Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Five Gardai will not be charged in shell to sea tape

123457»

Comments

  • #182
    steve9859
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭steve9859


    Macha wrote: »
    Sorry but as disgusting as that woman's comments were, they has absolutely nothing to do with this case.

    you mean aside from proving that they are just crusties out for any excuse to get the Gardai? It has everything to do with it!!


  • #183
    the bolt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 485 ✭✭the bolt


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    Actually I am not. I am no fan of the Gardai. But when I see the situation with this STS crowd it makes my blood boil. i see you have chosen not to comment on the remark about the young Garda in Donegal. I'm all for peaceful protests.
    but I am 100% against the tactics deployed in this instance.

    It is inexcusable, with no justification whatsoever. I saw a similar protest elsewhere in the country about another issue at close hand. Thuggery and rent-a-mob didn't even cover it.
    who is the rent a mob,the gardai?what has the donegal case got to do with the shell to sea case?


  • #184
    The Waltzing Consumer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,948 ✭✭✭The Waltzing Consumer


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    It doesn't really. NUI Maynooth (I think it was Maynooth) claimed they deleted footage that had nothing to do with the Gardai investigation. Whether that's true or not, we don't know yet. They claim to have offered to show the ombudsman exactly what they were deleting, but the ombudsman refused. The facts aren't quite facts yet.



    If I'd been caught making a joke about raping a customer when I was in retail, I'd've been immediately fired. No disciplinary hearing, no nothing: out the door, here's your p45, don't call us for a reference. I might've been annoyed at getting caught, but I wouldn't really be angry except at my own stupidity. And this is working behind a counter, I'm not someone who's supposed to be looking after the welfare of people and upholding the law. I'm not saying the Gardai deserve to be fired, but they definitely need to be told to cop the f*ck on. This applies even if all the 'context' that people are implying is actually the case (and it very well might be the case).

    Perhaps people will now think twice before jumping on the Garda-bashing bandwagon at any oppertunity.

    The same could be said about certain people immediately jumping in to applaud the Gardai regardless of what they have or haven't done.[/QUOTE]

    They offered to show the ombudsman what they were deleting but the ombudsman refused? That is absolute nonsense. They handed the tape over AFTER the deletion. They did not say "we have a tape, we are gonna delete some stuff, wanna have a look at if first before we do it?" Absolute lies.

    As for your job example. If a customer came up to you and started accusing you of raping them in the shop, even though you are clearly just standing there, well first that is horrible, and second, if you made a joke in the backroom about the absolute bizarre behaviour of that customer and this "rape", I would doubt you would be fired, rather commended for your restraint.

    The protesters accused the Gardai of rape when they were clearly shown on video being as gentle as bloody possible bringing these women off a tractor. Now, you tell me, how do you get from that to accusing them of rape?

    These protesters have lied, withheld information, manipulated rape for their own publicity, sought for severe punishment of these gardai, and for what?

    Because the gardai had to gently (it is all on video) escort them of a tractor they had illegally protested on and then have accusations of rape thrown at them. So they told a few stupid jokes to cope in private in the context of what had just happened.


  • #185
    7sr2z3fely84g5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,571 ✭✭✭7sr2z3fely84g5


    Nice to see none of this news mentioned on the official site..


  • #186
    lastlaugh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,382 ✭✭✭lastlaugh


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    If I'd been caught making a joke about raping a customer when I was in retail, I'd've been immediately fired. No disciplinary hearing, no nothing: out the door, here's your p45, don't call us for a reference. I might've been annoyed at getting caught, but I wouldn't really be angry except at my own stupidity. And this is working behind a counter, I'm not someone who's supposed to be looking after the welfare of people and upholding the law. I'm not saying the Gardai deserve to be fired, but they definitely need to be told to cop the f*ck on. This applies even if all the 'context' that people are implying is actually the case (and it very well might be the case).

    I don't think it's a valid comparison at all, Guards arresting trouble making crusties, and you dealing with a customer, 'in retail'.

    What kind of sh!t did you have to put up with, when you were, 'in retail'?


