure within FG. A member of the party can be referred to them if an issue arises. I wouldn't be surprised if in her meeting with Leo Varadkar she doubles down again and is even more defensive. I mean why not ? If she is willing to say the stuff she did in public, why would she be less defensive in private ?

    Agreed, she's created a PR disaster for the party, how do you punish that? You can't throw her out but you can sideline her (remove chair positions...etc.) and promote a new candidate when the general elections come around. Also you can no loner say the case was found to be fraudulent because it was pulled and never went to court. (despite us all knowing the story had more holes in it than my grannies pin cushion!)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2287
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Are they still in a meeting?


  • Options
    #2288
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,220 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »
    If the indo hadn’t released the mentioning in court and Maria Bailey had no Facebook page showing the gig and 10k, do you think she would have kept up the premise of not being able to run for 3 months and having trouble sitting or standing?

    I think she would have left those lies in her affidavit. I mean, on SOR she said she has (not did) instruct her legal team to amend that stuff. She says that after 3 years it’s easy to get things wrong. BUT she has ran that race since. Is it on the same time every year?

    Total fraud if she could have had the opportunity.

    But she didn't, and she hasn't.

    So, on what facts should she be thrown out of the party.

    BTW, I'm not posting to wind people up. I get the outrage. I have similar views. I'm just trying to get to the reasons why FG can **** her out of the party.


  • Options
    #2289
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,385 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    everlast75 wrote: »
    Sardonicat wrote: »
    She swore an affidavit that stated she could not run at all for 3 months.
    This was a blatant lie. She ran 10k 3 weeks after the "accident"
    She's a crook.

    Pleadings can be changed, mistakes can be made. Not enough to throw her out.

    What else?
    To change a sworn affidavit takes more than ammending a text. She SWORE that the information was true. It was read to her and she SWORE it was true. Then she signed it. She lied. To get money.

    She's a crook.


  • Options
    #2290
    InTheShadows
    Closed Accounts Posts: 727 ✭✭✭InTheShadows


    cjmc wrote: »
    Someone might have previously posted
    But Leo has overseen some fcuking debacles. This mess , the children’s hospital, the national broadband project .
    Any others ? I’m beginning to think that he was elected just to prove how liberal we’d become on the wave of equality we surfed and gay or not he’s an unmitigated fcuking disaster that we’ll look (and pay) back on for years to come . It’s not like it hasn’t happened before , repeatedly .

    He also said he'd look after the early risers. Not one red cent to the banks etc.... The man is a total fraud and a case study in how far spin and PR can get you in this country.


  • Options
    #2291
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,220 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    To change a sworn affidavit takes more than ammending a text. She SWORE that the information was true. It was read to her and she SWORE it was true. Then she signed it. She lied. To get money.

    She's a crook.

    Pleadings can be amended on consent from the Defendant.

    If not, you can apply to Court.

    Like it or not, it happens a lot in litigation.

    You are inferring that there was criminal intent. You might be right.

    But that doesn't make it true.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2292
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,689 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    jon1981 wrote: »
    Agreed, she's created a PR disaster for the party, how do you punish that? You can't throw her out but you can sideline her (remove chair positions...etc.) and promote a new candidate when the general elections come around. Also you can no loner say the case was found to be fraudulent because it was pulled and never went to court. (despite us all knowing the story had more holes in it than my grannies pin cushion!)
    The constituency party of FG if they haven't already for the next GE(I know both FG and FF had selection conventions quickly when it looked like there might be an election) could just not vote for her. If she has been selected to contest the next election then I pressure there is a process to deselect her for the next GE.


  • Options
    #2293
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,311 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    everlast75 wrote: »
    But she didn't, and she hasn't.

    So, on what facts should she be thrown out of the party.

    BTW, I'm not posting to wind people up. I get the outrage. I have similar views. I'm just trying to get to the reasons why FG can **** her out of the party.

    Leo has recently said that the government were going to clamp down on compo culture. how can he have a party member who has been shown to lie as part of a compo claim?


  • Options
    #2294
    Birneybau
    Registered Users Posts: 10,254 ✭✭✭✭Birneybau


    Suckit wrote: »
    I'd say there are a lot of people doing everything they can to stop that cctv being released. Surely they would have received confirmation in writing that the case has been dropped by now.
    InTheShadows wrote: »
    I don't understand why the CCTV can't be released? The case is dropped so no legal issues over making it public.

