nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

John Waters & Gemma O'Doherty to challenge lockdown in the high Court

Long_Wave

Now I know they are going to get a lot of ridicule for this but the lockdown is almost certainly unconstitutional so I wish them luck. https://mobile.twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1250421661062459399

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Balf

brightspark wrote: »

It's going to be expensive either way. I personally prefer the one that has less people dying.
)

I'll plump for the option with less children being damaged and abused.

Truthvader

Balf wrote: »

I'll plump for the option with less children being damaged and abused.

This will be good. Explain to everyone how a lockdown in a pandamic to save lives amounts to child abuse

Balf

Truthvader wrote: »

This will be good. Explain to everyone how a lockdown in a pandamic to save lives amounts to child abuse

I'll leave that to the experts.

Here's the kind of thing the lockdown junkies are happy to ignore

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/coronavirus-mental-health-child-welfare-5067329-Apr2020/

"We know that difficulties often intensify for children and young people when they do not have the safe refuge of school. This is the place they learn, meet their friends and often where they eat and receive support too. With little warning, all of this was gone.

We in Childline expected an increase in demand for our service – but not to the extent which has been experienced."

nacho libre

I wonder how Gemma would like it if someone started following her around and videoing her actions on the basis she is disturbing the peace, she'd likely file harassment charges, yet it's ok for her to harass and abuse people doing their job.
She seems like someone who is resentful at a previous employer and now is on a mission to take it out on others.

HeidiHeidi

nacho libre wrote: »

I wonder how Gemma would like it if someone started following around and videoing her actions on the basis she is disturbing the peace, she'd likely file harassment charges, yet it's ok for her to harass and abuse people doing their job.
She seems like someone who is resentful at a previous employer and now is on a mission to take it out on others.

There was a video of this very thing doing the rounds recently (I think it was from a while ago though, not recently taken) - she ran and ran and ran, hiding her face behind a folder, while her minder/bodyguard harrassed and threatened the person making the video and questioning Gemma (in a very Gemma style).

It would have been amusing had it not been so pathetic.

I don't think she followed up on it. Didn't stop her continuing to do it herself, though.

guyfo

Balf wrote: »

I'll leave that to the experts

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/coronavirus-mental-health-child-welfare-5067329-Apr2020/

More than a bit ironic that you would say I'll leave this to the experts then immediately post a link to the Journal.... Got a few Joe.ie, Mirror and Star articles to back up your statements with more expert opinions?

The restrictions are for the good of the country and to save as many lives as possible. There is no other agenda behind it, which is kind of proven by so many other countries enforcing similar if not even more strict rules. The opposite of your argument is also true for those kids who do get bullied at school, but are now home... I know if this happened when I was in school it would have saved me some hardship... For a while anyway.

Gemma isn't a social warrior, she isn't doing her good deed for society, she doesn't represent the views of the people of Ireland in any way. What she is is a horrible, self obsessed, racist transportation system for perfectly good organs. At this stage that is the only benefit to society she could possibly provide, as an organ donor. Anyone saying otherwise needs to take off the tinfoil hat and take a long look at themselves in the mirror.

Infini

nacho libre wrote: »

I wonder how Gemma would like it if someone started following around and videoing her actions on the basis she is disturbing the peace, she'd likely file harassment charges, yet it's ok for her to harass and abuse people doing their job.
She seems like someone who is resentful at a previous employer and now is on a mission to take it out on others.

What's needed are incitement to hatred laws to be strengthened against the likes of her or making it more accountable that those who are spreading misinformation and deceptive lies for financial gain can be restricted by a court order with hefty fines for non compliance. Having an opinion is one thing, publishing conspiracies and lies with malicious intent or to profit from should be pursued with criminal intent as they have no care for anyones safety only their miserable spiteful egos.

Truthvader

Balf wrote: »

I'll leave that to the experts.

