Scumbag sues Garda

dvpower · 10-10-2010 07:30PM

Rabble Rabble wrote: »

If I was on this Jury I would totally and absolutely nullify, regardless of evdience. Obviously the Garda in question was possibly a bit over-enthusiastic, but unless he left the scummer with permanent damage I dont really see the major problem here. Its not as if this happened in a South American dictatorship where police do to that to random strangers, the alleged abuse happened after a ten man police chase against scummers who were, otherwise, going to kill real useful citizens, were they not stopped. Could have been me, Could have been you.

Were I on the Jury I would acquit regardless.

Appropriate username anyway.

Rabble Rabble · 10-10-2010 07:43PM

thebullkf wrote: »

yeah thats what it means.:rolleyes:

junkie??

what do you mean?

though judging by your acquittal comment, don't bother.

Naw, I will. A junkie is scornful term for a drug addict. Surprised you didn't know.

Rabble Rabble · 10-10-2010 07:58PM

The other thing that should happen is this:

All joy riders in urban areas are jailed for attempted grievious bodily harm, and/or attempted murder - and/or multiple counts thereof. This would not mean a change in law, but of direction.

Scummers who throw stones at trains should be arrested for attempted bodily harm, and/or attempted murder - multiple counts thereof.

And scummers who try and bring down Planes with their laser lights - multiple accounts of attempted murder. multiplied by the number of people on the planes.

No concurrent sentences.

Better than a hug.

MarcusFenix · 10-10-2010 08:53PM

Just re-posting again, seems like many of the "pro-law enforcement no matter what the costs" posters must have a very sheltered lifestyle.

I don't have a clue about the details, but if the guard is found guilty with evidence etc. it will be great for all the D4 heads and all the liberals but for your average guard this will be bad news.

Firstly I doubt if the guy(defendant) got a hiding in a nightclub there would be a court case after.

And secondly, if the guard is found guilty then every other guard in the country will have to second guess every move they make when it comes to apprehending suspects.

I'm not condoning police brutality but I do think that anyone who gets a bit roughed up by the guards 95% of the time were looking for it. And this was no "brutality" either it seems. Probably just a bit of a "cop on".

When I was a teenager anyone who was 14-17 underage drinking and causing trouble would be picked up by the guards, given kick up the hole/few slaps and dropped close to home. This worked as everyone knew about it.

I don't know anything of the evidence in this trial i'm just basing judgement on all the "facts" on here. But I think the guys who think the guard is on par with the scummer if found guilty are being a bit too politically correct.

IMHO

steddyeddy · 10-10-2010 10:10PM

Einhard wrote: »

No, it should be "After considering all the evidence available to him, the DPP decided to bring a prosecutuion against a member of the GS, whose guilt or innocence will be determined in a court of law by a jury of his peers."

would you apply the same innocent untill proven guilty line to the alleged scumbag?

steddyeddy · 10-10-2010 10:12PM

just curious guys but would you extend beating up scumbag rights to the general public or it exclusive to the garda?

dvpower · 10-10-2010 10:51PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

just curious guys but would you extend beating up scumbag rights to the general public or it exclusive to the garda?

The problem is they don't want to give this right to gardai at all. They just want a blind eye to be turned. It's a cowardly position to take; they want a culture in the gardai where they think they can beat up the scumbags but they don't want to offer any legal protection to the gaurds who do the beatings.

goat2 · 11-10-2010 01:35AM

Pendrago wrote: »

Well, thanks, although I have been browsing the boards for the past 4 years, this is the first time I've actually been driven to sign up to post.

Lets wait for the next time these pair of gougers get hooked up or liquored up and take off down the Quays at top speed in their next stolen car....How many lives were at risk the first time they did this, not counting the chasing cops? Who's child/wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/brother/sister etc etc will be crossing that street?

and the worst is, there will be a next time, then it will be said they got away with it last time , to go out and do it all over again, but maybe next time someone will be hurt or killed by these,

mr_happy · 11-10-2010 01:49AM

If the joyrider looses this case maybe he can sue for something else if he doesnt like the jail conditions?

On a clear day you can sue forever.

JJayoo · 11-10-2010 04:38AM

Bring back hard labour, not chain gang style, few years of footing turf would teach theres scumbags a lesson

dvpower · 11-10-2010 07:39AM

JJayoo wrote: »

Bring back hard labour, not chain gang style, few years of footing turf would teach theres scumbags a lesson

Do you realise that the defendant on this case is a Garda?
(we already have a Ranting and Raving forum)

dvpower · 11-10-2010 07:41AM

goat2 wrote: »

and the worst is, there will be a next time, then it will be said they got away with it last time , to go out and do it all over again, but maybe next time someone will be hurt or killed by these,

Are you referring to the guards or the joyriders?

senordingdong · 11-10-2010 07:51AM

dvpower wrote: »

The garda (if he is guilty) has risked his career by beating up the suspect.

Right, so the safest thing to do would have been to do nothing.

dvpower wrote: »

I don't know where you got this idea?

