Sinn Fein and how do they form a government dilemma

Yes.
That is what SF believe also, they were removed from their positions and left the party before sanction.

We're not talking about the gaa.

That's a hell of a stretch, by that argument noone can report child abuse as that's an individuals personal information.

FF's James O'Connor on News at One not up to speed on the story and embarrassing himself.
Seems to think the criminal allegation was made against Stanley, not the other way around.

Lol, the same way lots of employees are aware of an incident involving other employees. They witness it, they hear about it from the person(s) involved etc. That doesn't give them the right to share it with another organisation though. Have you never heard of GDPR before?

Jesus, there's no way in a million years you've been involved in any employment disciplinary proceedings so let's not pretend otherwise. The second pedophile, jesus. What exactly makes you determine they are a pedophile? It's because of people like you that privacy laws exist and rightfully so. Sinn fein should have refused to give a personal reference for McMonagle and I've never claimed otherwise. AFAIK they are legally required to provide details of his employment with Sinn Fein, again, under GDPR they would be required to do this.

Despite all your claims, you still can't point to any piece of legistion or any section in the Children Protection act that provides for that. Amazing, but if you insist on repeatedly lying and making things up that fair enough.

Well actually we are talking about the GAA. Again, you're wrong. There is legislation in place that states people need to contact specific agencies or the Garda/PSNI if they feel a child is being abused.

Stop pivoting now Pureza.
Here's what your 'perception' was,

The other here is the perception involving the Gardaí was done for a self serving reason to keep Stanley quiet before the election

A joke trying to debate with somebody like you, asked a simple question about new information and you immediately pivot to something else.

BTW I don't and never had 'hero's'. Everyone has potentially feet of clay. My perception will change on foot of the evidence presented.

Stanley, as I said in my first post on this, is a big loss. I suggested in his defence that he may very well have made the criminal complaint before he actually acknowledged that it was him. That was what the use of 'counter claim' intimated to me.

My perception now is that maybe he was gaming the inquiry process - why would he stay in a 'kangaroo court' situation if he had evidence of criminality?
Why didn't he bring it to the Gardai himself. Was he using it as leverage to keep his position? They are certainly the questions I would be asking.

With the transcript to hand, do you now accept as pointed out to you that this was wrong?

mlmd has stated clearly that the complaint is not of a criminal nature and that had the complaint been of a “criminal nature” it would have been referred to gardaí immediately and the party “wouldn’t have been near it”.

MLMD said the complaint was not of a criminal nature, it was the 'counter claim' that was of a criminal nature.

Do you also accept to make the claim that it was sent to the Gardai to 'keep people quiet' is also bogus.

Stanley at any time could have gone to the Gardai himself. Stanley has also been invited by SF to reveal what the intial complaint was. He hasn't so far.

"My perception now is that maybe he was gaming the inquiry process - why would he stay in a 'kangaroo court' situation if he had evidence of criminality?

Why didn't he bring it to the Gardai himself. Was he using it as leverage to keep his position? They are certainly the questions I would be asking."

There's a delicious irony in your inferring that an SF TD was acting in bad faith, someone whom you would have defended to the hilt not 48 hours ago.

All of this is just speculation of course, but as to why Stanley didn't approach the Gardai about potential wrongdoing in his party - it's because that's just not the way SF roll, as you well know. Shinners gonna shinner after all.

And pivot again to something else.

Has this perception changed?

The other here is the perception involving the Gardaí was done for a self serving reason to keep Stanley quiet before the election

😁 SF did go to the gardai.

It is actually kind of depraved that you are pointing fingers at BHF rather than SF regarding that particular scandal.

Then again you have a history of this.

Remember the time that SF was caught hoarding peoples data illegally in some sort of database? You started a thread giving you about… not SF, but the Data Protection Commissioner for not doing their job!

Unbelievable stuff.

There is always someone else to blame, some other angle, some other get-out clause anytime your beloved SF comes under some scrutiny.

If your principal concern is child safety then a situation were there is no ability for the likes of the BHF to check an employee is dangerous and it could happen again.

The BHF are not at fault, they are hampered legally IMO
The people in SF who wrote and verified the references were absolutely and totally wrong and I welcome the SF announcement that they will not be allowed back in the party.

SF is in a full-blown self-made political crisis mere days before a GE is to be called and @FrancieBrady is banging on about Golf Gate. FFS.

He has lost the plot…

So you think SF went to the Gardai to 'hide' when at any time Stanley could go to the Gardai himself?
That MLMD took to the airwaves to reveal as much as she could of what happened, regardless of the 'damage'?

Makes zero sense, perception or not.