    Apparently the hotel is yet to receive notice that the claim was withdrawn. So...it's not over yet.


  • Options
    #2295
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    everlast75 wrote: »
    But she didn't, and she hasn't.

    So, on what facts should she be thrown out of the party.

    BTW, I'm not posting to wind people up. I get the outrage. I have similar views. I'm just trying to get to the reasons why FG can **** her out of the party.

    But has it been changed? Was it 20th May that it was for mention in court? What date was she dropping the case? Why would amendment to the affidavit be required if case dropped?

    Could they remove her from the party or ask her to resign for bringing the party into disrepute? I dunno.


  • Options
    #2296
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,220 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Leo has recently said that the government were going to clamp down on compo culture. how can he have a party member who has been shown to lie as part of a compo claim?

    Look. I get people are p*ssed off at her.

    Her interview with SOR was a disgrace.

    But she has not been shown to have lied. She has claimed that she made a mistake.

    It would be entirely different if it went to Court and the Court made a finding that she lied. But it didn't. I know she withdrew the case, but you can infer that the Court would have made that finding, but it didn't.

    You say she lied. She said she made a mistake. There are no grounds to throw her out listed so far, that I can see.


  • Options
    #2297
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,820 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    everlast75 wrote: »
    Pleadings can be amended on consent from the Defendant.

    If not, you can apply to Court.

    Like it or not, it happens a lot in litigation.

    You are inferring that there was criminal intent. You might be right.

    But that doesn't make it true.

    You'd have to assume had it gone to court the defendant would have hung her out to dry on that lie in her plea.

    Its one of the core reasons it wasnt in the courts. Its not the optics. Its being found out.

    You think they would be okay with changing such a key point of her case. The entire backbone of the injury was it impacted her physical activities.

    Yeah, no. I dont think so.



    Out she goes, Shes been caught and no technicality version will change that


  • Options
    #2298
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    everlast75 wrote: »
    What are the grounds for throwing her out of the party?

    And when I say grounds, on what proven facts?

    I suspect, as a lot here do, that she was chancing her arm, that she may get some compensation - say 50/50, but that's very different to a fraudulent claim.

    I would imagine Leo will point out to her that by her own words she has been unable to leave the house and is under attack everywhere so how can she actually do her job.


  • Options
    #2299
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,820 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    everlast75 wrote: »
    Look. I get people are p*ssed off at her.

    Her interview with SOR was a disgrace.

    But she has not been shown to have lied. She has claimed that she made a mistake.

    It would be entirely different if it went to Court and the Court made a finding that she lied. But it didn't. I know she withdrew the case, but you can infer that the Court would have made that finding, but it didn't.

    You say she lied. She said she made a mistake. There are no grounds to throw her out listed so far, that I can see.


    In no world can the core facet of her case be construed as a mistake. Nope.


  • Options
    #2300
    daheff
    Registered Users Posts: 5,851 ✭✭✭daheff


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Leo has recently said that the government were going to clamp down on compo culture. how can he have a party member who has been shown to lie as part of a compo claim?

    And a member whose firm are part of this- Josepha Madigans law firm are complicit here too. Pushing what they should reasonably have seen as a frivolous claim

    Surprised there isn’t more flak for her on this.


  • Options
    #2301
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    @pheobas

    Are you reading this thread?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2302
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,759 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    To change a sworn affidavit takes more than ammending a text. She SWORE that the information was true. It was read to her and she SWORE it was true. Then she signed it. She lied. To get money.

    She's a crook.

    I get the outrage, like I said, she should be fcuked out so fast that she sh1ts herself but it's not correct to say that she lied in the Affidavit. The Affidavit may well be a pile of sh1t but that doesn't necessarily mean that she lied. She may have made a mistake. An error of memory. I've had to stand over Affidavits before that had inaccuracies and it's common for people to rectify mistakes under questioning in court.


  • Options
    #2303
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,220 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    listermint wrote: »
    You'd have to assume had it gone to court the defendant would have hung her out to dry on that lie in her plea.