That's how I see the bigger picture unfolding every day.

dvpower · 11-10-2010 08:30AM

senordingdong wrote: »

Right, so the safest thing to do would have been to do nothing.

You live in a simple world:rolleyes:. They could have just done their job; made the arrest using the allowable level of force.

senordingdong wrote: »

That's how I see the bigger picture unfolding every day.

This is what you asked me:
Does it not bother you in the slightest to see Gardaí fighting a losing battle against the scum of Ireland, only to have their hands tied further every day, all for the sake of protecting criminals?

So, again, where did you get the idea that I'm not bothered by the 'battle against the scum'. Really, if your going to come out with this nonsence, the least I can expect is that you back it up.

senordingdong · 11-10-2010 08:36AM

dvpower wrote: »

You live in a simple world:rolleyes:. They could have just done their job; made the arrest using the allowable level of force.

How do you know they didn't use the allowable level of force?
They could very well have used the allowable level of force, but still have to deal with all this grief and hassle.

This is what you asked me:
Does it not bother you in the slightest to see Gardaí fighting a losing battle against the scum of Ireland, only to have their hands tied further every day, all for the sake of protecting criminals?

So, again, where did you get the idea that I'm not bothered by the 'battle against the scum'. Really, if your going to come out with this nonsence, the least I can expect is that you back it up.

[/quote]
Oh I beg your pardon, I mis-interpreted your reply.

It seemed to me that you're not bothered because you're advocating the politically correct methods that aren't seeing any note worthy results.

MagicSean · 11-10-2010 09:31AM

AFAIK the garda is charged with assault causing harm. From the description of the event and his injuries this does not appear to be from the "beating" he got because it would not have caused the harm required for that particular charge. Imo, from reading the media reports, the charge would seem to be for injuries sustained from the glass as he was being dragged out of the window. That would explain why his wrist needed to be bandaged.

dvpower · 11-10-2010 09:45AM

senordingdong wrote: »

How do you know they didn't use the allowable level of force?
They could very well have used the allowable level of force, but still have to deal with all this grief and hassle.

I keep saying it - I DON'T KNOW. The charge of assault causing harm indicates that it is the state's contention that they used more than the allowable level of force. The evidence given by the witness (for what little its worth) is that he was beaten with batons and kicked while handcuffed. We haven't heard the Garda evidence yet or any medical evidence, so its far too soon to say what really happenned.

senordingdong wrote: »

It seemed to me that you're not bothered because you're advocating the politically correct methods that aren't seeing any note worthy results.

Is it politically correct to advocate applying the rule of law now? If anyone would like to suggest a change in the law, I'm all ears.

dvpower · 11-10-2010 09:51AM

k_mac wrote: »

AFAIK the garda is charged with assault causing harm. From the description of the event and his injuries this does not appear to be from the "beating" he got because it would not have caused the harm required for that particular charge. Imo, from reading the media reports, the charge would seem to be for injuries sustained from the glass as he was being dragged out of the window. That would explain why his wrist needed to be bandaged.

Has there been more reporting on this issue? On the reports I read, the only description of the injuries was given by the joyrider who says they were sustained by being kicked and beaten with batons while handcuffed.

I think we will have to wait for the medical evidence on this one.

MagicSean · 11-10-2010 10:02AM

dvpower wrote: »

Has there been more reporting on this issue? On the reports I read, the only description of the injuries was given by the joyrider who says they were sustained by being kicked and beaten with batons while handcuffed.

I think we will have to wait for the medical evidence on this one.

Yes but just punching and kicking would not sustain a charge of assault causing harm unless they split his head open or something. Since the only medical treatment mentioned is the bandaged wrist I am making the assumption that this is the injury being prosecuted for.

AudreyHepburn · 11-10-2010 10:23AM

dvpower wrote: »

I keep saying it - I DON'T KNOW. The charge of assault causing harm indicates that it is the state's contention that they used more than the allowable level of force. The evidence given by the witness (for what little its worth) is that he was beaten with batons and kicked while handcuffed. We haven't heard the Garda evidence yet or any medical evidence, so its far too soon to say what really happenned.
.

I would have thought it was more to do with the State having an obligation to investigate any and all charges a prisoner/suspect might make against a member of the Gardai rather than them choosing to prosecute only those that seem legitimet?

And again as others seem to be failing to acknowledge yes the prisoner maintains he was beaten but considering he was out of his head on drink and drugs, as he admitted himself he couls easily have mistaken being arrested and handcuffed for being assualted particularly if he was being resistant and they had to use force to restrain him.

I've seen people drunk and drugged as a First Aider and they can be very violent and agressive. i have seen a situation where it took up to five male first aiders using considerable strength and force to restrain a man under the influence (for his own safety btw) with several more Gardai on hand in case he got worse.

MagicSean · 11-10-2010 10:26AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I would have thought it was more to do with the State having an obligation to investigate any and all charges a prisoner/suspect might make against a member of the Gardai rather than them choosing to prosecute only those that seem legitimet?

