Person charged over arson attack on Gatso Van

09-03-2011 08:40PM #1

Nice to see

Man charged over arson attack on garda van

A man has been charged with setting fire to a garda speed detection van and with endangering the life of a garda who was in the van at the time.

A 30-year-old man has been charged with setting fire to a garda speed detection van and with endangering the life of a garda who was in the van at the time.
Gareth Hill of the View, Gleann na Rí, Tower, Blarney, Co Cork, replied 'no comment' when the charges were put to him at Cork District Court.
He is charged with arson of the garda van and with engaging in conduct that created a risk of death or serious injury to Garda Paul Hooley.
The incident is alleged to have occurred on 27 August 2009 at Booleypatrick in Tower.
The Director of Public Prosecutions has indicated that Mr Hill will be tried on indictment at the Circuit Criminal Court.
He was released on bail until 11 April next to allow time for the preparation of a book of evidence.

RTÉ

discus · 09-03-2011 09:13PM

Does he have any previous convictions?

Terrontress · 10-03-2011 07:11AM

Regardless of anyone's views of Gatso vans, setting fire to any vehicle with someone inside is insanity.

maglite · 10-03-2011 10:18AM

Petrol bombed with a plastic bottle. Smarts has he...

MagicSean · 10-03-2011 11:40AM

Great news. I didn't think they'd get anyone for this. Some good work.

10-03-2011 02:59PM

discus wrote: »

Does he have any previous convictions?

The person has only been charged. Information like that if known can't be released as it could prejudice a trial.

BrianD · 13-03-2011 12:31AM

Any progress with the van that was destroyed near Dundalk? Think that one belonged to the private contractors.

CB19Kevo · 13-03-2011 03:57AM

only right that this individual pays out for a Brand new van and all the equipment considering he was in such a rush to destroy it....
doubt that will happen though....:rolleyes:

sdanseo · 13-03-2011 04:03AM

Thought it was a private operator crewing the vans, how come there was a Garda inside? Sounds like it was an AGS van and not in fact one of the high-profile outsourced ones?

goldie fish · 13-03-2011 11:21AM

sdonn wrote: »

Thought it was a private operator crewing the vans, how come there was a Garda inside? Sounds like it was an AGS van and not in fact one of the high-profile outsourced ones?

The date of the offence makes it clearer.
When was the civvy van introduced?

13-03-2011 04:05PM

The one in Cork was a Garda owned and operated van. The one in Dundalk was a private one. AGS still operate their own vans.

guil · 13-03-2011 09:31PM

another private one burned out tonight on the n11

sdanseo · 14-03-2011 02:39AM

guil wrote: »

another private one burned out tonight on the n11

Pathetic. I can absolutely see the point people have about these things (no offence to AGS but they are purely revenue collectors, nothing more in my opinion) but burning them out is just pure vandalism. I disagree with several laws, but I don't take out my frustration by breaking more of them. And with someone inside, this is once again attempted murder, tbh. Let them rot, if caught.

seanybiker · 14-03-2011 02:41AM

Great to hear some Prat got caught

AlekSmart · 14-03-2011 11:38AM

At this stage the Go-Safe consortium will most likely have to configure a set of exterior cameras to monitor their own assets.

The only other option is to have Garda protection at each active site which will play merry hell with the Contracted Budget for this scheme.

With our recession rapidly deepening,it only stands to reason that some of the normal stoic acceptance of State Revenue gathering is beginning to evaporate.

The prime mover behind improving Road Safety has to be simply Driver Education and Training,what Go-Safe represents is no more than a Commercial Business Opportunity with all of the attendant risks which such businessess endure on a daily basis,so protecting their front-line staff is now a very real issue for them.

sdanseo · 14-03-2011 02:42PM

AlekSmart wrote: »

At this stage the Go-Safe consortium will most likely have to configure a set of exterior cameras to monitor their own assets.

The only other option is to have Garda protection at each active site which will play merry hell with the Contracted Budget for this scheme.

With our recession rapidly deepening,it only stands to reason that some of the normal stoic acceptance of State Revenue gathering is beginning to evaporate.

The prime mover behind improving Road Safety has to be simply Driver Education and Training,what Go-Safe represents is no more than a Commercial Business Opportunity with all of the attendant risks which such businessess endure on a daily basis,so protecting their front-line staff is now a very real issue for them.

You may as well have a garda car with the same equipment so. Same use of reources.

At the end of the day, a patrol car with flashing blue lights and a Garda in a Hi-Vis with a speed gun will be much more effective at slowing people down. Put them everywhere in variable spots, not just at these toll-booths so called "accident hotspots".

guil · 17-03-2011 07:02AM

AlekSmart wrote: »

At this stage the Go-Safe consortium will most likely have to configure a set of exterior cameras to monitor their own assets.

The only other option is to have Garda protection at each active site which will play merry hell with the Contracted Budget for this scheme.

With our recession rapidly deepening,it only stands to reason that some of the normal stoic acceptance of State Revenue gathering is beginning to evaporate.

