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

Can someone explain this to me RE: Taxi fare dodge case

24

Comments

  • #32
    Motorist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Motorist


    xxxJennyxxx wrote: »
    omg I went to school with him!! :eek:

    Literally from 1st year - 6th year, he was always quite opinionated, but was never a troublemaker. Don't believe it! Had to see the picture of believe!

    From the comments I saw he put up on youtube a few weeks ago when this was heating up, he seemed like a pretty decent guy who was just panicking that so many people were sending him abuse.


  • #33
    LighterGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    I'm a bit slow :o

    So let me get this straight, this Eoin McKeogh was not the guy in that famous taxi fare dodging video that was posted on here?

    but he was accused of being?


  • #34
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    Think_then_talk wrote: »
    I now understand why it was removed from this site before it got out of hand.:).
    All the mods have humongous balls, but in reality, it's more to do with having seen this kind of thing before.

    Though this was an extreme example.
    xxxJennyxxx wrote: »
    omg I went to school with him!! :eek:

    Literally from 1st year - 6th year, he was always quite opinionated, but was never a troublemaker. Don't believe it! Had to see the picture of believe!
    Which of them? :)


  • #35
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    LighterGuy wrote: »
    I'm a bit slow :o

    So let me get this straight, this Eoin McKeogh was not the guy in that famous taxi fare dodging video that was posted on here?

    but he was accused of being?
    No, he wasn't, and yes, he was.

    And you see that's part of the problem ... even though the guy is innocent, it's his name that will end up associated with it. And will pop up on Google searches when he goes for a job in the future (and yes, that's becoming very common). And while if someone says "who was that guy again?", no-one will remember in 3 months, if someone mentions his name even disassociated from the event, lots of people will still go "who? ... name is familiar! ... oh, yeah, he was the guy who dodged ..." because they won't remember clearly how it turned out.


  • #36
    LighterGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    randylonghorn wrote: »
    No, he wasn't, and yes, he was.

    And you see that's part of the problem ... even though the guy is innocent, it's his name that will end up associated with it. And will pop up on Google searches when he goes for a job in the future (and yes, that's becoming very common). And while if someone says "who was that guy again?", no-one will remember in 3 months, if someone mentions his name even disassociated from the event, lots of people will still go "who? ... name is familiar! ... oh, yeah, he was the guy who dodged ..." because they won't remember clearly how it turned out.


    Thats messed up alright.
    From reading the RTE news bit. He was better of just letting it go.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Chucky the tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,320 ✭✭✭✭Chucky the tree


    randylonghorn wrote: »
    No, he wasn't, and yes, he was.

    And you see that's part of the problem ... even though the guy is innocent, it's his name that will end up associated with it. And will pop up on Google searches when he goes for a job in the future (and yes, that's becoming very common). And while if someone says "who was that guy again?", no-one will remember in 3 months, if someone mentions his name even disassociated from the event, lots of people will still go "who? ... name is familiar! ... oh, yeah, he was the guy who dodged ..." because they won't remember clearly how it turned out.


    But now if you google his name you'll be given links that tell us it wasn't him. If he simply did nothing and you googled his name you'd be left thinking he was guilty.


  • #38
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    LighterGuy wrote: »
    Thats messed up alright.
    From reading the RTE news bit. He was better of just letting it go.
    Chucky the tree wrote: »
    But now if you google his name you'll be given links that tell us it wasn't him. If he simply did nothing and you googled his name you'd be left thinking he was guilty.
    As I said on one of the many other threads on this last night, he'd have been better (and a lot less light in the pocket) getting himself invited on the Late Late and making a laugh of the whole thing. 'Twould still have gotten reported in the press and on websites and thrown up the same links ... in fact, links to clearer, more sympathetic reporting.


  • #39
    Chucky the tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,320 ✭✭✭✭Chucky the tree


    randylonghorn wrote: »
    As I said on one of the many other threads on this last night, he'd have been better (and a lot less light in the pocket) getting himself invited on the Late Late and making a laugh of the whole thing. 'Twould still have gotten reported in the press and on websites and thrown up the same links ... in fact, links to clearer, more sympathetic reporting.



    How does he go about getting himself invited on the late late? :confused:


  • #40
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    Chucky the tree wrote: »
    How does he go about getting himself invited on the late late? :confused:
    In this case, I reckon it would have taken one phone call to one of the researchers!

    Suits them perfectly: "young lad wrongly accused, my personal story: with poignant reflections on the dangers of the internet and the evils of Irish society".

    Wouldn't have to be the LLS for that matter, I just think this one would have suited them very well.


