nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Gardaí criticised over Ian Bailey investigation

hullaballoo

Well, more than just criticised. Story in the Independent here: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/how-dpp-demolished-garda-case-on-bailey-3037829.html

Independent wrote:

By Ralph Riegel and Dearbhail McDonald
Friday March 02 2012
THE Director of Public Prosecutions demolished the garda case against Ian Bailey, the self-confessed suspect for the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.

The full details of a damning critique by officials in the DPP's office of the gardai's investigation into her death are disclosed for the first time today. This follows yesterday's unanimous Supreme Court decision that Mr Bailey should not be extradited to France to be questioned as part of a murder investigation.

The review -- completed in 2001 -- found:

- No evidence linking him to the crime, including a chronic lack of forensic evidence against the Englishman.

- Serious concerns over garda practices, including an overdependence on unreliable witnesses.

- A garda fixation with aspects of Mr Bailey's personal life -- and with a possible sexual motive to the murder.

- Gardai ignored instructions not to arrest Mr Bailey's partner Jules Thomas on suspicion of aiding and abetting the murder.

The DPP repeatedly refused to prosecute Mr Bailey, detailing in the 2001 report the "unsafe practices" that some gardai engaged in during the high-profile murder inquiry. These included claims that at least one garda offered cash, clothes and drugs to a vulnerable drug abuser in exchange for information about Mr Bailey.

The approach of some of the gardai seems to have been intended to elicit a particular response from witnesses, according to the report.

Ms Thomas' original arrest and questioning on suspicion of the murder was deemed unlawful by the country's top prosecutor.

The new material included claims that senior gardai tried to put political pressure on the DPP's office to prosecute -- despite the fact that the evidence did not support a prosecution. These claims were described as "dramatic and shocking" by the Supreme Court yesterday.

Pressure

And Supreme Court judge Adrian Hardiman said it was open to the new DPP Claire Loftus to decide what criminal charges, if any, should be brought against the unnamed gardai who tried to apply political pressure on the DPP to bring about a murder prosecution.

Ian Bailey (54) said he was relieved by the Supreme Court ruling -- but described the last 15 years as "hell".

He accused the gardai of going door-to-door during the investigation saying to people: "Be in absolutely no doubt, he did it."

"This put fear in a lot of people's hearts and a lot of people chose to believe it," he said.

He described the last 15 years of his life as an "absolutely unbelievable period" for him and his partner Jules Thomas.

He told TV3 he was still coming to terms with yesterday's Supreme Court judgment which he described as a "great relief".

He said the attempt by the French authorities to extradite him to France was "a very frightening experience".

The Supreme Court ruling will not halt the ongoing French investigation into the death of Sophie Toscan du Plantier (39) -- and Mr Bailey now faces the prospect of a possible trial in absentia.

The French European Arrest Warrant (EAW) remains valid and in operation -- and Mr Bailey faces the prospect of a renewed extradition bid if he travels to another jurisdiction.

Sophie's family last night admitted they were "shocked and frustrated" by the Supreme Court decision.

"Time is our enemy now because of the age of Sophie's parents and their long wait for justice," family solicitor Alain Spilliaert said. Sophie's parents, Georges (87) and Marguerite Bouniol (85), were informed of the Irish legal ruling at their Paris home -- and were said to be "very upset" by the setback.

The landmark legal ruling has now cleared the way for three major actions to proceed -- a High Court lawsuit against the State by both Mr Bailey and his partner, Jules Thomas; a probe into alleged garda misbehaviour by the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) and a possible public inquiry into the dramatic revelations during the extradition hearing.

The five judges, led by Chief Justice Mrs Justice Susan Denham, unanimously overturned an earlier High Court decision and ruled Mr Bailey should not be surrendered to France.

The court ruled that no decision to put Mr Bailey on trial had been taken by the French authorities. Such a decision is required under Irish law to allow someone to be extradited.

Mr Bailey was awarded the costs of the High Court and Supreme Court hearings.

Speaking to TV3 last night he detailed his first arrest on the night of December 13, 1996 after Sophie's body was found.

