Invalid search warrants!

Hitchens · 22-07-2013 11:17PM #1

A retired Central Bank administrator who was jailed for the possession of hundreds of thousands of child porn images and videos has walked free from court after his conviction was quashed because of a misdated warrant.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/retired-central-bank-official-walks-free-after-child-porn-conviction-quashed-601366.html

Why does this seem to happen with our law enforcement officials? It's hardly rocket science to be able to get it right.

Smash The House · 22-07-2013 11:22PM

The Court of Criminal Appeal today overturned the conviction of Raphael Farina (aged 67) after it found that a warrant used to search his home was dated incorrectly and consequently did not permit entry to his apartment in Dublin city centre.

Wow. What a joke

mike65 · 22-07-2013 11:24PM

The Illuminati protecting their own again.

or the Keystones were operating at their usual level of technical competency

michael999999 · 22-07-2013 11:26PM

Hitchens wrote: »

A retired Central Bank administrator who was jailed for the possession of hundreds of thousands of child porn images and videos has walked free from court after his conviction was quashed because of a misdated warrant.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/retired-central-bank-official-walks-free-after-child-porn-conviction-quashed-601366.html,

Why does this seem to happen with our law enforcement officials? It's hardly rocket science to be able to get it right.

€€€€€€€€€

NuckingFacker · 22-07-2013 11:26PM

That's one central banker that needs to be rendered an invalid.

ColeTrain · 22-07-2013 11:27PM

Gardaí had called to Farina’s home with a search warrant as part of an international investigation into child pornography led by the Bavarian state police in Germany

I can imagine the culchie Garda ringing our German overlords after the trial "ah sorry we fooked up again boy"

NuckingFacker · 22-07-2013 11:33PM

Sorry, but could the Judge not have said, "well, Herr Farina, the Gards did indeed royally fcuk up on the date thing, but you're still guilty as sin, so the conviction stands-fcuk you very much and have a nice day."

Is there no common sense involved in the application of the law, or is that just me?? This worship we have of "documents". It's a piece of paper, not a "document". The children involved, and their famalies, no doubt send their profound thanks to that "judge" for his legal precision..

Christ the Redeemer · 22-07-2013 11:37PM

A banker walks free from court? get the **** out of here.

Wacker The Attacker · 22-07-2013 11:39PM

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

A banker walks free from court? get the **** out of here.

He's a banker with a penchant for child porn.

It really doesn't get any worse does it?

EuskalHerria · 22-07-2013 11:40PM

Incorrect date? You'd swear it was done by a child.
A nice change given the charges I suppose.

NuckingFacker · 22-07-2013 11:40PM

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

A banker in court? get the **** out of here.

fyp. Sadly.

blindside88 · 22-07-2013 11:43PM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Sorry, but could the Judge not have said, "well, Herr Farina, the Gards did indeed royally fcuk up on the date thing, but you're still guilty as sin, so the conviction stands-fcuk you very much and have a nice day."

Is there no common sense involved in the application of the law, or is that just me?? This worship we have of "documents". It's a piece of paper, not a "document". The children involved, and their famalies, no doubt send their profound thanks to that "judge" for his legal precision..

So to hell with the law, the evidence was obtained incorrectly and should be thrown out, he may well be guilty but it's a slippery slope if the judiciary are allowed to ignore the law because the know he's guilty. Where would you allow judges using "common sense" to end?

He should have been convicted and will undoubtedly get what's coming to him but we have laws for a reason, even the ones you don't agree with

NuckingFacker · 22-07-2013 11:45PM

blindside88 wrote: »

So to hell with the law, the evidence was obtained incorrectly and should be thrown out, he may well be guilty but it's a slippery slope if the judiciary are allowed to ignore the law because the know he's guilty. Where would you allow judges using "common sense" to end?

He should have been convicted and will undoubtedly get what's coming to him but we have laws for a reason, even the ones you don't agree with

Are you for real?

LowKeyReturn · 22-07-2013 11:47PM

Courts are pretty good at getting around flaws on search warrants, but some things are just a step too far.

For example the address would not have been an issue (most likely), but come on.. the date? The anger should be directed at the guards.

LowKeyReturn · 22-07-2013 11:49PM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Are you for real?

Are you for real?

Guards kick in your door at 5am because they think you look like the kind of lad that smoke a bit of dope? That's grand is it?

The ramifications for an investigation that used unconstitutionally obtained evidence is what keeps the system in check.

NuckingFacker · 22-07-2013 11:51PM

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Courts are pretty good at getting around flaws on search warrants, but some things are just a step too far.

For example the address would not have been an issue (most likely), but come on.. the date? The anger should be directed at the guards.

Why? Because of a typo? Or some typist not paying attention? I'll direct my anger at the child molester, thanks all the same. Or failing that, our dopey, out-of-touch judiciary.

Christ the Redeemer · 22-07-2013 11:52PM

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Are you for real?

Guards kick in your door at 5am because they think you look like the kind of lad that smoke a bit of dope? That's grand is it?