  • #41
    LighterGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    Something I am not sure on... the timeline of things.

    So:
    - Video makes the rounds on the net.
    - someone accuses this Eoin McKeogh of being the fare dodger.
    - people give him abuse on his facebook.
    - papers name him as the guy.
    ... now he lost the case against the 6 newspapers.

    Order right?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    JJayoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Well the lawyer got paid and thats the important thing.


  • #43
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    Near enough ...
    LighterGuy wrote: »
    - Video makes the rounds on the net.
    - someone accuses this Eoin McKeogh of being the fare dodger. It takes wings and snowballs across the net
    - people give him abuse on his facebook.
    - he gets temp injunction against Fb / youtube etc. to get it taken down
    - papers report the case, mentioning his name
    - he attempts to get an injunction against the 6 newspapers, and fails.

    (I think)


  • #44
    Motorist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Motorist


    LighterGuy wrote: »
    Something I am not sure on... the timeline of things.

    So:
    - Video makes the rounds on the net.
    - someone accuses this Eoin McKeogh of being the fare dodger.
    - people give him abuse on his facebook.
    - papers name him as the guy.
    ... now he lost the case against the 6 newspapers.

    Order right?

    - Video makes the rounds on the net.
    - boards and other forums keep closing it down.
    - it gets off to a few false starts.
    - over the Christmas period when people have too much time on there hands, it really takes off
    - someone accuses this Eoin McKeogh of being the fare dodger on youtube
    - he comes on youtube pleading his case but people are sceptical
    - people give him abuseon facebook
    - it dies down as people go back to work. Everyone forgets about it
    - he goes to high court for injunction against facebook and youtube
    - this puts him back into the spot light as all newspapers report this
    ... now he lost the case against the 6 newspapers and is facing a probable six figure legal bill


  • #45
    LighterGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,243 ✭✭✭LighterGuy


    Motorist wrote: »
    - Video makes the rounds on the net.
    - boards and other forums keep closing it down.
    - it gets off to a few false starts.
    - over the Christmas period when people have too much time on there hands, it really takes off
    - someone accuses this Eoin McKeogh of being the fare dodger on youtube
    - he comes on youtube pleading his case but people are sceptical
    - people give him abuseon facebook
    - it dies down as people go back to work. Everyone forgets about it
    - he goes to high court for injunction against facebook and youtube
    - this puts him back into the spot light as all newspapers report this
    ... now he lost the case against the 6 newspapers and is facing a probable six figure legal bill


    This sounds spot on from other stuff I read.
    If so ... the feckin' fool.

    Sounds like he wanted money out of it. It was stupid to go to the high court trying to stop facebook and youtube. But it was clearly all "gimme money, money, money" with the case against the papers.

    I know people have sued for less and won. But I cant help but feel the whole ryan giggs thing was playing through his mind :pac:


  • #46
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Motorist wrote: »
    - boards and other forums keep closing it down.

    It ran on boards for ages. Don't think they shut it down until the court case came up and then I presume there was some manner or request for threads naming him to be removed.
    LighterGuy wrote: »
    But it was clearly all "gimme money, money, money" with the case against the papers.

    I dunno. Stopping them publishing his name seems to be what he's tried to do.

    Is he suing them? I hadn't heard anything about him looking for damages from the papers. I actually don't think it's about money at all.


  • #47
    Salt001
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 215 ✭✭Salt001


    Didnt the judge say that the cost of the case would be enough to buy a house.Now even though thats not as eye watering as it used to be its still a heafty chunk of change.
    To me i think he just made things worse for himself.


  • #48
    Motorist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Motorist


    AnonoBoy wrote: »

    Is he suing them? I hadn't heard anything about him looking for damages from the papers. I actually don't think it's about money at all.



    I presume the original intention was to take a defamation action against whoever he felt misidentified him as the fare dodger. I wonder if there is any money left in the kitty though to take an action after the last extremely ill-advised trip to the High Court.

    Getting an injunction for material posted on the internet is absolutely hopeless. If you want to see a really grim/horrific side of what can happen search the Nikki Catsouras case.

    http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5276841&page=1#.Tx9Em289V40


  • #49
    Think_then_talk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 245 ✭✭Think_then_talk


    I don't think it was about money, It was about clearing his name as for the cost I personally think that the person who said it was him in the first place should be made pay in someway the one that saw it on yt & then put it on his fb page.
    But that will never happen.
    As for the lad in the video.. It's now claimed he paid the money back...
    So what he committed a crime in the first place ..
    Think of all the garda time he wasted for one.