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »
    They offered to show the ombudsman what they were deleting but the ombudsman refused? That is absolute nonsense. They handed the tape over AFTER the deletion. They did not say "we have a tape, we are gonna delete some stuff, wanna have a look at if first before we do it?" Absolute lies.

    Maybe it will prove to be b*ll****, but the reports at the moment are stating that there are different claims by different people involved. So, until they're proven either way, you can't say that they're definitely b*ll****. Unless it's an opinion, which is fair enough.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0728/breaking63.html
    The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »
    As for your job example. If a customer came up to you and started accusing you of raping them in the shop, even though you are clearly just standing there, well first that is horrible, and second, if you made a joke in the backroom about the absolute bizarre behaviour of that customer and this "rape", I would doubt you would be fired, rather commended for your restraint.

    Oh, you misunderstood me. If, in the staff area, I merely commented on the bizarre behaviour of the customer and the 'rape', that would've indeed not been a case for dismissal. If, however, I had joked about raping the customer instead, yeah, I would definitely have been fired. A guy was let go for less (mildly threatening behaviour mentioned casually afterwards whilst being overheard by the manager, after a person was violent and a bit crazy with him)
    The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »
    The protesters accused the Gardai of rape when they were clearly shown on video being as gentle as bloody possible bringing these women off a tractor. Now, you tell me, how do you get from that to accusing them of rape?

    I have no idea. Maybe the tape was doctored. Or maybe the gardai whilst "clearly shown on video" being gentle acted differently when they were alone and thought they were no longer being recorded?
    lastlaugh wrote: »
    I don't think it's a valid comparison at all, Guards arresting trouble making crusties, and you dealing with a customer, 'in retail'.

    What kind of sh!t did you have to put up with, when you were, 'in retail'?

    I really was in retail. I'm not sure why you're using quotation marks. The level of sh*t I had to put up with (which would in no way compare with the level of sh*t a gard - or nurse, or social worker - would put with) doesn't take away from the comparison. It's the end result: I'd've been fired had I done something similar. That they're a gard (with all the relevant training to deal with problem people and the like) meant to uphold the law, means that they should at least be prepared to accept the same punishment as I would have had to accept. Their training and salary should compensate themselves not to be unprofessional until, at the very least, they've clocked off for the day.

    And, once again, I'm not saying that I think they should be fired. Disciplined in some way.


  • #188
    Paparazzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,395 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    It doesn't really. NUI Maynooth (I think it was Maynooth) claimed they deleted footage that had nothing to do with the Gardai investigation. Whether that's true or not, we don't know yet. They claim to have offered to show the ombudsman exactly what they were deleting, but the ombudsman refused. The facts aren't quite facts yet.



    If I'd been caught making a joke about raping a customer when I was in retail, I'd've been immediately fired. No disciplinary hearing, no nothing: out the door, here's your p45, don't call us for a reference. I might've been annoyed at getting caught, but I wouldn't really be angry except at my own stupidity. And this is working behind a counter, I'm not someone who's supposed to be looking after the welfare of people and upholding the law. I'm not saying the Gardai deserve to be fired, but they definitely need to be told to cop the f*ck on. This applies even if all the 'context' that people are implying is actually the case (and it very well might be the case).

    Perhaps people will now think twice before jumping on the Garda-bashing bandwagon at any oppertunity.

    The same could be said about certain people immediately jumping in to applaud the Gardai regardless of what they have or haven't done.[/QUOTE]
    Lucky all employers aren't as stupid as yours.

    Boss: you're fired. I heard you talk about rape
    You: But I can explain...
    Boss: no. There can be no possible explanations. Get your stuff and get out.
    You: But.....
    Boss: OUT! I said no explanation. And don't bother looking for a reference.

    Yeah right. I call bullshìt.


  • #189
    lastlaugh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,382 ✭✭✭lastlaugh


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    I really was in retail. I'm not sure why you're using quotation marks. The level of sh*t I had to put up with (which would in no way compare with the level of sh*t a gard - or nurse, or social worker - would put with) doesn't take away from the comparison. It's the end result: I'd've been fired had I done something similar. That they're a gard (with all the relevant training to deal with problem people and the like) meant to uphold the law, means that they should at least be prepared to accept the same punishment as I would have had to accept. Their training and salary should compensate themselves not to be unprofessional until, at the very least, they've clocked off for the day.