Here's the kind of thing the lockdown junkies are happy to ignore

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/coronavirus-mental-health-child-welfare-5067329-Apr2020/

"We know that difficulties often intensify for children and young people when they do not have the safe refuge of school. This is the place they learn, meet their friends and often where they eat and receive support too. With little warning, all of this was gone.

We in Childline expected an increase in demand for our service – but not to the extent which has been experienced."

Oh deary me. School is not a safe refuge if your friends are dead. A bit more traumatic than missing double maths every Tuesday I expect. In any event we already got the experts and they advised a lockdown - unless of course you have access to different experts. Maybe Dessie Ellis could halt the virus in its tracks with a bag of semtex and a box of nails if only he was let

Truthvader

guyfo wrote: »

More than a bit ironic that you would say I'll leave this to the experts then immediately post a link to the Journal.... Got a few Joe.ie, Mirror and Star articles to back up your statements with more expert opinions?

The restrictions are for the good of the country and to save as many lives as possible. There is no other agenda behind it, which is kind of proven by so many other countries enforcing similar if not even more strict rules. The opposite of your argument is also true for those kids who do get bullied at school, but are now home... I know if this happened when I was in school it would have saved me some hardship... For a while anyway.

Gemma isn't a social warrior, she isn't doing her good deed for society, she doesn't represent the views of the people of Ireland in any way. What she is is a horrible, self obsessed, racist transportation system for perfectly good organs. At this stage that is the only benefit to society she could possibly provide, as an organ donor. Anyone saying otherwise needs to take off the tinfoil hat and take a long look at themselves in the mirror.

Good luck excavating her carcass in search of a heart

Harry Palmr

David Icke has been banished from two high profile sites in Facebook and Twitter O'Doherty is lucky in that she is hardly known by comparison. Mind you that's no reason to give her the space she occupies.

brightspark

TaurenDruid wrote:

Now if you were Dee or Gemma you'd at least have read your constitution so you'd already know the answer top that...

I think Gemma skipped that bit of the constitution, anyone care to highlight it to her?

[Deleted User]

Balf wrote: »

I'll leave that to the experts.

Here's the kind of thing the lockdown junkies are happy to ignore

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/coronavirus-mental-health-child-welfare-5067329-Apr2020/

"We know that difficulties often intensify for children and young people when they do not have the safe refuge of school. This is the place they learn, meet their friends and often where they eat and receive support too. With little warning, all of this was gone.

We in Childline expected an increase in demand for our service – but not to the extent which has been experienced."

Enable early intervention from social workers. The childline worker from the very article you're citing does not call for dropping of guidelines.

PTH2009

People painting these 2 as Patriots like the lads in the 1916 rising

Infini

PTH2009 wrote: »

People painting these 2 as Patriots like the lads in the 1916 rising

Only a tiny amount of idiotic minded people would do so, the vast majority will see her as the spiteful, malicious troll she is and treat her with the contempt she well deserves. Certain individuals are a waste of space but so long as they keep to themselves most wont give a damn, it's when they start shouting, making scenes and shítstirring for malicious and self centered intentions that draw's my disgust and utter contempt. I'm all for freedom of speech but when it's used in a way to spread blatent lies for self gain or worse endanger the wellbeing of the vast majority during a national emergency it really annoys me that they aren't taken to task and hung by their bollock's in a court of law as it's clear to many that her intentions are malicious.

Harry Palmr wrote: »

David Icke has been banished from two high profile sites in Facebook and Twitter O'Doherty is lucky in that she is hardly known by comparison. Mind you that's no reason to give her the space she occupies.

Honestly I really wonder if enough people reported her account over and over to twitter for spreading misinformation and lies could they actually get her permabannned from the platform for good? If there's one thing I love seeing it's when malicious feckers get their comeuppance!

maestroamado

The question i want to ask is why is the courts not able to deal with this as a matter of urgency?
This is going on now for a few weeks and the fact that the judiciary and Government are not capable of dealing with this challenge needs to be addressed. There is clearly something amiss here.
Why is this?