The prime mover behind improving Road Safety has to be simply Driver Education and Training,what Go-Safe represents is no more than a Commercial Business Opportunity with all of the attendant risks which such businessess endure on a daily basis,so protecting their front-line staff is now a very real issue for them.

they already have them front and back but i dont know if they record, next time ya pass one look just above the centre of the windsrceen on the roof

ghill · 28-04-2013 10:13PM

My name is Garrett Hill the person charged with this crime. It really makes me sick in this country how people are so quick to judge. Just because a person is charged with something does not mean he is guilty. There are a lot of corrupt guards on the force and if you are one of these people that think all guards are angels your an idiot. Just Google it and you will see for yourself. Guards committing armed robbery in Caragaline in Cork, Another female guard giving information off the "top secret" Garda Pulse System to gang members in Dublin about rival gangs. Sensitive information that could get a person killed. And what was she doing it for? Bags of cocaine,Another two guards beating a man on the street in Waterford and when another guard operating the CCTV saw what was happening he turned the camera away so he wouldn't record any evidence, Another guard in Cork smashed a mans face so hard he broke his jaw and some of his teeth and all while on a night out with the lads. The Judge gave him 18 months in prison, the very next day he went back to the same court and his barrister said the Judge didn't take into consideration how hard it is in prison for ex-cops. The Judge agreed and suspended the 18 months. What about the poor man who got his face smashed in? All the above are convictions not people who were only charged.

This case against me was a fit up from the start. The guards had absolutely no evidence at any time. They pursued it and blackened my name for nearly four years with no evidence. Of course then you have the fools like seanybiker and MagicSean who think that because your charged that means your guilty.

I stood trial on 25/04/2013 listed as a three day trial. Not even four hours into the trial the Judge directed the jury to find me not guilty and said that my arrest was unlawful. In the days leading up to the trial the state barrister on numerous occasions offered me a deal to plead guilty to criminal damage and they would drop the rest. I refused every time but why where they offering me a deal? This was one of there own inside the van that got burned they should have been asking for the death penalty.

Some people need to open there eyes, Guards are just normal people who will make mistakes but you have other guards who will bend or even brake the law to get what they want.

goldie fish · 28-04-2013 10:28PM

ghill wrote: »

My name is Garrett Hill the person charged with this crime. It really makes me sick in this country how people are so quick to judge. Just because a person is charged with something does not mean he is guilty. There are a lot of corrupt guards on the force and if you are one of these people that think all guards are angels your an idiot. Just Google it and you will see for yourself. Guards committing armed robbery in Caragaline in Cork, Another female guard giving information off the "top secret" Garda Pulse System to gang members in Dublin about rival gangs. Sensitive information that could get a person killed. And what was she doing it for? Bags of cocaine,Another two guards beating a man on the street in Waterford and when another guard operating the CCTV saw what was happening he turned the camera away so he wouldn't record any evidence, Another guard in Cork smashed a mans face so hard he broke his jaw and some of his teeth and all while on a night out with the lads. The Judge gave him 18 months in prison, the very next day he went back to the same court and his barrister said the Judge didn't take into consideration how hard it is in prison for ex-cops. The Judge agreed and suspended the 18 months. What about the poor man who got his face smashed in? All the above are convictions not people who were only charged.

This case against me was a fit up from the start. The guards had absolutely no evidence at any time. They pursued it and blackened my name for nearly four years with no evidence. Of course then you have the fools like seanybiker and MagicSean who think that because your charged that means your guilty.

I stood trial on 25/04/2013 listed as a three day trial. Not even four hours into the trial the Judge directed the jury to find me not guilty and said that my arrest was unlawful. In the days leading up to the trial the state barrister on numerous occasions offered me a deal to plead guilty to criminal damage and they would drop the rest. I refused every time but why where they offering me a deal? This was one of there own inside the van that got burned they should have been asking for the death penalty.

Some people need to open there eyes, Guards are just normal people who will make mistakes but you have other guards who will bend or even brake the law to get what they want.

So who did do it?

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2013/0426/world/man-cleared-of-throwing-petrol-bomb-at-garda-speed-trap-van-229507.html

3fullback · 28-04-2013 10:49PM

You may indeed be legally innocent but factually why was your fingerprints on the bottle, this is scientific/forensic evidence which is very hard to argue against?

Just because someone is legally innocent, does not mean they did not do the crime.

Zambia · 28-04-2013 11:07PM

Not Guilty does not Equal exonerated.

I concede Mr Hill may well not have done it but this trial proves a Garda made a mistake in the arrest not the accuseds innocence.

Had the Garda arrested Hill under a different section how would things have played out then?

However the court has decided.

discus · 28-04-2013 11:07PM

Did they find anyone elses fingerprints? Surely that wasn't the only evidence? Anyone could have opened a bin and taken a bottle

3fullback · 28-04-2013 11:13PM

discus wrote: »

Did they find anyone elses fingerprints? Surely that wasn't the only evidence? Anyone could have opened a bin and taken a bottle

Surely must have been further evidence, as what were the chances of the person they arrested fingerprints ending up matching ones on the bottle! If you get my drift.