He said he was placed in a room and repeatedly told "you killed her, you did it" without ever being given an explanation as to why he was a suspect. "I had 12 hours of total accusation and 'you killed her, you did it, you did it, you did it'. This was repeated to me time and time again and there was no attempt to actually investigate as far as I could see," he said.

Apologies for the wall of text, I'll fix it later from a PC. [Fixed.]

I think this is pretty shocking but not very surprising. I imagine more details will come out in the near future.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

the bolt

Rawhead wrote: »

They tried to take the pension or gratuity off some Guards years ago. The Guards won the case on the basis that it was their money and they had already paid the money.
It would be no different in a private sector job I believe. If you had paid into a private pension scheme and then got sacked you would still be entitled to anything you saved. You cannot be stripped retrospectively of something you have earned.
I don't think it would be fair to start that precedent for any employee.

would agree except thats its tax payers that will end up footing the bill.

john reilly

pirelli wrote: »

I read in the media that Ian Bailey burnt clothes in his back garden the day after the murder, is this more Garda propaganda.

if you read it in the media, then no doubt its true!!

berrypendel

john reilly wrote: »

who said ian bailey was a hero. this isnt about him. its about hoe corrupt and incompetent the gardai are. as to his guilt if he is guilty then this makes the gardai even more incompetent

..they must be really dopey, i.e they would have had evidence

steddyeddy

pirelli wrote: »

I read in the media that Ian Bailey burnt clothes in his back garden the day after the murder, is this more Garda propaganda.

The point here is who knows if he is guilty the gaurds incompetence endangered a guitly verdict. As for the garda propganda again who knows I wouldnt trust the garda in question.

berrypendel

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Can we please remember and accept that just because the case was shoddy does not mean he is innocent.

it also does not mean he is guilty

I can't imagine that the Gardai would have gone as far as they did trying to prove him guilty if they didn't, in some way, really believe that he was.

i can easily imagine such a scenario, they had to get someone. And just because they really believed he was guilty does not mean he was. Ever hear of Dean Lyons

Nor does this case reflect on An Garda Siochana as a whole, however much you might like it to.

yes it does. Any organisation that can behave like that is a disgrace

This whole affair may not be, and likely is not, as simple as Ian Bailey = Good, Gardai= Bad.

nor is it necessarily Bailey =bad, garda = good

pirelli

john reilly wrote: »

who said ian bailey was a hero. this isnt about him. its about hoe corrupt and incompetent the gardai are. as to his guilt if he is guilty then this makes the gardai even more incompetent

I read in the media that Ian Bailey burnt clothes in his back garden the day after the murder, is this more Garda propaganda.

john reilly

Rhys Essien wrote: »

Imagine if the guards(a guard) themselves were involved in her murder and needed to frame some poor old innocent fast.

Good looking woman living on her own in remote area dishes someones advances,who are after getting fond of her.

Now that would be mad.

and I thought the gardai had a vivid imagination

john reilly

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don't think anyone would deny this whole thing was a monumental cock-up.

But lets not reduce ourselves to the level of childish, mindless Garda bashing and holding Ian Bailey up as a hero.

Can we please remember and accept that just because the case was shoddy does not mean he is innocent. I can't imagine that the Gardai would have gone as far as they did trying to prove him guilty if they didn't, in some way, really believe that he was.

Nor does this case reflect on An Garda Siochana as a whole, however much you might like it to.

This whole affair may not be, and likely is not, as simple as Ian Bailey = Good, Gardai= Bad.

who said ian bailey was a hero. this isnt about him. its about hoe corrupt and incompetent the gardai are. as to his guilt if he is guilty then this makes the gardai even more incompetent

steddyeddy

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Nothing is ever that simple in Criminal cases, or any kind of court case. There is always more than side to the story.

Leave the self righteous outrage and Garda hating out of it and look at the case objectively.

I'm not saying this wasn't a momunmental mess but it doesn't mean the Gardai were wrong.