  • #50
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Motorist wrote: »
    I presume the original intention was to take a defamation action against whoever he felt misidentified him as the fare dodger.

    No I think you're wrong with that one. The original intention was to get the video taken down which worked. Then when the papers reported on that court proceeding he tried to get an injunction out against his name being used in the reports. I never heard any mention of suing for defamation (although that may come down the line if he wants to track down the original person who named him but that could prove extremely costly)


  • #51
    EL_Loco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 901 ✭✭✭EL_Loco


    c'mon, has the internet not coughed up a Shaggy "it wasn't me" mashup with this fella?


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    barbiegirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,846 ✭✭✭barbiegirl


    When you go for a job you are Googled to see what information there is about you. At it stood before he took legal action the top result would probably have been that video and his name associated with it.
    By taking the route he has, he has ensured maximum publicity, thereby ensuring that the same Google search should return the reports of his innocence.
    He is working simple Search Engine Optimisation. The more popular a search is, and the more hits a page has the higher it will rank. He understands this and that the only way was to go big to counteract the original video and assocated articles.


  • #53
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    barbiegirl wrote: »
    He is working simple Search Engine Optimisation. The more popular a search is, and the more hits a page has the higher it will rank. He understands this and that the only way was to go big to counteract the original video and assocated articles.

    Unfortunately for him "Oh it wasn't him after all" is far less popular and less likely to go viral than "Taxi fare dodger seeks injunction to hide his name."

    I feel sorry for the guy.


  • #54
    barbiegirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,846 ✭✭✭barbiegirl


    Yep but he did his best. Such a pity he had to at all but unfortunately he had to make the most noise he possibly could. The total cost when laid against the possible lost wages for the next 40 years aren't too bad.
    Try Googling your own name. I know when I do mine, which is very individual, lots of things come up, right from 10 years ago when I was bridesmaid for my sister. You have no control over taking it down, but thankfully the first and second page are now work related. I know how to lock down my social media :D


  • #55
    AnonoBoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    barbiegirl wrote: »
    Yep but he did his best. Such a pity he had to at all but unfortunately he had to make the most noise he possibly could. The total cost when laid against the possible lost wages for the next 40 years aren't too bad.
    Try Googling your own name. I know when I do mine, which is very individual, lots of things come up, right from 10 years ago when I was bridesmaid for my sister. You have no control over taking it down, but thankfully the first and second page are now work related. I know how to lock down my social media :D

    I googled my own name there. All I got were my posts on John Review sites - could this damage my career do you think?


  • #56
    barbiegirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,846 ✭✭✭barbiegirl


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    I googled my own name there. All I got were my posts on John Review sites - could this damage my career do you think?

    You tell me :D I don't know what you wrote. I bet you wouldn't want it to have brought up a picture of you dancing like a loon at the weekend :D or being accused falsely of a crime. Always be careful of what you post and where you post it.


  • #57
    Orando Broom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,351 ✭✭✭Orando Broom


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    Unfortunately for him "Oh it wasn't him after all" is far less popular and less likely to go viral than "Taxi fare dodger seeks injunction to hide his name."

    I feel sorry for the guy.

    I do to but I think some things are better left alone. The nature of the viral phenomenon on the internet is that the oxygen of publicity fuels it.

    It is clear the solicitor had no insight into how the concept of viral works.

    I'd wager she was never on a message board in her life.

    There is a niche market appearing for solicitors here that are au fait with the idiosyncracies' of the internet.

    That chap would have been better getting some creative friends to help him make a funny, clever video response and laugh it off; attempt to piggy back on the virulence of the accusation to make his innocence go viral.


  • #58
    barbiegirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,846 ✭✭✭barbiegirl


    It doesn't matter what you remember it's what the internet remembers. Louis Walsh is in the papers every other day so there is lots of information on him, still that story is on the first page. Possible today cause the guy is due to sentencing. Eoin isn't, less data available for the search engine.
    Why should he have to change his name, when he did nothing wrong.
    Remember as a 21/22 year old he understands the power of the net. I can't comment on his legal advise as I wasn't in any of these meetings and don't know what instructions he gave his solicitor. It was expensive, but for someone starting out it may have been worth it.


  • #59
    Stiffler2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,536 ✭✭✭Stiffler2


    Can you hear that ??















    It's the sound of no one caring !


  • #60
    connundrum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,563 ✭✭✭connundrum


    I, for one, feel better informed now.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    lemme
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭lemme


    Bumped, for the sake of Eoin McKeogh.


Advertisement
Advertisement