Mod- Thread title updated to reflect what has actually happened, and the op's text link has been turned into a working link
Lazy effort op, don't do it again
Threadbanned
john123470
Lodged a new appeal yesterday - Court of Appeal, unlikely to be heard before Christmas.
I think she is the only lawyer, too - but she doesn't exactly have a stellar record. 🤣
One senator in the Seanad raised the issue of whether imprisonment is appropriate while accepting the rule of law and where fault lay and mentioned hope for intervention. Another supported that in a qualified way while also stressing rule of law. First mention I’ve seen in the Oireachtas.
Given that SEN Mullen is a traditional RC voice it’s an interesting input.
The intervention is easy..
All he has to do is agree to stay away from the school until the suspension hearings are complete.
He doesn't have to accept anything that "goes against his faith" or any other guff - He just has to behave like a grown-up and follow the process.
Had he been capable of that , this would have been all sorted 6 weeks ago and no one would have known anything about it and he wouldn't have spent a second in Mountjoy.
Obviously. Equally obviously it was a reference to an outside intervention. The less obvious is why SEN. Mullen put it on the record of the Seanad.
The idea that the school can't proceed with the disciplinary process in Enoch's case is absurd. Surely, his imprisonment due to his refusal to adhere to the injunction has the same effect on his employment on the school as it would have had on Peter Darragh Quinn if he had been a teacher. In other words, Peter Darragh Quinn, who left the Republic to avoid imprisonment for contempt, would have been, if he had been a teacher in the Republic, sacked from his job.
As soon as I saw the word "Senator", I knew it was going to be Mullen.
I think it is blatantly obvious why Ronan Mullen was the one to bring it up.
I don't think that I'd be going out on a limb to suggest that Senator Mullen would likely be very supportive of the underlying arguments that Enoch and his family typically espouse.
He could have raised the matter of imprisonment anywhere. He put it on the record of the Seanad. That is very much less obvious. The fact another senator as outlined gave support is interesting.
The underlying arguments are not part of the contempt case. As you stated many times. He commented on the imprisonment aspect.
Who was the other senator?
If anyone thought it was hard doing time in the Joy....
He commented on it deliberately to try and connect the two elements , just as Enoch is trying.
Mullen is a Senator and is using that forum to try to muddy the issue.
He was very careful not to trigger a response from others in the chamber by making it all about the imprisonment part , but he absolutely categorically supports the viewpoint of Enoch Burke.
Enoch truly believes that he has done absolutely nothing wrong that that everyone should just do exactly what he wants because "God is on his side" and that is absolutely aligned with everything Mullen says he stands for.
So after all that do you think he had a point about imprisonment as a response by the court? And external intervention?
No. there was no other remedy available. If they hadn't locked him up he would have continued to break the court order.
Exactly and not only that, he made it absolutely clear that he had no intention of stopping it when brought to court - hence the detention.
To spell it out should courts have other options for contempt of their orders rather than prison? By raising the issue in the Oireachtas that might be the implication. If your only tool is a hammer etc
The fact you haven't named the other senator says a lot. It's home to a fair few loons. Mullen has stated lots of outlandish and even untrue things in the Seanad. I'm sure he brought it up in his Irish Catholic column as well.
He raised it a month ago and so far, has zero implications. Also our judiciary is separate from the government for a reason.
It says nothing but invites those who wish to do so to leap to their usual and usually tiresome conclusions. You can Google as well as me. If you think members of a body that the Irish people chose to preserve are to be dismissed glibly by a randomer on Boards good luck to you. Any thoughts on the fact that two members of the Seanad can see a need to consider if imprisonment is always an appropriate response to contempt?
PS I don’t read the IC but I’ll take your word for it.
What options are you thinking of, bearing in mind that imprisonment is used to prevent further breaches of a court order and any alternative would have to do the same.
Enoch Burke is incapable of obeying his court order not trespassing hence prison is the only way to stop his trespassing.
Unless you mean deportation/execution as an alternative? Theres not much else that can be done unless he decides to act like an adult.
Any thoughts as to why Senator Mullen and one other senator have only now voiced their concern if imprisonment is always an appropriate response to contempt?
It's not exactly as if Enoch Burke is the first person to be imprisoned for continuous and ongoing contempt and for blatantly refusing to purge his contempt.
And to spell it out to you (again), he’s in prison because he made it very clear that he would continue to defy the injunction.
What other intervention do you have in mind would have kept him out of prison while also ensuring he didn’t break the injunction?
In a word ‘No’.
Anybody know who the other senator was?
Good question. I don’t know. Maybe the thoughts of the loss of a case taken on religious ethos and its imaginary priority in law before the CoA is rattling the churches.
Lisa chambers I think as I as she’s the only one who mentions Enoch Burke along with Ronan Mullen. Both of them state that Enoch Burke should purge his contempt.
Mullen is one step away from the Westboro level of nonsense himself at the best of times so I'd take anything he says with, well nothing because it's usually a load of religious rubbish anyway
There will be no external intervention on the judicial branch by the legislative branch.
Doing so in the past has brought down govts of the day.
As for it all being "interesting", it's really not. It's one religious nutter using his platform to talk about another religious nutter. That is all
golly yer still very desperate for this to not be as simple as it is
why is that
Reply to the post you hoped would be made rather than the post that was made. Tiresome.
External intervention to me means with Mr Burke. You seem to see it differently.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6cf5dc758823be7b2ebdb601ec3d15b8.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d5a8197d7274f92eab37915a6d9f12a1.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbba4c22aa1d352d2cdbb076e36aea8c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)