I wonder how this will work out for him
Threadbanned Posters:
Hamsterchops
take everything
road_high
FixdePitchmark
gk5000
I think EB is just so arrogant he believes he doesn't have to comply with any of the court processes.
Some people has alluded to the possibilty of American organisations funding the family but that doesn't make sense to me. Why would they find a family from Mayo? Would they pay into all of their bank accounts? Or would they just single out one of the offspring to pay into his account? It doesn't make sense to me.
I think he is just so deluded and he believes he's done nothing wrong so why should he provide that information.
Fools and their money....
I recall a judge questioning why EB would not divulge his financial records.. will be very interesting if and when they do indeed surface
The family are probably raking in money from American donations as well. Loonies funding loonies.
I did get a laugh in their recent rant where Martina says that the DAP "are shown the utmost favour by the courts" as if the courts haven't been exceptionally generous and patient with the Burke's antics.
Methinks martina may institute her own diciplinary procedures as at more than once, they were all speaking over eack other and not deferring to her.
They're showing their weird American influences again there. We don't have any concept of "conservative judges", same way absolutely nobody remembers which parties appointed Supreme Court judges here.
In a way the present situation created by EB is probably the best New Years present for the pupils and staff at WHS given EB's decision not to comply with the stay away from WHS order is keeping him stuck in the "Joy" unable to be present at WHS.
It's not quite a Groundhog Day even though it's repetitive, all down to EB preventing a panel being able to sit to hear his appeal. Some-one [not EB, obviously] at WHS may have got their New Years Day wish fulfilled. Long may EB be a "stuck in the mud" personality.
Edit: I just came across a new video from the Burkes. Aside from their usual complaints, it seemed that the three Burkes present that they were surprised and upset at the rulings from Judge Emily Farrell, they described her as a conservative judge in the video. Michael McDowells son came in for a berating from them as well as a representative at the hearing.
I'm not an expert on legal processes, but I wondor are the High Court just going through the motions here and will just let him have his day out in the High Court on 21st January, then let the DAP make their decision.
Despite what appears to have been an effort at a strategic timing by the Burkes by only requesting an injunction this week, (After all, if he felt that the DAP hearing in December wasn't appropriate, why didn't he immediately lodge papers seeking an injunction in December), the Counsel for the DAP offered to postpone any further process whilst they file a replying affidavit, so he's guaranteed that he will not have a decision made about him until after he has his day in Court on 21st January.
The judiciary can't be oblivious to their antics and I would hope that 21st January is just a case of the Judge letting him shout for a while, letting the DAP reply, and then telling the DAP they're entitled to make a decision.
I really don't know how to view today's development. On one hand you could say the Courts are giving the DAP time to go away and get a bigger hammer and nail (maybe a bit of coaching on the side as well). On the other hand you could say that EB and his ilk have outsmarted the DAP and/or the Courts. If it is the latter then it really doesn't say much about them as an organisation!.
Looks like he got his way again, another indulgence by the courts as Saturday's meeting has now been postponed.
"So basically EB threw a strop because the DAP did not jump at his command"
Replace "DAP" above with anybody involved in this from Day 1 and it explains everything.
He could have raised a formal grievance with the Dept of Ed about the request from the Principal , instead he threw a huge strop at a public event resulting in his suspension(on full pay) pending a disciplinary hearing.
He could have used that disciplinary hearing to raise his concerns , instead he threw a strop and kept attending the school forcing the school to get a court injunction.
He could have recognised the authority of the court and stayed away from the school pending the disciplinary hearing , but instead he threw a strop and kept trying to get into the school leading to his incarceration.
And on and on and on we go….
Every single thing that has happened is 100% due to Enochs (and the entire Burke Families) inability to follow the correct process.
Same thing over and over- turn every proceeding into chaos because no rules apply to them, make allegations against everyone and then try to unpick it by saying procedures were not followed. Delay delay delay then demand others turn something around immediately.
"Ms Justice Farrell also directed that the only people allowed address the court were Mr Burke and Mr Lyons after Mr Burke’s mother Martina and sister Ammi made comments from the body of the court. Martina Burke had repeatedly interjected: “It pays to be corrupt in this country.”"
Outrageous behaviour in a court (as usual).
So basically EB threw a strop because the DAP did not jump at his command and reply to him ASAP, instead chose its own legal course, while he is "free" to challenge the DAP holding a hearing with its latest 3 member panel.
