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

whippet · 13-05-2020 12:38PM

At least the high court confirms what we’ve known all along .. they are living in a parallel reality

extra gravy · 13-05-2020 12:41PM

bennyl10 wrote: »

the rent freeze and evictions ban "impedes access to justice" apparently

That part jumped out at me too. Arguing against something that prevents people being evicted. True patriots.

sydthebeat · 13-05-2020 12:41PM

sabat wrote: »

In 18 months time you might well be wishing that they had won...

i might still have my 73 year old mother with me in 18 months.... so ill take that chance thanks you very much.....

Harry Palmr · 13-05-2020 12:44PM

Is there an opportunity to see the court record for a case that's been finished or dismissed? I'd love to know what the pair put forward in detail

sabat · 13-05-2020 12:49PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Why? What do you think Ireland will be like in 18 months?

I think the bond markets are going to take a look at the books and say "no thanks." Use your imagination to see what hell will spring from there.

sabat · 13-05-2020 12:51PM

sydthebeat wrote: »

i might still have my 73 year old mother with me in 18 months.... so ill take that chance thanks you very much.....

She can stay in if she wants

13-05-2020 01:05PM

sabat wrote: »

She can stay in if she wants

Ah sure we may aswell lock up all the oldies now and throw away the key...

What hope have the aged got if this is the attitude to it?

13-05-2020 01:09PM

sabat wrote: »

In 18 months time you might well be wishing that they had won...

I can guarantee you now that I won't in any shape or form. Common sense has prevailed.

AndrewJRenko · 13-05-2020 01:12PM

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

The stench of Soros off this decision is strong.

Really? Could you expand on that please, so that we can better understand how George influenced the decision in an Irish court?

sabat wrote: »

In 18 months time you might well be wishing that they had won...

In 18 months time, I'll be wishing that Gemma and John would just take the hint and shut up.

sabat · 13-05-2020 01:14PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I can guarantee you now that I won't. Common sense has prevailed.

Does your guarantee extend to sovereign debt markets? I'm not defending the plaintiffs or their arguments, but in the long run it might be better if they had won-at the very least it might have knocked a couple of months off this ridiculous timetable.

13-05-2020 01:15PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Really? Could you expand on that please, so that we can better understand how George influenced the decision in an Irish court

Don't expect a cogent response. The "Soros controls the entire world" narrative is popular among disaffected young males looking to vent their sputum.

The Nal · 13-05-2020 01:32PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Really? Could you expand on that please, so that we can better understand how George influenced the decision in an Irish court?

Someone said it on Facebook

Mrs Shuttleworth · 13-05-2020 01:50PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Two lunatics asked told to **** off out of the High Court
Great news.

The Judge said that they had no standing to challenge the aspects of the legislation that amends the Mental Health Act.

So according to the High Court they most definitely are not lunatics.

Interestingly the Court did not make a determination on costs. Costs follow the event and costs should have been awarded against them, but weren't. This effectively blocks them filing an Appeal as you can't file an Appeal until the final Costs Order is perfected.

The Nal · 13-05-2020 01:57PM

Independent - Sacked

Presidential nomination - Failed

Youtube - Banned

European election - 1.8%

Fingal by-election - 4.1%

General Election - 1.9%

High Court case - Dismissed

Relentless failure. She really needs a change of career.

Seth Brundle · 13-05-2020 01:58PM

The Nal wrote: »

Independent - Sacked

Presidential nomination - Failed

Youtube - Banned

European election - 1.8%

Fingal by-election - 4.1%

General Election - 1.9%

High Court case - Dismissed

Relentless failure. She really needs a change of career.

Absolutely none of the above is important when you consider how many Facebook likes she has!

Ash.J.Williams · 13-05-2020 02:02PM

The Nal wrote: »

Independent - Sacked

Presidential nomination - Failed

Youtube - Banned

European election - 1.8%

Fingal by-election - 4.1%

General Election - 1.9%

High Court case - Dismissed

Relentless failure. She really needs a change of career.

the first one was ok though wasn't it?

whisky_galore · 13-05-2020 02:06PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Absolutely none of the above is important when you consider how many Facebook likes she has!

People 'like' all sorts of idiotic sh1t.

Pair of fcuking donkeys, well matched. Glad their Freeman tinfoil hat rubbish is not being entertained any longer.

Annasopra · 13-05-2020 02:27PM

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Is there an opportunity to see the court record for a case that's been finished or dismissed? I'd love to know what the pair put forward in detail

Judgement today is here

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/2020/05/approved-odoherty-and-waters-v.-minister-for-health-ireland-and-the-attorney-general.pdf

April 21st Transcript is here

https://gemmaodoherty.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/200421-ODoherty-Anor-v.-Minister-for-Health-Anor.pdf

super_furry · 13-05-2020 02:32PM

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Judgement today is here

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/2020/05/approved-odoherty-and-waters-v.-minister-for-health-ireland-and-the-attorney-general.pdf

April 21st Transcript is here

https://gemmaodoherty.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/200421-ODoherty-Anor-v.-Minister-for-Health-Anor.pdf

Damn son.

"Unsubstantiated opinions, speeches, rhetoric and a bogus, absurd and offensive historical parallel with Nazi Germany, are not substitutes for facts."

13-05-2020 02:36PM

sabat wrote: »

Does your guarantee extend to sovereign debt markets? I'm not defending the plaintiffs or their arguments, but in the long run it might be better if they had won-at the very least it might have knocked a couple of months off this ridiculous timetable.

