Garda Cleared of Assault on a Technicality - Question

metman · 01-03-2009 03:27PM

Trojan911 wrote: »

Nah Met,

I can see where he is coming from & is spot on with his comments, in my opinion.

McCrack wrote: »

Your accusations are wrong, very wrong.

Can you offer any constructive input yourself to the subject matter of this thread instead of trying to attack anyone who dares disagree with the bluebottle minds?

Everything anyone posts on boards in any forum is open to testing, criticism, disagreement etc. remember that.

Bluebottle minds? Is that a legal term? :rolleyes:

Rather than waste anymore of my precious time, I'll simply refer you both to my previous post (and place both of you on my ignore list). Trojan, that's my opinion.

Now I'm done with this thread.

Trojan911 · 01-03-2009 03:56PM

metman wrote: »

Bluebottle minds? Is that a legal term? :rolleyes:

Rather than waste anymore of my precious time, I'll simply refer you both to my previous post (and place both of you on my ignore list). Trojan, that's my opinion.

Now I'm done with this thread.

Oh dear, take the easy option, walk away......

McCrack · 01-03-2009 04:09PM

But Metman you didnt actually contribute anything useful to this thread...and now you say you're done with it?

Why did you even bother in the first place? It doesnt make much sense really.

OhNoYouDidn't · 02-03-2009 12:47AM

What a storm I caused with a genuine and innocent question. I was unaware that the Ombudsman had to be called in when an off duty officer was accused of a minor crime. That may seem like the stupidist thing in the world to you carreer cops, but I think it was a legitimate question to ask on this forum to clarify something 'civilians' were wondering about.

There was a serious amount of putting words in my mouth from cushtac that I am not impressed with.

Eru wrote: »

The original question was fine, it showed a lack of understanding of the legal system but as you and I agree, no harm in asking when you dont know something.

Yet you led the charge abusing me for asking it and cushtac suggested I was 'anti-Garda'. OTT boys and quite frankly reinforces a few negative sterotypes about you guys sticking together which was unhelpful in the context of the issue at hand.

You are confusing internal Garda disciplinary issues with the legal system by the way. Not the same thing at all.

Eru wrote: »

the problem was the OP couldnt seem to grasp the asnwers being given and went on and on about how the Gardai are being treated differently and that GSOC are only an overseeing or internal discipline body. .

As for the original reponses to my question, posters were disagreeing with each other over the answer, so how am I to be blamed for 'not grasping' contradictory replies?

On and on? One post ffs.

Eru wrote: »

Then when the actual reality seemed to have sunk in the OP implied that the Gardai acted differently to protect a colleague when the reality is they acted correctly and in accordance with law and proceedure. Personally I give the OP more credit than that and believe that his actions and posts were made for the purpose of arguement and bashing.
.

If you think I was "arguing or bashing", you must have lived a very sheltered life.

I still believe that there is no way an ordinary drunk would not have been lagged here, but accept that in the case of an off duty officer it was not necessary as he would be having a chat with the ombudsman anyway as per procedure. But non Gardai would have no way of knowing that the Ombudsman would have to be involved, how and why would we?

The condescension and aggression from some quarters here is an eye opener.

OhNoYouDidn't · 02-03-2009 12:52AM

cushtac wrote: »

I don't think that's what he meant at all. He had previously been talking about how the Gardaí dealt with the incident, asking why the suspect wasn't dealt with like anyone else. When this was pointed out to him he suggested that if he had been a builder he would have been in the cells, which commonly refers to police custody.

Given that the matter of the collapsed trial hadn't come up in about 10 posts, and nearly every post in between had been about the Gardaí, I find it hard to believe he was suddenly referring back to the court case & was talking about prison.

I was asking why he was not arrested then and there.

Maybe it is basic ignorance of the law, but I reiterate that I do not believe I would get away with that behaviour without a trip to the cells. However I do accept that the process would be different for an off duty Garda, which was the piece of the jigsaw that is not apparant in the Indo article.

OhNoYouDidn't · 02-03-2009 12:56AM

Eru wrote: »

You have a seriously distorted view and understanding of Irish law and the various sections within it. You need to sit down and first understand the various types of law and the difference between the Gardai, GSOC and various other agencies.

I must, because I won't make the mistake of asking a question about the relationship between the GS, the GSOC and DPP like I did here in a hurry again.