Enoch Burke appeal hearing postponed due to legal challenge
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/enoch-burke-appeal-hearing-postponed-due-to-legal-challenge/a2042166827.html
and a more detailed report on rte.ie detailing burkish behaviour by Enoch and his ould wan.
https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2026/0108/1552109-enoch-burke/
Ms Justice Emily Farrell adjourned the case until 21 January, much to the displeasure of the Burkes.
There was a picture attached to a recent article reporting on this injunction of Ammi and a brother. I wonder was that a recent picture or from before? They look a bit hard done by because Enoch is still in prison. Can they not understand that he's in prison because he wants to be there?
I'd like to get a wording readout of the questions EB put to the witnesses in his cross-examination, plus the approach he used when asking the questions.
He has a quarter of a million odd in penalties.
Whatever a teachers salary is,forty or fifty I'm guessing. So many years even if he keeps his salary coming.
Ok. Good to hear. I understood from initial reporting on the topic that only a % was being taken from his salary.
I wonder how long until the fines are fully paid ?
EB is an awful silly pr1ck. The fact that hes still in prison and it's all of his own making. Now he wants an injunction against the work appeals process or the make up of the panel. I noticed how he wants to use civil law now to try and protect himself but he won't respect civil law when it swings the other way. Notice how he never respected an injunction when it was applied against him from the school. But now he wants some sort of protection or process from the civil courts. There's just no end to any of this from him.
It's certainly an interesting space to watch. If he successfully argues against the composition of the DAP a second time, is the goal to then bring an application declaring the initial suspension null and void, on the basis that it's unable to be upheld?
He already had a Master as do all the Burke's.
Mammy Burke.
The Courts keep changing who is dealing with the Burkes. Fresh bodies constantly in essence. Also a hedge against future claims by Burkes if ‘X had it in for us’. With at least 4 different judges dealing with them over the last few years, not including COA judges, they can’t claim that,
I see Simeon has calmed down now he has a master…
you must have missed the bit where his bank account was cleared out and every cent of every pay check he receives is being taken to pay his fines before it even hits his bank account
I would imagine (or at the very least, hope) the board would have done enough diligence beforehand to ensure they had all their i's dotted and t's crossed with their hearing to negate any such claims from Burke that there was a substantial enough issue which would require the members to recuse themselves and do the hearing again.
His attempts to wear down the judiciary are why he's in Mountjoy.
The objection to Ms O Brien appears to be basically that because when would so as asked by a principal that she cannot sit on such a panel. That's a pretty extraordinary position and essentially points to Burke wanting to cherry pick people on the panel of a simlar viewpoint to himself, should any of those exist. More widely the tactic seems to be to be agressive and disruptive, and then when anyone reacts to their appalling behaviour to cry foul and use it as the basis for yet more court proceedings. It may well work, but you'd wonder where it all leads. Can people who are determined enough simply wear down the judiciary?
Enoch is delaying this for various reasons, but monthly payroll is a huge factor. While in jail, the state needs to take ALL his nett salary to pay back the fines. While in jail, the state is paying for his accomidation, food, medical needs. Why should the state esstionally pay for him twice ? Salary and jail costs. I get they cant stop his salary for legal reasons, but they can claw back 100% of the Nett salary each money, leaving him with zero while in jail.
If he's out of jail, and still appealing, getting a teachers salary, but fines are still outstanding, the state needs to take most of the nett pay, leaving him with the equivalent of job seekers allowance €250 per week (or whatever the rate is). This is fair and good legal justification, as he would be entitled to it anyway if not in jail and was not recieving any salary.
Hit him where it hurts the most .. the pocket
It's great that he has the hypocrisy to use the words unfair, unreasonable, unlawful and fair procedures in his application. Talk about living in a world of your own.
If he is successful with this, I hope the judge stays strong and never lets him out of jail until he respects the rule of law both ways.
he wants the can kicked down the road again so him and his moronic supporters can continue claiming he still technically works in the school.
His grounds appear far wider than the composition of the panel and go right to the heart of the way the DAP conducted it’s business. If his claims are substantiated and accepted by the High Court the outcome of his application for injunctive relief is a forgone conclusion.
If the the second DAP proceedings are stopped, it could well be the end. It’s a general you can’t go on hearing the same case repeatedly as you start to run the risk of double jeopardy, undue burden, stigmatisation, etc. Two bites of the cherry is often considered just about reasonable.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