Jesus Im sorry but you describe the reaction a clear cut case of gardai corruption as self righteous outrage against the gardai? The gaurds used investigation methods which would make the witch hunters of salem embarrassed. Untill people finally wake up that theres a criminal element in the gardai nothing will change. No one is saying all gaurds are like this but the ones that are need to be dealt with.

steddyeddy

Biggins wrote: »

To be absolutely fair, I would say "some" within An Garda Siochana and those that did the investigating.
I am sure there is many within An Garda Siochana that are just as appalled at the actions of their fellow numbers.
...If only for the fact that their bad actions reflect on the organisation as a whole and those innocent under its title.

I agree.

AngryBollix

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Open your mind. Even the experts can make mistakes.

Mistakes are one thing. Anyone can make them.

This isnt a simple mistake. It's a complete bollocks up.

AngryBollix

I can think of one really high profile case where a "suspect" got life in prison with the same "chronic lack of forensic evidence".

I'm sure there are others

Show Time

Remember the Gardai who handle this case first day would not be the sharpest tools in the box(stationed in some bally go backwards instead of big city)so they took the simple approach and blame the local oddball which did not work out.

AudreyHepburn

lividduck wrote: »

'Ian B was right, the stupid thuggish Gardai were wrong' (According to all the evidence and the views of two Directors of Public Prosecutions).

Open your mind. Even the experts can make mistakes.

lividduck

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Right because Gardai wouldn't know anything about crime, criminals, investigations would they?

Look I'm not saying they behaved correctly here, they certaintly did not.

Nor am I saying IB is definitly guilty, he may not be.

But as Darko says above, if the Gardai believe they have a murderer within their grasp they will do what they have to, to prove it.

Would any of us here do any different, if for example you had Larry Murphy sitting in front of you, and you knew he killed those women?Would you not pursue any and all avenues to get him?

I am merely asking that we take a more balanced view of this case, rather than resorting to simplistic 'Ian B was right, the stupid thuggish Gardai were wrong' arguments.

The method was, the actually thoughts or beliefs behind it may not be.

'Ian B was right, the stupid thuggish Gardai were wrong' (According to all the evidence and the views of two Directors of Public Prosecutions).

AudreyHepburn

lividduck wrote: »

Which part of two DPPS saying they WERE wrong dont you get, even the Supreme Court commented on the DPP files in a very negative way.
THE GAURDS WERE WRONG, get over it, they are oftenn wrong. They were wrong in Donegal (see Tribunal of Inquirey), they were wrong in Waterford (beat the crap out of some poor guy for no reason), they were wrong to Shoot Brian Carthy dead in Abbeylara, they were wrong to kill one of their own members by shooting him in the back in Abbeyleix (they thought he was an unarmed bank robber and nobody would care).
I will take the word of two directors of public prosecutions of the Garda any day.

Right because Gardai wouldn't know anything about crime, criminals, investigations would they?

Look I'm not saying they behaved correctly here, they certaintly did not.

Nor am I saying IB is definitly guilty, he may not be.

But as Darko says above, if the Gardai believe they have a murderer within their grasp they will do what they have to, to prove it.

Would any of us here do any different, if for example you had Larry Murphy sitting in front of you, and you knew he killed those women?Would you not pursue any and all avenues to get him?

I am merely asking that we take a more balanced view of this case, rather than resorting to simplistic 'Ian B was right, the stupid thuggish Gardai were wrong' arguments.

The method was, the actually thoughts or beliefs behind it may not be.

[Deleted User]

While the investigating officers should be ashamed of themselves and stripped of their jobs and any entitlements it's a sad fact that all around the world if the police believe they have their suspect they ignore all other avenues in order to make the case against their suspect.

SeaFields

Biggins wrote: »

My point is that there still is some very good Gardi out there - they just seem to be forgotten about in this complete mess.

What is so distressing is that there is a woman in her grave and no one has been brought to justice over it. With all the media scrambling over this story in the last few days, she is the one who it seems is being forgotten about.

lividduck

Biggins wrote: »

To be absolutely fair, I would say "some" within An Garda Siochana and those that did the investigating.
I am sure there is many within An Garda Siochana that are just as appalled at the actions of their fellow numbers.
...If only for the fact that their bad actions reflect on the organisation as a whole and those innocent under its title.

fair comment as ever young Biggins, point taken.