Of course may have already been in database if Mr.Hill had prior dealings.

goldie fish · 28-04-2013 11:14PM

Careful now.

Zambia · 28-04-2013 11:15PM

3fullback wrote: »

Surely must have been as what were the chances of the person they arrested fingerprints ending up matching ones on the bottle! If you get my drift.

Of course may have already been in database if Mr.Hill had prior dealings.

Sadly as soon as the word chance comes in the case is lost.

ghill · 29-04-2013 12:32AM

goldie fish wrote: »

So who did do it?

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2013/0426/world/man-cleared-of-throwing-petrol-bomb-at-garda-speed-trap-van-229507.html

How do i know who done it but it was not me. The fingerprint could have been on the bottle for up to two years before it was used in the arson and there own expert would even say that. You cant date a fingerprint. The bottle was found 100 meters from my house and yes that was the only evidence. Two prosecution witnesses said the man who done it had gloves on so if that man was me how did my prints get on the bottle. They had my prints on file, so lets say they had a match to the print on the bottle after two weeks why did it take them 16 months to arrest me. This was a witch hunt from the start.

29-04-2013 07:11AM

The reason it was thrown out was because of a plastic bottle being used rather than a glass one meaning the section used to detain was wrong. Once the detention is gone then there can be no trial.

AlekSmart · 29-04-2013 11:05AM

ghill wrote: »

How do i know who done it but it was not me. The fingerprint could have been on the bottle for up to two years before it was used in the arson and there own expert would even say that. You cant date a fingerprint. The bottle was found 100 meters from my house and yes that was the only evidence. Two prosecution witnesses said the man who done it had gloves on so if that man was me how did my prints get on the bottle. They had my prints on file, so lets say they had a match to the print on the bottle after two weeks why did it take them 16 months to arrest me. This was a witch hunt from the start.

Looks like Ciaran O Loughlin knows his criminal onions then Garett ...would you recommend him ?

Would you see this type of action as being justified at all ?

Without askin you to get TOO involved,could you perhaps outline WHY the Gardai would decide on mounting a Witch Hunt against You in particular ?

SB2013 · 29-04-2013 04:45PM

Hopefully the judges decision can be appealed successfully. Failing that a civil action should be brought against the arsonist.

Sempai · 29-04-2013 05:27PM

ghill wrote: »

My name is Garrett Hill the person charged with this crime. It really makes me sick in this country how people are so quick to judge. Just because a person is charged with something does not mean he is guilty. There are a lot of corrupt guards on the force and if you are one of these people that think all guards are angels your an idiot. Just Google it and you will see for yourself. Guards committing armed robbery in Caragaline in Cork, Another female guard giving information off the "top secret" Garda Pulse System to gang members in Dublin about rival gangs. Sensitive information that could get a person killed. And what was she doing it for? Bags of cocaine,Another two guards beating a man on the street in Waterford and when another guard operating the CCTV saw what was happening he turned the camera away so he wouldn't record any evidence, Another guard in Cork smashed a mans face so hard he broke his jaw and some of his teeth and all while on a night out with the lads. The Judge gave him 18 months in prison, the very next day he went back to the same court and his barrister said the Judge didn't take into consideration how hard it is in prison for ex-cops. The Judge agreed and suspended the 18 months. What about the poor man who got his face smashed in? All the above are convictions not people who were only charged.

This case against me was a fit up from the start. The guards had absolutely no evidence at any time. They pursued it and blackened my name for nearly four years with no evidence. Of course then you have the fools like seanybiker and MagicSean who think that because your charged that means your guilty.

I stood trial on 25/04/2013 listed as a three day trial. Not even four hours into the trial the Judge directed the jury to find me not guilty and said that my arrest was unlawful. In the days leading up to the trial the state barrister on numerous occasions offered me a deal to plead guilty to criminal damage and they would drop the rest. I refused every time but why where they offering me a deal? This was one of there own inside the van that got burned they should have been asking for the death penalty.

Some people need to open there eyes, Guards are just normal people who will make mistakes but you have other guards who will bend or even brake the law to get what they want.

So is it Garrett or Gareth? All papers reporting Gareth, which makes me think that this could be bogey! Or papers are wrong :rolleyes:

goldie fish · 29-04-2013 06:57PM

ghill wrote: »

How do i know who done it but it was not me. The fingerprint could have been on the bottle for up to two years before it was used in the arson and there own expert would even say that. You cant date a fingerprint. The bottle was found 100 meters from my house and yes that was the only evidence. Two prosecution witnesses said the man who done it had gloves on so if that man was me how did my prints get on the bottle. They had my prints on file, so lets say they had a match to the print on the bottle after two weeks why did it take them 16 months to arrest me. This was a witch hunt from the start.

Why did they have your prints on file?

Person charged over arson attack on Gatso Van

Comments