    Its one of the core reasons it wasnt in the courts. Its not the optics. Its being found out.

    You think they would be okay with changing such a key point of her case. The entire backbone of the injury was it impacted her physical activities.

    Yeah, no. I dont think so.

    Out she goes, Shes been caught and no technicality version will change that

    You're assuming that the Defendant would not have consented to the changing of a pleading, assuming that the Defendant would have successfully defended an application seeking permission from the Court to allow that to happen and assume that when the case came on for hearing, assume that the Court would have found that she was proven to have lied.

    That's an awful lot of assumptions.


  • Options
    #2304
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    at this stage, I wouldn't say it's beyond her to pull an Angela Kearns and say she contemplated doing something drastic, just for the sympathy of it


  • Options
    #2305
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,220 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    listermint wrote: »
    In no world can the core facet of her case be construed as a mistake. Nope.

    in the court of public opinion, you are correct.

    In the court of law, perhaps not.

    If the swing was dangerous, the seat was not secured or whatever other negligence might have attached to the pub, the Court may very well have found in her favour. Once liability is established, it then goes to the level of compensation. If she was found to have been exaggerating her claim, her case may be thrown out, or else the level of damages sought reduced.

    Therefore, such a key factor may not be fatal in the claim. I've no doubt she had a sore a** afterwards, so it doesn't mean she wasn't injured at all if she ran a number of weeks later.


  • Options
    #2306
    givyjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    everlast75 wrote: »
    Look. I get people are p*ssed off at her.

    Her interview with SOR was a disgrace.

    But she has not been shown to have lied. She has claimed that she made a mistake.

    It would be entirely different if it went to Court and the Court made a finding that she lied. But it didn't. I know she withdrew the case, but you can infer that the Court would have made that finding, but it didn't.

    You say she lied. She said she made a mistake. There are no grounds to throw her out listed so far, that I can see.

    Did you miss the bits about her running a ten 10k, three weeks after was supposedly injured? Never mind that she would have obviously been training in the run up to it, but she actually snorted 'it wasn't a good time for me' when her finish time was brought up. As balls.ie uncovered, it actually was a good time for her based on her own previous (and subsequent) finishes. A trivial part of the whole fiasco but a lie all the same. Willing to lie about such minor details, hardly a leap to assume she's willing to lie about bigger details.. such as a supposed 7k in medical expenses.

    Honestly, a big enough deal hasn't been made of this, yet.. It's absolutely sickening the stunt she has pulled and her interview was absolutely galling.


  • Options
    #2307
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,220 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    rusty cole wrote: »
    at this stage, I wouldn't say it's beyond her to pull an Angela Kearns and say she contemplated doing something drastic, just for the sympathy of it

    I wouldn't be surprised if she sued if FG tried to turf her out!


  • Options
    #2308
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,759 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Leo has recently said that the government were going to clamp down on compo culture. how can he have a party member who has been shown to lie as part of a compo claim?

    Here's the thing. She hasn't been shown to have told a lie.

    Telling a lie is telling something factually incorrect on purpose. It is possible that she told something factually incorrect as a result of a lapse in memory. In that case, it wouldn't be a lie.

    We all suspect it's a lie, but that hasn't been proven.


  • Options
    #2309
    JPCN1
    Registered Users Posts: 888 ✭✭✭JPCN1


    jon1981 wrote: »
    I bet you she loses a couple of chair positions and then left to public to decide her faith in the next general election.


    Her fate?

    Big question is will she be allowed run under the FG banner? Currently they have 3 of 4 and Barrett not running again. They could easily drop to one and that'd be a disaster for them and their hopes of a third term.


  • Options
    #2310
    BENDYBINN
    Registered Users Posts: 1,832 ✭✭✭BENDYBINN


    Only for an investigating journalist nobody would have known she ran the 10k three weeks after accident......this is where she got caught big time


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2311
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    everlast75 wrote: »
    But she didn't, and she hasn't.

    So, on what facts should she be thrown out of the party.

    BTW, I'm not posting to wind people up. I get the outrage. I have similar views. I'm just trying to get to the reasons why FG can **** her out of the party.


    A lack of confidence in her ability to make informed judgements on important decisions.

    This is a woman who was unable to decide if she had something in her hands or not after all.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement