Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

hatrickpatrick · 11-02-2014 01:53PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

True a certain distance apart on the “cozyness” scale is healthy, even necessary, between any watchdog and whoever is being watched. But it can’t be good if any public body, by their actions or lack of them, distrust the police so much that they decline to report a crime.

Of course it's not good, but is that automatically a fault on GSOC's part?
Maybe they have legitimate reasons for not trusting them due to wrong actions on the other side's part? That's what I'm saying, nobody seems to be asking that (in the media), not whether it was a bad thing for GSOC not to trust the Gardai (IE, painting GSOC as unreasonably paranoid and suspicious) but asking what have the Gardai and the MoJ done to create so much distrust in the first place?

I would have thought given recent stories, in particular the ones I cited previously about the handing over of documents and Shatter's incredibly ambiguous statement on that which seemed to divide blame equally between GSOC and the Gardai, it would be blindingly obvious why there's distrust, and blindingly obvious that the distrust is justified. The media seem to be implying that the distrust is somehow unreasonable - surely given everything that's happened in recent months, it's perfectly understandable?

Youzername · 11-02-2014 02:08PM

Michael Martin speakin a bit of sense on 1 o clock news. Get to the bottom of who is behind it.

However, deflecting the issue 'Senior Gardai' suggesting different, head of GOSC should step down.

Suspicious much?

Steppenwolfe · 11-02-2014 02:15PM

AGSI General Secretary John Redmond said ...."he believes GSOC has no regard for the laws of the country "....

You couldn't make this up :rolleyes:

twowheelsgood · 11-02-2014 02:17PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course it's not good, but is that automatically a fault on GSOC's part?
Maybe they have legitimate reasons for not trusting them due to wrong actions on the other side's part? That's what I'm saying, nobody seems to be asking that (in the media), not whether it was a bad thing for GSOC not to trust the Gardai (IE, painting GSOC as unreasonably paranoid and suspicious) but asking what have the Gardai and the MoJ done to create so much distrust in the first place?

I would have thought given recent stories, in particular the ones I cited previously about the handing over of documents and Shatter's incredibly ambiguous statement on that which seemed to divide blame equally between GSOC and the Gardai, it would be blindingly obvious why there's distrust, and blindingly obvious that the distrust is justified. The media seem to be implying that the distrust is somehow unreasonable - surely given everything that's happened in recent months, it's perfectly understandable?

But if the GSOC reported the matter (and made it known that the asked the Gardai to investigate) then they would be in the same place as they are now. Except, there wouldn’t be the additional question about non-reporting that there is now. I think they made a bad call here.

And from the Gardai point of view it is understandable that they are peeved that a public official declined (if he did) to report a possible crime. If they didn’t at least question his judgement (calling for resignation might be going too far) they are implicitly accepting that the police are not to be trusted by some holders of public office.

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 02:17PM

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

AGSI General Secretary John Redmond said ...."he believes GSOC has no regard for the laws of the country "....

You couldn't make this up :rolleyes:

Yep about right anyone who holds a government department to book has no regard for laws of the state

I blame people between the ages of 30-50 for consistency voting in ****e and being scared of change

After all they fixshed the road!!!

sopretty · 11-02-2014 02:23PM

Ye, saw Micheal Martin there - he's looking for the direction of the focus to be switched to the actual bugging, rather than why the GSOC didn't inform MOJ/gardai.

porsche959 · 11-02-2014 02:24PM

Has any Zanu FG supporter found a way to blame this on Gerry Adams yet lol?

My name is URL · 11-02-2014 02:24PM

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

AGSI General Secretary John Redmond said ...."he believes GSOC has no regard for the laws of the country "....

You couldn't make this up :rolleyes:

Sure you could. Do you think Senior Gardai are not going to take every opportunity they have to attack the credibility of the ombudsman?

Nothing new there

oholly121 · 11-02-2014 02:25PM

sopretty wrote: »

Ye, saw Micheal Martin there - he's looking for the direction of the focus to be switched to the actual bugging, rather than why the GSOC didn't inform MOJ/gardai.

Wow really are you serious!!!!!???

Jesus better go outside and look for the "pig" flying across the sky!!!

"Probably on his way to bug the GSOC" LOL!!!!!!!

11-02-2014 02:35PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

..accepting that the police are not to be trusted by some holders of public office.

No, they are saying they should always be above suspicion and should never be questioned - that is ridiculous. Of course they are chief suspects.