The ramifications for an investigation that used unconstitutionally obtained evidence is what keeps the system in check.

This is a bit different than simply kicking a door in, a pedo is walking free because he's a banker!

****, I mean because of a "typo".

blindside88 · 22-07-2013 11:53PM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Are you for real?

So how much incorrect or incorrectly obtained evidence ok?

blindside88 · 22-07-2013 11:53PM

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

This is a bit different than simply kicking a door in, a pedo is walking free because he's a banker!

****, I mean because of a "typo".

I agree with you but where do you draw the line?

LowKeyReturn · 22-07-2013 11:54PM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Why? Because of a typo? Or some typist not paying attention? I'll direct my anger at the child molester, thanks all the same. Or failing that, our dopey, out-of-touch judiciary.

Thank god - people would be worried about things getting done if people were even the slightest bit informed. The conspiracy theorists are right about one thing - governments rely on the stupidity of the mob.

Christ the Redeemer · 22-07-2013 11:54PM

blindside88 wrote: »

I agree with you but where do you draw the line?

I dunno, but knowing this country, the line gets drawn at about 1 million earnings a year.

NuckingFacker · 22-07-2013 11:54PM

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Are you for real?

Guards kick in your door at 5am because they think you look like the kind of lad that smoke a bit of dope? That's grand is it?

The ramifications for an investigation that used unconstitutionally obtained evidence is what keeps the system in check.

The date was wrong. The search was valid. Your point is invalid. But you're free to go. Thems the rules. I'll leave now, but just remember whose rights you are so strongly defending. Sleep well.

LowKeyReturn · 22-07-2013 11:54PM

blindside88 wrote: »

So how much incorrect or incorrectly obtained evidence ok?

blindside88 wrote: »

I agree with you but where do you draw the line?

**** loads - the standard is unconstitutionally obtained evidence.

LowKeyReturn · 22-07-2013 11:56PM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

The date was wrong. The search was valid. Your point is invalid.

I think you'll find my point is well backed up. Nice word play though.

blindside88 · 22-07-2013 11:57PM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

The date was wrong. The search was valid. Your point is invalid. But you're free to go. Thems the rules. I'll leave now, but just remember whose rights you are so strongly defending. Sleep well.

I'm not any way qualified in these matters but if the warrant was invalid is the search not invalid? I hate to see scum like that go free but I can see the judges predicament

NuckingFacker · 23-07-2013 12:02AM

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

I think you'll find my point is well backed up. Nice word play though.

Yeah, your point is well backed up by well-paid lawyers that exist solely to seek out flaws in prosecution cases, no matter how tenuous. If I was a Gard, I'd jack it in, the lunatics have indeed taken over the asylum. You will now respond how wrong I am, how many rights a person has to a fully constitutional trial, fair and correct due process, the precise servation of warrants and evidence. I say up your bum to that, justice is never done, it is bought by he who can afford the brightest mind in the room. Brightest is seldom best though, or most moral. It's usually just the sharpest. To all the Gardai out there, ye have my sympathy. Ye and the kids and parents involved.

LowKeyReturn · 23-07-2013 12:06AM

NuckingFacker wrote: »

Yeah, your point is well backed up by well-paid lawyers that exist solely to seek out flaws in prosecution cases, no matter how tenuous. If I was a Gard, I'd jack it in, the lunatics have indeed taken over the asylum. You will now respond how wrong I am, how many rights a person has to a fully constitutional trial, fair and correct due process, the precise servation of warrants and evidence. I say up your bum to that, justice is never done, it is bought by he who can afford the brightest mind in the room. Brightest is seldom best though, or most moral. It's usually just the sharpest. To all the Gardai out there, ye have my sympathy. Ye and the kids and parents involved.

You do know the other side have lawyers too now? AFAIK De Valara wasn't a lawyer, open to correction on that.

EoghanIRL · 23-07-2013 12:09AM

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

A banker walks free from court? get the **** out of here.

Yet you can get jailed for not paying your tv licence.

LowKeyReturn · 23-07-2013 12:14AM

How did we get this far into the thread without a mention of Brian Curtin BTW?

23-07-2013 12:29AM

Irish Examiner wrote:

She said that among the five flaws were a misspelling of Mr Farina’s address as “Springer’s Yard”, an absence of information regarding the issuing District Court area and number and a misdating of the warrant as May 6 2007, when it had actually been issued on June 6, 2007.

That's enough to get a case thrown out? There are threads about court summons with incorrect information in the 'Legal Discussion' forum every other day, and the answer is always that minor mistakes don't really matter.

General General · 23-07-2013 12:30AM

Whole thing is a push toward dropping the need for a search warrant at all... which is a move not against guys like the one who got away here, but rather a move towards what a certain sick kind of mind actually wants; removal of civil rights for people other than some chosen elite.

Ahem... sorry, what did I just say there? I think I was channeling... I think I was channeling.

Invalid search warrants!

Comments