Extremely relieved and delighted’ says Fine Gael senator acquitted of attacking and injuring a man in a brawl outside a bar in Dundalk
Looks like the civil case might not go the way the other lad expects based on this.
Have them added anything to this story in the last 4 years and who did you not link directly instead of using random twitter dumps?
Has the person been charged with anything in the last 4 years?
Anyone could but I ain't lying.
So you throw accusations of alleged sexual assaults around without any knowledge of whether he has been charged or convicted. Some journalist you must be.
As for ‘admitting it’, he apologised for a prank. He did NOT apologise for an alleged sexual assault.
But you know this.
Any proof?
Edit: Are you ‘green eggs’?
I am not green eggs and any proof I give will let people know who I am.
It's more than just a prank. A prank is setting off stink bomb or throwing a water balloon. Sticking a chocolate bar up a sleeping guys arse is not a prank.
Very convenient.
If I messaged your privately with my details would that suffice?
So let me get this straight, it’s ok for a criminal to murder Garda once they support SF but anyone else in ireland you have a problem with innocent or guilty of a crime because they are not SF supporters?
Correct?
Not really, I’m not going to ‘vouch’ for you.
A prank. I'm sure he thought he was hilarious.
What ever apologist label you chose to give it, he apologised for forcing a chocolate bar up a sleeping man's arse. Thats how it was. Thats what happened.
If a rape victim never reports it does it mean they weren't raped?
It was in The Irish Mail. I posted a link. He posed for photos during the act. He apologised on radio.
Here's the link:
He shoved a chocolate bar up the arse of a sleeping man. Thats assault.
You should ring the Garda with your evidence
But let’s clear this up, the accusation you are making is bad? But according to you it’s ok to murder a Garda?
He admitted and apologised for sticking the chocolate bar up a mans arse.
Why are you disputing this happened?
As I said if you have the evidence then ring the Garda.
Very strange case for the DPP to approve. The only (?) two witnesses called by the state were the "victim" and his wife, who gave statements that conflicted with CCTV. This is despite there being plenty of better witnesses who could have given evidence. On paper, this was always going to fail.
I wonder did they reckon on balance that it was better to let this get defeated in court than to decline the prosecution and be accused of political favouritism.
Why werent other witnesses called then?
It's a good question. It's normal for the defence to not call witnesses unless they have something specific to combat. But there were allegedly a group of the victim's friends who tried to hold McGahon back. If the victim was assaulted, surely their statements about what happened would have been at least a little bit more independent. Which suggests that if these people gave statemen, they were likely not helpful to the state's case.
If yer man has history with CAB, then his mates are probably no stranger to the Gardai, so their statements - if they gave any - might be all over the place and totally inconsistent.
He apologised for a prank.
He did not apologise for an alleged sexual assault.
He apologised for sticking a chocolate bar up someone's arse. Nothing more nothing less
Regardless, he did not apologise for an alleged sexual assault.
He posed for photos while in the act and apologised on the radio. I made no claim.
He apologised for sticking a chocolate bar up a sleeping man's arse. He apologised for that. He didn't apologise for the inappropriate abuse of a chocolate bar either.
As I said, welcome to FG land. Where you can admit to something and apologise but if it never went to court and conviction it never happened. I'm sure all the victims of abuse that never reported it to Garda appreciate that outlook.
An ‘unsavoury’ prank which he has apologised for.
Do you think this should rule him out of seeking public office?
If you did a straw poll on here, the majority would not think it was just a prank, they would say its at least assault.
So why wasn’t he charged with assault?
Who knows? Just because he was not charged does not mean it never happened.
In the absence of a conviction he is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
Before you say he admitted it and apologised, he didn’t. He apologised for a prank. Not an alleged sexual assault.
Burden of proof much lower in a civil case John has to prove he didn't cause injury to Breen White when it is plain as day that he did.
Yes it absolutely should and it should prevent FG from thinking he's a suitable candidate as well they're obviously desperate that they would put this drunken liability forward as a candidate and as a senator.