And again as others have yes the prisoner maintains he was beating as many are failing to acknowledge he was out of his head, as he admitted himself and could easily have mistake being apprehended, laid across the bonnet of the car and handcuffed as being assualted particularly if he was being resistant and they had to use force to restrain him.

An investigation can be conducted without a prosecution. That is what the Ombudsman is for. The fact that it has gone as far as the courts means the Ombudsman and DPP have basically accepted the criminals claims.

dvpower · 11-10-2010 11:54AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I would have thought it was more to do with the State having an obligation to investigate any and all charges a prisoner/suspect might make against a member of the Gardai rather than them choosing to prosecute only those that seem legitimet?

There are a number of hoops to jump through before a case like this gets to court.
First a complaint - no issue here - it appears that one of the joyriders made a complaint to the garda ombudsman.
Second an investigation that unearths some evidence, enough to warrent it being referred to the DPP (it may be the case that the garda ombudsman is more liberal in referring cases than the gardai would normally be, but I'm speculating).
Third, the DPP review the file and decide if there is a prima fascia case. This doesn't mean that they have made any particular judgement; just that there is a case to answer.

So the state does have an obligation to investigate all complaints, but has no obligation to prosecute all complaints.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

And again as others seem to be failing to acknowledge yes the prisoner maintains he was beaten but considering he was out of his head on drink and drugs, as he admitted himself he couls easily have mistaken being arrested and handcuffed for being assualted particularly if he was being resistant and they had to use force to restrain him.

True. A jury may decide that he got his injuries legitimately during the arrest. They would likely reject the 'assault causing harm' charge. They may decide that he was mishandled after the injuries were caused and could convict on the simple assault charge. I'd imagine that the medical evidence, if there is any, would be crucial here.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I've seen people drunk and drugged as a First Aider and they can be very violent and agressive. i have seen a situation where it took up to five male first aiders using considerable strength and force to restrain a man under the influence (for his own safety btw) with several more Gardai on hand in case he got worse.

It will be interesting to hear what, if any, explanation the gardai give. It could range between them not having any knowledge of how the injuries were received, to them being received while he was being pulled through the window of the car, or maybe that the joyrider resisted arrest and they were as a result of reasonable force being applied to make the arrest.
But we don't have that information yet.

jackiebaron · 11-10-2010 12:02PM

Funkfield wrote: »

In all fairness, we are not talking about someone pi$$ing down a back alley.

So you're saying that it's up to the policeman's discretion who he simply arrests and/or issues a ticket to in accordance with proper procedure and who he beats the sh!t out of before he arrests and/or issues a tickets to in accordance with proper procedure.

senordingdong · 11-10-2010 12:08PM

dvpower wrote: »

Is it politically correct to advocate applying the rule of law now? If anyone would like to suggest a change in the law, I'm all ears.

I would think so.
I feel the whole system of prosecution needs a complete overhaul.

jackiebaron · 11-10-2010 12:14PM

Rented Mule wrote: »

Drunk, drugged up, stole a car, reckless driving, high speed chase, with 10 gardai in also in chase ?

They never would have found his body if I was one of the guards.

Case closed.

And that's exactly why you are not one of those guards. It would have come out in the test that you are a power-hungry yob who would quite easily take the law into your own hands and murder suspects rather than doing the job you were paid to do.

darced · 11-10-2010 12:14PM

This post has been deleted.

dvpower · 11-10-2010 12:25PM

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If there is, perhaps he could use his damages to pay compensation to the person he took the car keys from, to pay for the car he wrecked, to pay for the garda and state time and to pay compensation to the state.
He certainly shouldn't walk away with a pocketfull of cash.

thebullkf · 11-10-2010 12:30PM

=senordingdong;68443045]How do you know they didn't use the allowable level of force?
They could very well have used the allowable level of force, but still have to deal with all this grief and hassle.

Oh I beg your pardon, I mis-interpreted your reply.

It seemed to me that you're not bothered because you're advocating the politically correct methods that aren't seeing any note worthy results.

our prisons are full...if that ain't results i don't know what is.

we need to focus on prevention...not prosecution..

ArmaniJeanss · 11-10-2010 12:32PM

dvpower wrote: »

If there is, perhaps he could use his damages to pay compensation to the person he took the car keys from, to pay for the car he wrecked, to pay for the garda and state time and to pay compensation to the state.
He certainly shouldn't walk away with a pocketfull of cash.

I don't know whether its legally possible, but it would be nice to think that the insurance company of the robbed car would already have a claim in against the Maughan guy on the off-chance that he gets a windfall from the state in respect of the 'assault'.

archer22 · 11-10-2010 12:44PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

And that's exactly why you are not one of those guards. It would have come out in the test that you are a power-hungry yob who would quite easily take the law into your own hands and murder suspects rather than doing the job you were paid to do.

It looks like there are a lot of them getting throught the "test" given the amount of them that are up before the courts for just about every crime ranging from paedophilia to armed robbery and everything in between.Even slapping girls in taxis for not knowing who they are.

Scumbag sues Garda

Comments