Eru wrote: »

Once your understanding of our justice system is up to scratch you can read stories in a paper and make an informed opinion about the situation instead of using the taboids opinion to try and argue with those that do actually know the law and above all, understand it because all you have done so far is make yourself appear foolish and uneducated.

Tabloids? I appreciate the Irish Independent isn't what it used to be, but calling it a tabloid is a bit harsh.

The irony of abusing me for asking the question and then calling me foolish and uneducated for being ignorant of the answer is entirely lost on you, isn't it?

If a suspect was as defensive and aggressive in answering a question as some of you are, you would draw your own conclusions, wouldn't you?

TheNog · 02-03-2009 01:18AM

McCrack wrote: »

yet you felt compelled to stick your oar in.

You also used the word 'we' which suggests to me that you have closed ranks in this 'us V them' mentality that has prevailed on this thread and indeed forum.

your attitude regarding this matter and certain others attitudes just re-inforce my opinions previously stated.

I've seen posted here and elsewhere by certain individuals, and not to mention the back-slapping and brown-nosing too.

Freddie Morris got it damn right in his reports.

I stand over my previous posts.

Grand so. For trolling and back seat modding you can stand somewhere else besides in this forum for a week.

CLADA · 02-03-2009 01:19AM

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I was asking why he was not arrested then and there.

Maybe it is basic ignorance of the law, but I reiterate that I do not believe I would get away with that behaviour without a trip to the cells. However I do accept that the process would be different for an off duty Garda, which was the piece of the jigsaw that is not apparant in the Indo article.

I posted very early on to your original query since then it appears your question was answered.

In relation to the point you raise above, it would be fair to say that on receipt of such a complaint the majority of Gardai would take your name and address and send you on your way, a witness statement would be taken from the complainant and you would be subsequently invited to make a statement under caution.

However, if you were drunk to the extent that you were a danger to yourself or others an arrest may occur. (OR) if you were aggressive etc.. the Gardai may direct you to leave the area under the public order act and if you failed to comply an arrest may occur.

Many cases can be dealt with on the street without an arrest, bear in mind that arresting someone can remove a Garda from his beat for hours.

If you're happy enough your question is answered maybe this could be locked up and we could move on to the next healthy debate

Offy · 02-03-2009 01:20AM

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I was asking why he was not arrested then and there.

Maybe it is basic ignorance of the law, but I reiterate that I do not believe I would get away with that behaviour without a trip to the cells. However I do accept that the process would be different for an off duty Garda, which was the piece of the jigsaw that is not apparant in the Indo article.

He was not arrested because the Garda are not required to obey the laws of Ireland OhNoYouDidnt. A very similar incident happened to my 16 year old daughter a couple of years ago. That is the sad state of the Garda in Ireland, they like to assault girls and then get their collages to lie for them. The Ombudsman dismissed statements from three people (all professionals with no records) and claimed they checked with the Garda station and believed what other Garda told them. Look at the chap in Donegal that spent a few years in prison because of Garda lies. They are never held accountable so they get on a power trip and do what they want. That man lost years from his life and did the Garda involved get sent to jail? If you want justice dont look to the Garda, stay away from them and the ombudsman.

TheNog · 02-03-2009 01:20AM

OP

As far as I can see you asked a valid question and were abused for it. I did believe at one stage you may have been trolling but now not so.

So can we get this back on topic or is everyone done here?

TheNog · 02-03-2009 01:23AM

Offy wrote: »

He was not arrested because the Garda are not required to obey the laws of Ireland OhNoYouDidnt. A very similar incident happened to my 16 year old daughter a couple of years ago. That is the sad state of the Garda in Ireland, they like to assault girls and then get their collages to lie for them. The Ombudsman dismissed statements from three people (all professionals with no records) and claimed they checked with the Garda station and believed what other Garda told them. Look at the chap in Donegal that spent a few years in prison because of Garda lies. They are never held accountable so they get on a power trip and do what they want. That man lost years from his life and did the Garda involved get sent to jail? If you want justice dont look to the Garda, stay away from them and the ombudsman.

banned for this utter nonsense

OhNoYouDidn't · 02-03-2009 01:24AM

TheNog wrote: »

OP

As far as I can see you asked a valid question and were abused for it. I did believe at one stage you may have been trolling but now not so.

So can we get this back on topic or is everyone done here?

Thanks.

