Gangland Shootings part 4 - Read OP before posting

In older times women and children were sacred, with the drug scum nothing is sacred.

realdanbreen wrote: »

Thing is you usually do the deal before you get sentenced.
He mightn't have much info that would be of any use to the guards.

Totally agree, but sometimes the memory comes back when the sentence starts feeling long, and the pressure of the system kicks in, it happens quite often.

stingrayed wrote: »

Wonder how long smyth will last in isolation without trying to do some sort of a deal, everybody hates him, so seems he has nothing to lose.

How would this even work without recorded evidence? And all calls regarding it would be on burners so no time/ date corroboration of any use to be had.

So Smyth makes a statement "In May 2017 I received a call from XX telling me to to meet him and YY in Crumlin, they asked me to kill Gately, he gave me 5 grand upfront, a gun, and told me I would collect another 20 grand when the job was done"

Really can't see how this alone could lead to a charge. If it could the defence would only point out this is a man looking at spending the next X amount of years in prison who has been promised early release and a new life abroad expenses paid, and who has a personal grudge/ owes money to the defendant and therefore has a vested interest in jailing him.

If the SCC judges won't convict Patrick Hutch because the i's weren't dotted and the t's weren't crossed, it's hard to see them take a chance on evidence as flimsy as this.

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

How would this even work without recorded evidence? And all calls regarding it would be on burners so no time/ date corroboration of any use to be had.

So Smyth makes a statement "In May 2017 I received a call from XX telling me to to meet him and YY in Crumlin, they asked me to kill Gately, he gave me 5 grand upfront, a gun, and told me I would collect another 20 grand when the job was done"

Really can't see how this alone could lead to a charge. If it could the defence would only point out this is a man looking at spending the next X amount of years in prison who has been promised early release and a new life abroad expenses paid, and who has a personal grudge/ owes money to the defendant and therefore has a vested interest in jailing him.

If the SCC judges won't convict Patrick Hutch because the i's weren't dotted and the t's weren't crossed, it's hard to see them take a chance on evidence as flimsy as this.

Hardly difficult for him to point the Gardai in the right direction, for certain things that they are not sure about, and collect some extra time off, win win for slithery smyth, gardai can then do their job and join the dots up.

Noseygit wrote: »

His time for a deal was before he went to court.

He can appeal and squeal a deal.