Biggins

Just one point I think further the public should consider.
The DPP asked for the matter to be looked into - who did the actual investigation?
Was it the Gardi further or even partly that looked into the actions of their fellow officers?
If so, the good ones did indeed expose the bad ones, found out what they did and reported this back to the DPP so he could formulate his eventual report.
(And by god, I'm sure that further investigation was not easy to say the least!)

My point is that there still is some very good Gardi out there - they just seem to be forgotten about in this complete mess.

lividduck

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Nothing is ever that simple in Criminal cases, or any kind of court case. There is always more than side to the story.

Leave the self righteous outrage and Garda hating out of it and look at the case objectively.

I'm not saying this wasn't a momunmental mess but it doesn't mean the Gardai were wrong.

Which part of two DPPS saying they WERE wrong dont you get, even the Supreme Court commented on the DPP files in a very negative way.
THE GAURDS WERE WRONG, get over it, they are oftenn wrong. They were wrong in Donegal (see Tribunal of Inquirey), they were wrong in Waterford (beat the crap out of some poor guy for no reason), they were wrong to Shoot Brian Carthy dead in Abbeylara, they were wrong to kill one of their own members by shooting him in the back in Abbeyleix (they thought he was an unarmed bank robber and nobody would care).
I will take the word of two directors of public prosecutions of the Garda any day.

AudreyHepburn

suicide_circus wrote: »

The problem is that Bailey has been branded a murderer in the press for the last 15 odd years, he can never get a fair trial here even if they try and prosecute again. Added to this the outrageous corruption and witness tampering carried out by the gardai in this case.

Once again I do not, repeat do not, disagree this whole affair was a mess. I really wish people would read my posts properly.

I just think people are taking too simplistic an approach to it. The Gardai went about the case in the worst way but that does not mean an innocent man has been unfairly tarnished.

Again I don't believe the Gardai would have pursued Bailey as they did if they really didn't think he was guilty.

suicide_circus

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don't think anyone would deny this whole thing was a monumental cock-up.

But lets not reduce ourselves to the level of childish, mindless Garda bashing and holding Ian Bailey up as a hero.

Can we please remember and accept that just because the case was shoddy does not mean he is innocent. I can't imagine that the Gardai would have gone as far as they did trying to prove him guilty if they didn't, in some way, really believe that he was.

Nor does this case reflect on An Garda Siochana as a whole, however much you might like it to.

This whole affair may not be, and likely is not, as simple as Ian Bailey = Good, Gardai= Bad.

The problem is that Bailey has been branded a murderer in the press for the last 15 odd years, he can never get a fair trial here even if they try and prosecute again. Added to this the outrageous corruption and witness tampering carried out by the gardai in this case.

Biggins

lividduck wrote: »

...How would like to be targetted by an incompetant and corrupt police force!
in this case it is as simple as Ian Bailey = Victim, An Garda Siochana= Perpetrators

To be absolutely fair, I would say "some" within An Garda Siochana and those that did the investigating.
I am sure there is many within An Garda Siochana that are just as appalled at the actions of their fellow numbers.
...If only for the fact that their bad actions reflect on the organisation as a whole and those innocent under its title.

AudreyHepburn

lividduck wrote: »

Unreal!
Not one, but two Directors of Public prosecutions felt he had no case to answer. The man is entitled to an unqualified presumption of innocence.
How would like to be targetted by an incompetant and corrupt police force!
in this case it is as simple as Ian Bailey = Victim, An Garda Siochana= Perpetrators

Nothing is ever that simple in Criminal cases, or any kind of court case. There is always more than side to the story.

Leave the self righteous outrage and Garda hating out of it and look at the case objectively.

I'm not saying this wasn't a momunmental mess but it doesn't mean the Gardai were wrong.

lividduck

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don't think anyone would deny this whole thing was a monumental cock-up.

But lets not reduce ourselves to the level of childish, mindless Garda bashing and holding Ian Bailey up as a hero.

Can we please remember and accept that just because the case was shoddy does not mean he is innocent. I can't imagine that the Gardai would have gone as far as they did trying to prove him guilty if they didn't, in some way, really believe that he was.

Nor does this case reflect on An Garda Siochana as a whole, however much you might like it to.