The original question as to the procedural issues was clarified (in a roundabout manner

). The only other confusion appears to be whether the law permits an arrest for common assault. If someone can clear that up, I would be obliged.

TheNog · 02-03-2009 02:00AM

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Thanks.

The original question as to the procedural issues was clarified (in a roundabout manner ). The only other confusion appears to be whether the law permits an arrest for common assault. If someone can clear that up, I would be obliged.

No there is no power for common assault or Section 2 in the Criminal Justice (Non Fatal Offences Against the Person) Act. However if a Garda witnesses an assault and firmly believes severe harm has been caused to the victim, the guard could arrest him for Section 3 Assault. The only problem then would be to ensure the victim will make a statement afterwards. If the victim decides then not to make a statement (which they are entitled to do) the arresting Garda may actually end up being sued by the offender for wrongful arrest.

The best thing would be to arrest the offender for a public oder offence and then make follow up enquiries a few days later.

It may all seem a bit complicated I know but that is the restraints placed on us by law.

cushtac · 02-03-2009 11:56AM

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Maybe it is basic ignorance of the law, but I reiterate that I do not believe I would get away with that behaviour without a trip to the cells. However I do accept that the process would be different for an off duty Garda, which was the piece of the jigsaw that is not apparant in the Indo article.

So in other words you do believe that the suspect in the Galway case got preferential treatment because of his job, like I said. So how am I putting words in your mouth?

The law has been pointed out to you - a Garda cannot arrest for common assault unless it is witnessed by him/her. Since this was not the case and no other arrestable offence was alleged there was no way anyone could have been arrested in this case. The off-duty Garda was not given any preferential treatment in this case.

Eru · 02-03-2009 04:21PM

RMD wrote: »

Disgraceful that some scumbag in uniform is practically allowed walk from charges while if it was a common citizen we'd be slapped in cuffs and thrown in a garda car very quickly.

If the common citizen did this, slapped some girl about and there was a victims statement, a key witness statement and physical evidence of assault (the cut lip) charges would most likely be pressed very quickly.

Don't see any reasoning why the Gardai should be allowed to halt the standard investigation when he's comitted the crime off-duty, off-duty he is a common citizen, not a member of the Gardai on patrol.

Well for starters it was the Ombudsman that investigated not An Garda Siochana and thats because the then Minister for Justice, with massive support from the public decided that an Ombudsman was better than Garda internal affairs. You as a member of the public, supported this so I fail to see why your blaming AGS for something we had no involvement in.

Secondly, if it were a Garda investigation no someone would not be arrested as there is no power of arrest for 'common assault' and maybe, just maybe a criminal prosecution would have been the end result. I could suggest thats because AGS know and are good at what they do but I will resist that urge

As for this topic, seems to have gone far enough IMHO, may I suggest a lock soon as we can see what its attracting and I dont see it getting any better.

sgthighway · 02-03-2009 04:31PM

Eru wrote: »

As for this topic, seems to have gone far enough IMHO, may I suggest a lock soon as we can see what its attracting and I dont see it getting any better.

We have all made our judgement so I'm +1 on above

deadwood · 02-03-2009 05:13PM

I think the original question has been answered and an explanation of procedures followed (or not, depending on your viewpoint) has been given. Can I propose a thorough edit or just a lock?

It was a fair enough question, I think. It just got blurred along the way. I didn't post because i'm always right and that wouldn't be much of a debate, now would it?

johnnyskeleton · 02-03-2009 08:04PM

RMD wrote:

Don't see any reasoning why the Gardai should be allowed to halt the standard investigation when he's comitted the crime off-duty, off-duty he is a common citizen, not a member of the Gardai on patrol.

That's a fair point, although it presupposes that ordinary criminal charges are more serious than charges brought via the Ombudsman, which I don't believe is the case.

TheNog wrote: »

If the victim decides then not to make a statement (which they are entitled to do) the arresting Garda may actually end up being sued by the offender for wrongful arrest.

Not if they were acting bona fides in the course of their duty and within the parameters of the statute.

TheNog wrote: »

The best thing would be to arrest the offender for a public oder offence and then make follow up enquiries a few days later.

As in arrest for breach of the peace? Then they would be deprived of an opportunity to detain the person for questioning, which would be a shame in a s.3 situation.

TheNog · 02-03-2009 08:18PM

Ok I think this thread has run its course.

An awful pity it was ruined by a minority

Garda Cleared of Assault on a Technicality - Question

Comments