Well there's a first time for everything, or revisionist statement might be more accurate

13-05-2020 02:43PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Don't expect a cogent response. The "Soros controls the entire world" narrative is popular among disaffected young males looking to vent their sputum.

Not just limited to young males, plenty older ones too.

sabat · 13-05-2020 02:53PM

DubInMeath wrote: »

Well there's a first time for everything, or revisionist statement might be more accurate

The only other post I've made about Gemma O'Doherty was in the conspiracy forum last July; funnily enough the same point could be made about the case today.

sabat wrote: »

I'm not condoning any of O'Doherty's more out-there claims but I find it interesting that by attacking her here in such a mob-like fashion people are essentially siding with Google who are infinitely more of a threat to their freedom. Is the train of logic being established that if one person who protests against this company is a "looney" therefore anyone else who protests against them in the future is also a deluded crank?

CrabRevolution · 13-05-2020 03:01PM

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

The Judge said that they had no standing to challenge the aspects of the legislation that amends the Mental Health Act.

So according to the High Court they most definitely are not lunatics.

Interestingly the Court did not make a determination on costs. Costs follow the event and costs should have been awarded against them, but weren't. This effectively blocks them filing an Appeal as you can't file an Appeal until the final Costs Order is perfected.

The judge stated at the end that as the verdict was being delivered electronically and not in court, it meant the parties would have to make written submissions for costs.

Harry Palmr · 13-05-2020 03:39PM

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Judgement today is here

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/2020/05/approved-odoherty-and-waters-v.-minister-for-health-ireland-and-the-attorney-general.pdf

April 21st Transcript is here

https://gemmaodoherty.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/200421-ODoherty-Anor-v.-Minister-for-Health-Anor.pdf

Damning stuff and surely they must have been told by someone in thier flock that the outlined case was based neither on the law or science. It almost reads like an exercise in how not to mount a legal argument.

"MS O'DOHERTY: Well, they're not being -- this Court is not being conducted in public, and you will know that your former colleague, Ronan Keane said that courts that are held in private tend towards corruption. I'm sure that's not going to be the case here.

JUDGE: I agree, that's why I'm holding it in public, Ms Doherty, that's why I'm holding it in public.

MS O'DOHERTY: It's not -- there is no public here. Would we -- could we agree, Judge, that a sample representative come in?"

And so on, like dealing with a child.

Ipso · 13-05-2020 03:57PM

super_furry wrote: »

Damn son.

"Unsubstantiated opinions, speeches, rhetoric and a bogus, absurd and offensive historical parallel with Nazi Germany, are not substitutes for facts."

Damning to a normal person, this will only cause Beavis and Butthead To double down.

Annasopra · 13-05-2020 04:45PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Absolutely none of the above is important when you consider how many Facebook likes she has!

Nah. Facebook Banned her :pac:

hippo300 · 13-05-2020 05:08PM

In his judgement, he said: “In making their case for leave the applicants, who have no medical or scientific qualifications or expertise, relied upon their own unsubstantiated views, gave speeches, engaged in empty rhetoric and sought to draw an historic parallel with Nazi Germany – a parallel which is both absurd and offensive.”

Judge should be demoted for this. He has obligation to the law, not to scientific qualifications or expertise. You don;t need to be medical expert to be able to challenge any law that is restricting your constitutional freedoms. Your standing is being citizen of Ireland, not a medical degree.

It's said how well this judicial nonsense is received on this forum.

I won't even start how many times during this pandemic expert changed their opinions (most recently schools appear to be safe, previously face masks, no expert was there to prevent pandemic or limit the damage before it was very late). What matters is that opinionated judge makes it impossible to challenge legislation, because "they're not experts".

EDIT: If the law affects me, I have standing. If the law affects my constitutional freedoms, there is no justification for what the judge did.

Fiery mutant · 13-05-2020 05:09PM

hippo300 wrote: »

Judge should be demoted for this. He has obligation to the law, not to scientific qualifications or expertise. You don;t need to be medical expert to be able to challenge any law that is restricting your constitutional freedoms. Your standing is being citizen of Ireland, not a medical degree.

It's said how well this judicial nonsense is received on this forum.

I won't even start how many times during this pandemic expert changed their opinions (most recently schools appear to be safe, previously face masks, no expert was there to prevent pandemic or limit the damage before it was very late). What matters is that opinionated judge makes it impossible to challenge legislation, because "they're not experts".

Go home Gemma, you’re drunk.

walshb · 13-05-2020 05:11PM

Ok, so how many appeals can we expect from these two charlatans?

whippet · 13-05-2020 05:11PM

hippo300 wrote: »

Judge should be demoted for this. He has obligation to the law, not to scientific qualifications or expertise. You don;t need to be medical expert to be able to challenge any law that is restricting your constitutional freedoms. Your standing is being citizen of Ireland, not a medical degree.

It's said how well this judicial nonsense is received on this forum.

I won't even start how many times during this pandemic expert changed their opinions (most recently schools appear to be safe, previously face masks, no expert was there to prevent pandemic or limit the damage before it was very late). What matters is that opinionated judge makes it impossible to challenge legislation, because "they're not experts".

Incorrect .. he dismissed their medical and scientific claims as they were not backed up by any facts ... and they offered no back up which was the grounds to dismiss

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

Comments