This whole affair may not be, and likely is not, as simple as Ian Bailey = Good, Gardai= Bad.

Unreal!
Not one, but two Directors of Public prosecutions felt he had no case to answer. The man is entitled to an unqualified presumption of innocence.
How would like to be targetted by an incompetant and corrupt police force!
in this case it is as simple as Ian Bailey = Victim, An Garda Siochana= Perpetrators

AudreyHepburn

I don't think anyone would deny this whole thing was a monumental cock-up.

But lets not reduce ourselves to the level of childish, mindless Garda bashing and holding Ian Bailey up as a hero.

Can we please remember and accept that just because the case was shoddy does not mean he is innocent. I can't imagine that the Gardai would have gone as far as they did trying to prove him guilty if they didn't, in some way, really believe that he was.

Nor does this case reflect on An Garda Siochana as a whole, however much you might like it to.

This whole affair may not be, and likely is not, as simple as Ian Bailey = Good, Gardai= Bad.

Rhys Essien

alphabeat wrote: »

rubbish , its more likely someone from her environment / circle either french , or irish , and VERY well connected -killed her .

second likely is an oppurtunistic thief or thug.

Imagine if the guards(a guard) themselves were involved in her murder and needed to frame some poor old innocent fast.

Good looking woman living on her own in remote area dishes someones advances,who are after getting fond of her.

Now that would be mad.

alphabeat

Chucky the tree wrote: »

No he's still guilty imo. The Garda just made a complete bollox of it from start to finish.

rubbish , its more likely someone from her environment / circle either french , or irish , and VERY well connected -killed her .

second likely is an oppurtunistic thief or thug.

Biggins

berrypendel wrote: »

they behaved disrgacefully

No debate there.

What's worse is that the French might still use their very tainted evidence!
More stupid daftness!

See: http://www.thejournal.ie/ian-baileys-lawyer-french-authorities-intend-to-continue-with-process-373138-Mar2012/

A LAYWER FOR Ian Bailey believes that French authorities intend to continue with their investigation into his client despite the Supreme Court ruling that he should not be extradited to France for questioning about the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.

Speaking to RTÉ One Radio this afternoon, Frank Buttimer said that there is currently an application by French authorities to seek further access to Garda files in relation to Mr Bailey. Proceedings in that case will be heard in Dublin this week, he said.
“The French don’t care about the Irish prosecutorial and judicial systems,” said Buttimer.

“They intend to try Ian Bailey in his absence. It is immaterial to them if he was or was not to be extradited. They intended to continue with this.”
In France, you can be tried for the gravest of crimes in your absence.
Bailey, a former journalist, has denied any involvement in the murder of Toscan du Plantier, who was found dead near her holiday home in Schull, in West Cork, more than 15 years ago.

French authorities have sought his extradition for questioning – and not prosecution – so the Supreme Court upheld Bailey’s appeal. A Court shall refuse to surrender a person if it is satisfied that a decision has not been made to charge the person and, in Bailey’s case, try him for the offence of murder of Mme Toscan du Plantier.
Buttimer described the current situation as a “farcical state of affairs”. He told the This Week programme that Bailey is “completely innocent” and a “victim of alleged misbehaviour”.

There is no evidence against him. Meanwhile, in France they seek to rely on tainted evidence. Probably, at the end of the day, they will seek to extradite him if and when he is found guilty of the crime.

The question of a tainted Garda investigation and process was raised in the High Court by Bailey’s lawyers. They maintained that the French warrant was invalid because it contained alleged evidence that was allegedly obtained improperly, was corrupt and tainted.

The information about the questionable Garda investigation came to light after the Director of Public Prosecutions sent Buttimer what he calls a “44-page devastation” of the evidence against his client.

That documentation from the DPP only emerged after that court had ruled on Bailey’s extradition and just prior to the Supreme Court’s overturning of that judgement.
“It came to me in unprecedented circumstances and I could not believe what I was reading,” he said. “I had not expected it and I had no entitlement in law to receive it.”

The retired DPP Eamon Barnes took the view that in the interest of justice, certain material should be sent to us, explained the solicitor.
“This case is totally unprecedented and raises huge questions about our system of justice,” concluded Buttimer.