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

Solicitor asked to remove underwear....

1235»

Comments

  • #122
    Hogzy
    Registered Users Posts: 7,544 ✭✭✭Hogzy


    Furasta wrote: »
    Honesty how you can become a lawyer and not think about situations like this is beyond me.....

    When I trained to be a solicitor there wasn't any training on what underwear to wear to the office. :rolleyes:


  • #123
    the beer revolu
    Registered Users Posts: 16,731 ✭✭✭✭the beer revolu


    I get a sense that she, a solicitor, was outraged at being subject to the same security protocols as prison visitors and prison staff.

    Because solicitors would never break the law!


  • #124
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users Posts: 12,190 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Mav11 wrote: »
    I don’t know how you can come to the conclusion that prison staff made a balls of the situation. It seems to me that they acted perfectly and impartiality within the parameters of the security protocols.

    Havent come to any conclusions at all.

    Fcuk Putin. Glory to Ukraine!



  • #125
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Hogzy wrote: »
    When I trained to be a solicitor there wasn't any training on what underwear to wear to the office. :rolleyes:

    Don't think her office is in the prison is it?


  • #126
    mikethecop
    Registered Users Posts: 2,111 ✭✭✭mikethecop


    Hogzy wrote: »
    When I trained to be a solicitor there wasn't any training on what underwear to wear to the office. :rolleyes:

    did they cover prison visits ?


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    Blaaz_ wrote: »
    Even if its againest irish prision service policy


    Looks to me,someone is getting suspended

    And rightly so. That solicitor should have been suspended immediately for acting so unprofessionally. Thank god prison staff refused to listen to her old guff.


  • #128
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    TheValeyard wrote: »
    Havent come to any conclusions at all.

    Apologies. Fixed the post.


  • #129
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    punisher5112 wrote: »
    Yeah it is made out like the perp... I mean client was watching, it's going to be a woman checking and that's life
    Have only read a few pages of the thread (had to give up after a few pages), so maybe this has been pointed out -- but, the engagement occurred in front of a group of men. Anyone can see how that could be humiliating, if you imagine your wife/ girlfriend or daughter in that position.


  • #130
    Topgear on Dave
    Registered Users Posts: 4,519 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    the beer revolu wrote: »

    Became solicitors would never break the law!

    God bless your innocence. :pac:


  • #131
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Completely stupid decision by the staff.

    The obvious solution was to search the prisoner thoroughly after the visit, rather than putting someone just there to do their job in a humiliating position.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Mav11 wrote: »
    And rightly so. That solicitor should have been suspended immediately for acting so unprofessionally. Thank god prison staff refused to listen to her old guff.

    hmm....looks to me someone in prision staff overstepped the mark
    The Irish Prison Service (IPS) said today that "it is not the policy of the Irish Prison Service to request any person to remove under garments in order to gain admittance to a prison.


    All theres left in light of this,is whether this solictior will settle for an apology,looks to me,if she wants, to push it,the irish tax payer will shouldering cost of a payout for over-zealous staff here


  • #133
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    Blaaz_ wrote: »
    hmm....looks to me someone in prision staff overstepped the mark




    All theres left in light of this,is whether this solictior will settle for an apology,looks to me,if she wants, to push it,the irish tax payer will shouldering cost of a payout for over-zealous staff here

    “The solicitor said she was then told she would not be able to enter the prison if the monitor continued to sound, "so I would have to take my underwear off had I wanted to gain access"”

    It seems to me that the only thing that she was told was that she couldn’t enter while the alarm was sounding. She seemed to have inferred herself that she would have to remove the bra if she wanted to get in and was helpfully informed if she wished to do this she could use a bathroom.


  • #134
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Mav11 wrote: »
    It seems to me that the only thing that she was told was that she couldn’t enter while the alarm was sounding. She seemed to have inferred herself that she would have to remove the bra if she wanted to get in
    No, it says in the article she was asked about her underwear with 5 men standing there.

    The exact quote was "Are you wearing any underwear?"


  • #135
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    No, it says in the article she was asked about her underwear with 5 men standing there.

    The exact quote was "Are you wearing any underwear?"

    A helpful suggestion as to what might be triggering the alarm?.


  • #136
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Mav11 wrote: »
    A helpful suggestion as to what might be triggering the alarm?.

    Hmm. If I were a prison guard, I would simply ask if someone can think of anything on their person that is setting off the alarm.

    "Are you wearing any underwear?" isn't a question that would dawn on most people.

    Not really complicated, is it?