Infini

maestroamado wrote: »

The question i want to ask is why is the courts not able to deal with this as a matter of urgency?
This is going on now for a few weeks and the fact that the judiciary and Government are not capable of dealing with this challenge needs to be addressed. There is clearly something amiss here.
Why is this?

Probably slower services due to the coronavirus being the main culprit, also we have a caretaker rather than an actual goverment until the greens stop stalling and just sign up with a realistic agenda.

maestroamado

Infini wrote: »

Probably slower services due to the coronavirus being the main culprit, also we have a caretaker rather than an actual goverment until the greens stop stalling and just sign up with a realistic agenda.

The courts in this country are completely separate from Government.
That case involving the people who died in the Truck in the UK went ahead.
This should have being dealt with immediately, the fact that it has not being dealt with needs be asked.
This should be a straightforward case, i expect they know exactly what they are doing.

We also have the fact that people from NI can drive freely in this country and rest of us restricted.
I wonder if the PSNI allow me to drive freely through NI.

I am not a fan of any of the two people but they have asked a question and the fact that the Courts have not the ability to deal with it is a bigger concern.
Will they Courts keep kicking this down the road...

[Deleted User]

maestroamado wrote: »

The courts in this country are completely separate from Government.
That case involving the people who died in the Truck in the UK went ahead.
This should have being dealt with immediately, the fact that it has not being dealt with needs be asked.
This should be a straightforward case, i expect they know exactly what they are doing.

We also have the fact that people from NI can drive freely in this country and rest of us restricted.
I wonder if the PSNI allow me to drive freely through NI.

I am not a fan of any of the two people but they have asked a question and the fact that the Courts have not the ability to deal with it is a bigger concern.
Will they Courts keep kicking this down the road...

Actually they might well let you, mate who lives in Dundalk still has to travel to their office in Belfast each week to perform the sys admin tasks that can't be done remotely.

Lab technicians who live in NI are still working in DKIT for sections of their work that can't be done remotely.

brightspark

Don't forget that the reason for this and indeed most legislation is that not all people are sufficiently moral to care about the common good and some are simply selfish idiots.

Ginger n Lemon

I think that as unlikable as Gemma is, there is something extremely wrong living in a democracy where a handful decide the fate of entire population, unchallenged and unquestioned. This is what happens in China and North Korea.

In my opinion, having a 5 month lockdown for barbers, pubs, shopping centres is going to prove excessive. Very excessive.

Downlinz

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I think that as unlikable as Gemma is, there is something extremely wrong living in a democracy where a handful decide the fate of entire population, unchallenged and unquestioned. This is what happens in China and North Korea.

In my opinion, having a 5 month lockdown for barbers, pubs, shopping centres is going to prove excessive. Very excessive.

And yet today FG are riding high in the opinion polls on 35% as the most popular party comfortably. They've made measures largely supported by the public and seen as necessary while none of the opposition party members had an objection, literally zero elected representatives had any issue with what has happened.

Those who feel otherwise, see parallels with fascist regimes or have a sympathetic view to Gemma's position should realise that they're the 1% tiny, tiny minority based on all available evidence.

threeball

Harry Palmr wrote: »

David Icke has been banished from two high profile sites in Facebook and Twitter O'Doherty is lucky in that she is hardly known by comparison. Mind you that's no reason to give her the space she occupies.

You'd imagine a call should be put in to twitter and facebook to have them removed. They should have the sense to do it themselves seen as they're based here.

MrsBean

maestroamado wrote: »

The courts in this country are completely separate from Government.
That case involving the people who died in the Truck in the UK went ahead.
This should have being dealt with immediately, the fact that it has not being dealt with needs be asked.
This should be a straightforward case, i expect they know exactly what they are doing.

We also have the fact that people from NI can drive freely in this country and rest of us restricted.
I wonder if the PSNI allow me to drive freely through NI.

