Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Positive Experiences with Fiosru/GSOC?

  • 17-08-2025 07:44PM
    #1
    phatony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 132 ✭✭


    I know somebody in a situation where a Gardai lied under oath to take away reasonable doubt by putting words in the mouth of the accused.

    Normally there would be no hope - but a simple comparison of the Digital Court Recording of how he described the contents of the statement is the complete opposite of what the statement actually says. It's truly twisted. Also not a proper investigation, more figuring out what words to put into the person mouth to eliminate doubt.

    Can't be the first time this has happened. Has anyone ever seen/had a positive outcome from a complaint to Fiosru or GSOC?

    Or is it a complete waste of time or would provoke revenge?



Comments

  • #2
    peter4918
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 382 ✭✭peter4918


    well if there is a digital court recording and his/her evidence is the complete opposite of what the statements say, how come the solicitor didn’t pick up on it and bring it to the attention of the judge?

    Gotta love these ‘I know someone’ stories.



  • #3
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,432 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    A thread of positive experiences with GSOC will be a very short thread.



  • #4
    phatony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 132 ✭✭phatony


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123733019#Comment_123733019

    Was there even one positive experience for a complainant - that is what I am asking.



  • #5
    Dannythedog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 50 ✭Dannythedog


    no



  • #6
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 28,094 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Well, the GSOC annual report for 2023 records 81 investigations which identified a breach of Garda Regulations and the imposition of sanctions, and a further 27 cases in which matters were referred to the DPP, and 5 of those cases in which Guards were prosecuted. So presumably those complainants were at least somewhat satisfied.

    But, with regard to the situation described in the OP, there's a bigger question.

    . . . a Gardai lied under oath to take away reasonable doubt by putting words in the mouth of the accused . . .

    Was the accused convicted?

    If yes, then an appeal against conviction would seem like a bigger priority than a complaint to Fiosru.

    If no, then this is relevant to a possible complaint to Fiosru, in so far as it may indicate that the guard's evidence wasn't accepted by the court.

    Post edited by Peregrinus on


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    kirving
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,330 ✭✭✭kirving


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123731695#Comment_123731695

    In two times I've been in court, once on a jury, and once just for the craic, I've seen the Gardai lie under oath three times.

    1. Jury: Lied about a subject I have professional expertise in, totally needles embellishment (the accused tbh deserved a conviction but was acquitted partially because of this).
    2. Observing: Garda lied about an area I know very well. Again total embellishment to try and get a conviction - that one worked unfortunately.
    3. Observing: One guy waiting around was stupid enough to tell me he knew another Gard in the same station, and his case would be struck out, but he wanted to attend to say thanks to the Garda. Gard made up some BS explanation on the spot and the judge struck it out, while other poor schmucks got €500+ fines for similar offenses.


  • #8
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 28,094 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    In case 3, the garda would not have been under oath.

    Also I'm not sure why the Garda would have needed to "made up some BS explanation" at all; if the prosecution doesn't want to proceed with a charge and asks for it to be struck out, the judge doesn't normally quiz them about that. Was there some unusual feature in this case which meant the judge was reluctant to strike it out, and had to be persuaded?



  • #9
    csirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,095 ✭✭✭csirl


    GSOC/Fiorsu dont have enough resources or adequate powers. Their ability to investogate is largely limited to reviewing paperwork etc rather than doing a proper investigation. They are also very poor at engaging with conplainants - often limited taking a statement once at the start any maybe no further engagement until the outcome.

    Following from the above, I believe their methodology is flawed. The Garda complained about gets to see and respond to the complainants submissions/statements, however, the complainant never sees or has an opportunity to comment on the Gardas submissions/statement. Very essy for a rogue Garda to invent a BS narrative to justify his/her actions knowing that the complainant will never see it or be able to point out or provide evidence as to its truthfulness.



Advertisement