    And, once again, I'm not saying that I think they should be fired. Disciplined in some way.

    I was using quotation marks in an attempt to be sarcastic, apologies.
    The bottom line for me is that they were having a private joke between themselves, which in context, I think was witty.
    I'm sure there are people reading this who will quickly leap onto the moral high horse and condemn me for finding it funny, Hey-Ho.
    I think people need to recognise that Guards are ordinary people who have recieved training, that training doesn't remove their sense of humour. At least I hope it doesn't.
    It's all blown out of proportion.


  • #190
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,305 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    I posted at length in the original thread saying there's more to this than Shell to Sea are saying.

    The whole thing is a cesspit, don't believe what the Guards say or Shell to Sea, simple as that. We've got both sides of the story now and it is a long way from theGardai in threatening to rape woman headline initially reported.

    Still doesn't make what they said okay, but it's far from the initial "facts".

    A week at the Rape Crisis Centre would do these Gardai good.

    A week beside Gardai patrol in Limerick or Dublin city centres or many a town centre would do the women good. They'll encounter a real rape victim and know not to make light of it.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #191
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,097 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    I'll re-stipulate my major point, the recording was illegal and thus not admissible in evidence. Case gone straight away. Simples.

    The reason GSOC didn't want to see the tape is that, because there was stuff deleted in the first place (even if they could show what was deleted), it would still be probable to think that footage relating to the incident was deleted (not just what they say was deleted). That is reasonable doubt, and as such the evidence in now inadmissible.
    My name is URL wrote: »
    No, the pig ignorant and dumb Garda neglected to even check if the thing was on. That alone speaks volumes. Jesus christ, they didn't even look at what recordings were on the yoke.

    They have no right to go through the camera without a warrant. If they did, there would have been a different legal case against them.
    Ray Shallow Underpants wrote: »
    i don't think our law recognises women can commit rape or certain sex offences,can anyone clarify that?.

    Rape, under the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981 specifically said a sexual assault on a female. This was changed under the Criminal Law (Rape Ammendment) Act 1990. All penetration rape is now covered under Section 4 of this Act:

    4.—(1) In this Act “rape under section 4 ” means a sexual assault that includes—

    (a) penetration (however slight) of the anus or mouth by the penis, or

    (b) penetration (however slight) of the vagina by any object held or manipulated by another person.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Paparazzo wrote: »
    Boss: you're fired. I heard you talk about rape
    You: But I can explain...
    Boss: no. There can be no possible explanations. Get your stuff and get out.
    You: But.....
    Boss: OUT! I said no explanation. And don't bother looking for a reference.

    Yeah right. I call bullshìt.

    You can call bull**** all you want, but the people would be out on their arses. You would get a meeting with the manager and assistant manager explaining why you're getting the sack. I'm sure you could bring it to a higher authority, but good luck with that.
    lastlaugh wrote: »
    I was using quotation marks in an attempt to be sarcastic, apologies.

    But being sarcastic about what? I'm genuinely confused here.
    lastlaugh wrote: »
    The bottom line for me is that they were having a private joke between themselves, which in context, I think was witty.
    I'm sure there are people reading this who will quickly leap onto the moral high horse and condemn me for finding it funny, Hey-Ho.
    I think people need to recognise that Guards are ordinary people who have recieved training, that training doesn't remove their sense of humour. At least I hope it doesn't.
    It's all blown out of proportion.

    I'd disagree about the wittiness of the joke, context or not, but if it does come to pass that there is more that just implied context, then yeah, I'd agree it's been taken out of context. Although, if I recall reading earlier in this thread, the gardai in question apologised already (not sure if that's true), which would mean that they accept that they were wrong/that it wasn't really funny.

    I think K-9 has the right idea: both groups need to experience how the other side lives and then go on from there.