I am not a fan of any of the two people but they have asked a question and the fact that the Courts have not the ability to deal with it is a bigger concern.
Will they Courts keep kicking this down the road...

There are procedures and stages to a Judicial Review case. You don't just click your fingers and have a judgement made. Each party needs time to prepare their statements and cases. First an application for leave (permission) is made and then, if granted, notice is served on all relevant parties. Time should be allowed for those parties to prepare their opposition case. Then the matter can move to substantive hearing stage. There could even be a pre-hearing or interim relief hearing stage. Of course the judge will then need time to deliberate and issue a ruling, so all in all, a fairly time consuming process.

The fact that there is approximately a week between each stage so far is as fair and quick as you're gonna get, given the circumstances. I would argue that this is being treated as a matter of urgency.

brightspark

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

In my opinion, having a 5 month lockdown for barbers, pubs, shopping centres is going to prove excessive. Very excessive.

If it stops just one of your relatives from dying would you still consider it excessive?

Simple choice go to the barber, pub and shopping centre and have just one of your relatives die? or leave them closed?

I know which one I would choose.

Ginger n Lemon

brightspark wrote: »

If it stops just one of your relatives from dying would you still consider it excessive?

Simple choice go to the barber, pub and shopping centre and have just one of your relatives die? or leave them closed?

I know which one I would choose.

Stops from dying? Ireland has had 260 deaths per 1 million of population, Sweden has had 264, one country has put itself into a recession for the next 5 years, and other didn't.

What have my relatives gotta do with the facts of life? What have my relatives got to do with 25% unemployment levels in the country?

The real question is, for every 1 person "saved" by us sitting at home, how many have will have been killed through suicide, depression, lack of access to timely healthcare because people are scared to leave their house and go to the hospital for a check up on that pain in their chest?

Truthvader

Jesus...….. Is this the "expert" we were waiting for?

maestroamado

MrsBean wrote: »

There are procedures and stages to a Judicial Review case. You don't just click your fingers and have a judgement made. Each party needs time to prepare their statements and cases. First an application for leave (permission) is made and then, if granted, notice is served on all relevant parties. Time should be allowed for those parties to prepare their opposition case. Then the matter can move to substantive hearing stage. There could even be a pre-hearing or interim relief hearing stage. Of course the judge will then need time to deliberate and issue a ruling, so all in all, a fairly time consuming process.

The fact that there is approximately a week between each stage so far is as fair and quick as you're gonna get, given the circumstances. I would argue that this is being treated as a matter of urgency.

I know little of this but i think if a Judicial Review can be taken against legislation that the ink is hardly dry on suggests someone got the wording wrong.
I just thought now that it may be unconstitutional to introduce such legislation in this country without referendum.
I am thinking these people secure in the knowledge that there be no sanction against them. My only hope is that we get a clear ruling.

jackboy

brightspark wrote: »

If it stops just one of your relatives from dying would you still consider it excessive?

Simple choice go to the barber, pub and shopping centre and have just one of your relatives die? or leave them closed?

I know which one I would choose.

Simple choice to continue driving your car and have just one of your relatives die. Or never drive again.

Which would you choose?

brightspark

jackboy wrote: »

Simple choice to continue driving your car and have just one of your relatives die. Or never drive again.

Which would you choose?

We aren't talking about "never again".

If it was a question of not driving for six months, a year or even two years then I would choose no driving naturally.

Ginger n Lemon

maestroamado wrote: »

I know little of this but i think if a Judicial Review can be taken against legislation that the ink is hardly dry on suggests someone got the wording wrong.
I just thought now that it may be unconstitutional to introduce such legislation in this country without referendum.
I am thinking these people secure in the knowledge that there be no sanction against them. My only hope is that we get a clear ruling.

A clear ruling and a democratic one! It would be incredible for a judicial system to allow a handful of people with medicine only background making decisions that affect 5 million of population.

In general, since when does adopting an approach practised in China is the way to go? Their constitution is complete opposite to that of Ireland.