  • #137
    Hogzy
    Registered Users Posts: 7,544 ✭✭✭Hogzy


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    Don't think her office is in the prison is it?

    Yup, they did, and we visited a prison aswell. None of us were subjected to that level of search.


  • #138
    The J Stands for Jay
    Registered Users Posts: 5,645 ✭✭✭The J Stands for Jay


    Mav11 wrote: »
    “The solicitor said she was then told she would not be able to enter the prison if the monitor continued to sound, "so I would have to take my underwear off had I wanted to gain access"”

    It seems to me that the only thing that she was told was that she couldn’t enter while the alarm was sounding. She seemed to have inferred herself that she would have to remove the bra if she wanted to get in and was helpfully informed if she wished to do this she could use a bathroom.

    If the quality of writing in the article was better, we would be able to know if she inferred she should take off her bra or if she was told to take it off. As it stands, all the arguements happening here are pointless, as the differing opinions are based on differing interpretations of the article.


  • #139
    lulublue22
    Registered Users Posts: 1,475 ✭✭✭lulublue22


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    No, it says in the article she was asked about her underwear with 5 men standing there.

    The exact quote was "Are you wearing any underwear?"

    That’s how I read it too - as a female I totally get where she is coming from - who wants to discuss their underwear in front of 5 male strangers. Also felt sorry for her re trying to cover up with her jacket - who wants their nipples visible in a male dominated work environment FFS and unless she had a vest and a fairly thick jumper on it’s practically a given that they were. Work attire does very very little to cover the fact that you are braless to be fair.


  • #140
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    I have on occasions had to enter Irish prisons for work purposes. I know that before I rock up to the security scanners that I cannot have concealed metal on me or other items such as USB keys. She should have also been aware of these requirements.

    A number of years ago I broke my leg and had to get some metalware inserted. The prison scanners will be set off as a result and I have to roll up the leg of my trousers to allow the hand held wand directly on the skin to show that I am not hiding anything. I would be very disappointed if others, regardless of their gender were treated differently. It would represent a security failure and lack of professionalism by the IPS if it were any different.


  • #141
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    Hmm. If I were a prison guard, I would simply ask if someone can think of anything on their person that is setting off the alarm.

    "Are you wearing any underwear?" isn't a question that would dawn on most people.

    Not really complicated, is it?

    Crossed posts see above.

    I was asked had I metal in my leg. I said yes. Not really complicated at all is it?


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Mav11 wrote: »
    Crossed posts see above.

    I was asked had I metal in my leg. I said yes. Not really complicated at all is it?

    Really? So they asked you about metal pins or plates in your leg? Wow, that's specific.

    Did they not ask if you're wearing any underwear?

    Kinda seems like the more obvious question would be "is there anything on your body comprised of metal?", but these prison guards, they sound like they are highly specific.


  • #143
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    Really? So they asked you about metal pins or plates in your leg? Wow, that's specific.

    Did they not ask if you're wearing any underwear?

    Kinda seems like the more obvious question would be "is there anything on your body comprised of metal?", but these prison guards, they sound like they are highly specific.

    Specificity born from experience. These officers know their business, saves a lot of time, grief and contraband getting into our prisons.

    No need to ask what I was wearing on my body, but I imagine to some, to be asked what was in my body would be considered far more invasive, undignified and worthy of an attack of the vapors.


  • #144
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users Posts: 12,190 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Rule of Acquisition 190


    Hear all, trust nothing.

    Fcuk Putin. Glory to Ukraine!



  • #145
    Mav11
    Registered Users Posts: 2,235 ✭✭✭Mav11


    TheValeyard wrote: »
    Rule of Acquisition 190


    Hear all, trust nothing.

    But never let the truth get in the way of a good story.


  • #146
    mikethecop
    Registered Users Posts: 2,111 ✭✭✭mikethecop


    Hogzy wrote: »
    Yup, they did, and we visited a prison aswell. None of us were subjected to that level of search.

    you should have been,

    even if you weren't expecting to be left alone with a prisoner for a private consultation

    still seems like a in person prison visit in the middle of last year could have been done over the phone or via video line ,

    wonder if there is much of a difference between the two when it comes to billing


  • #147
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users Posts: 13,798 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    Not sure about billing, but no doubt they'd use the "line is being monitored" excuse. Let's just make it like America, a room divided in 2 by Perspex and a phone to talk to each other through the glass. Wouldn't have to remove anything then.


  • #148
    Fallout2022
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭Fallout2022


    It's important to have a good brief.



Advertisement