  • #193
    HarryPotter41
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,402 ✭✭✭HarryPotter41


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    You can call bull**** all you want, but the people would be out on their arses. You would get a meeting with the manager and assistant manager explaining why you're getting the sack. I'm sure you could bring it to a higher authority, but good luck with that.



    But being sarcastic about what? I'm genuinely confused here.



    I'd disagree about the wittiness of the joke, context or not, but if it does come to pass that there is more that just implied context, then yeah, I'd agree it's been taken out of context. Although, if I recall reading earlier in this thread, the gardai in question apologised already (not sure if that's true), which would mean that they accept that they were wrong/that it wasn't really funny.

    I think K-9 has the right idea: both groups need to experience how the other side lives and then go on from there.

    You would then take an unfair dismissal case because they would find it hard to justify a straight dismissal without any previous verbal or written warnings about your behaviour.


  • #194
    Paparazzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,395 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    You can call bull**** all you want, but the people would be out on their arses. You would get a meeting with the manager and assistant manager explaining why you're getting the sack. I'm sure you could bring it to a higher authority, but good luck with that

    Your management would ignore all context? Like your customer is mad and shouts "rape" in front of all other customers and workmates when you go near her?
    If your boss sacks you cos of that he's an idiot


  • #195
    source
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,375 ✭✭✭source


    Toby Take a Bow wrote:
    Oh, you misunderstood me. If, in the staff area, I merely commented on the bizarre behaviour of the customer and the 'rape', that would've indeed not been a case for dismissal.

    Can you not see that this is exactly what happened in this case????

    Woman being led off tractor...."Rape"

    Other woman, "I'm not going with them they'll rape me"

    Garda in car, away from both women, with friends and colleagues...."hahaha Get down off the tractor or i'll rape ya hahaha"

    Garda is making light of the crazy comments being made against him earlier. Nothing more sinister, as some here would want you to believe. I love how some posters when confronted with the truth still want to believe the lie.
    Toby Take a Bow wrote:
    Although, if I recall reading earlier in this thread, the gardai in question apologised already (not sure if that's true), which would mean that they accept that they were wrong/that it wasn't really funny.

    No it doesn't mean that they accept that they were wrong, it means that they were pressured into making a public apology by people who made public a fraudulent video tape. They also were pressured into making an apology by the citizens of this nation who seem to think that when Gardai are involved there should be no presumption of innocence.


  • #196
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    The problem with this, or any case involving Gardai, is that people are blinding by irrational hatred of them and stubbornly refuse to let go of their prejudices no matter what.

    When Gardai are in the dock, so to speak, it becomes a case of either 'guitly until proven innocent' or 'guilty regardless of verdict'.

    And the very same people, like S2S, who treat them with such scorn and hatred expect the Gardai to treat them like royalty.

    The tape was tampered with, the joke was very obviously a joke, Shell2Sea are making a mockery of rape. The Gardai have done nothing wrong so lets get off the moral high horses and see this for what it is.


  • #197
    Toby Take a Bow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,732 ✭✭✭Toby Take a Bow


    Paparazzo wrote: »
    Your management would ignore all context? Like your customer is mad and shouts "rape" in front of all other customers and workmates when you go near her?
    If your boss sacks you cos of that he's an idiot

    Maybe. In an incident (similar, but not the same) a guy was fired. He was told by legal counsel that he didn't really have a leg to stand on. However, as it wasn't me, I would have to take his word on it (and assume he's telling the truth that he never received any previous warnings for anything which may have happened before).


  • #198
    HarryPotter41
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,402 ✭✭✭HarryPotter41


    Toby Take a Bow wrote: »
    Maybe. In an incident (similar, but not the same) a guy was fired. He was told by legal counsel that he didn't really have a leg to stand on. However, as it wasn't me, I would have to take his word on it (and assume he's telling the truth that he never received any previous warnings for anything which may have happened before).


    Under law each employer must have a clear and understood disciplinary process. Gross misconduct is the only grounds for firing someone with no previous warnings and it would be very hard to justify a private conversation as gross misconduct. I suggest your friend was doing what we all do in difficult circumstances, tell the story in a way which makes us look better.


Advertisement
Advertisement