Busted Flat. · 11-02-2014 02:39PM

We should get some of the retired Garda to investigate this, maybe some of the Senior men from Donegal, or the Kerry babies, I think that would be acceptable to the powers that be.

sopretty · 11-02-2014 02:41PM

If they do go down the independent enquiry route, who exactly would be best placed to conduct such an enquiry?

hatrickpatrick · 11-02-2014 02:52PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

But if the GSOC reported the matter (and made it known that the asked the Gardai to investigate) then they would be in the same place as they are now. Except, there wouldn’t be the additional question about non-reporting that there is now. I think they made a bad call here.

If the Gardai had done it and it had been reported to them, it would have made it a great deal harder to catch them. Maybe the Ombudsman kept quiet hoping they'd get another chance to find out who did it, if it happened again?

And from the Gardai point of view it is understandable that they are peeved that a public official declined (if he did) to report a possible crime. If they didn’t at least question his judgement (calling for resignation might be going too far) they are implicitly accepting that the police are not to be trusted by some holders of public office.

This is a unique situation here in which, purely by virtue of who has most to gain, the police are automatically going to be potential suspects. That's not in the least bit unreasonable to say in my view. Also, given recent events, distrust is (again in my view) completely justified.

Finally, let's imagine we do accept that it's reasonable for the Gardai to be pissed at not being informed. When someone doesn't report a crime and the crime is subsequently discovered, wouldn't you agree that the crime itself should still be the primary focus, and the non-reporting of it should be a secondary issue?

The opposite of what's happening here, in other words.

I Heart Internet · 11-02-2014 02:55PM

sopretty wrote: »

If they do go down the independent enquiry route, who exactly would be best placed to conduct such an enquiry?

I assume someone has already quoted the Simpsons in this thread:

Lisa: If you're the police, who will police the police?
Homer: I dunno. Coast Guard?

I Heart Internet · 11-02-2014 02:58PM

The Garda Commisioner (and now cheerled by a Garda union it seems (rte)) protests too much on this. He would have us believe that it is crazy to be even contemplating that the Garda Siochana may have been in any way responsible for the bugging.

Give us a break! Standard policing would ask - who has most to gain from bugging the GSOC? One answer (not the only answer) is elements of AGS. Another potential answer (bearing in mind what has happened in the UK) might be elements within the media.

twowheelsgood · 11-02-2014 03:09PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Finally, let's imagine we do accept that it's reasonable for the Gardai to be pissed at not being informed. When someone doesn't report a crime and the crime is subsequently discovered, wouldn't you agree that the crime itself should still be the primary focus, and the non-reporting of it should be a secondary issue?

But there is very little to be said about who did it, which is why very little is being said. If and when we find out who did it you can be certain that will quickly become the focus of everybodies attention. For now, all we can do is guess and speculate.

Do you think it would be profitable if all discussion on the matter took the form: "I don't know who did it but I bet XXX were involved! What do you think?" "I don't know either but I think we should be looking at YYYY"

We can however discuss auxiliary issues, well, pretty much because we can. We know what the GSOC did and did not do so we are in a position to ask if they took the right course of action or not. This, IMO, is why the discussion is focused where it is.

hatrickpatrick · 11-02-2014 03:17PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

But there is very little to be said about who did it, which is why very little is being said. If and when we find out who did it you can be certain that will quickly become the focus of everybodies attention. For now, all we can do is guess and speculate.

Do you think it would be profitable if all discussion on the matter took the form: "I don't know who did it but I bet XXX were involved! What do you think?" "I don't know either but I think we should be looking at YYYY"

We can however discuss auxiliary issues, well, pretty much because we can. We know what the GSOC did and did not do so we are in a position to ask if they took the right course of action or not. This, IMO, is why the discussion is focused where it is.

So you think it's reasonable that a crime has been committed and most of the media and political discussion of it is blaming the victim and attacking the victim's actions?

jimgoose · 11-02-2014 03:18PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

So you think it's reasonable that a crime has been committed and most of the media and political discussion of it is blaming the victim and attacking the victim's actions?

It's not reasonable no, but it is at any rate perfectly normal - this is Ireland.

twowheelsgood · 11-02-2014 03:30PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

So you think it's reasonable that a crime has been committed and most of the media and political discussion of it is blaming the victim and attacking the victim's actions?

The crime (against the victim! :rolleyes:) is a matter to be investigated. There is as I already said, little beyond guesswork that we can add to that facet of the discussion.

So can I ask if you think that decisions made by a public official should not be questioned because said official was a victim of a crime (apparently)?

I think they should. And until we know enough to discuss the substantial question with some authority there is nothing amiss about asking these questions.

hatrickpatrick · 11-02-2014 03:32PM

twowheelsgood wrote: »

The crime (against the victim! :rolleyes:) is a matter to be investigated. There is as I already said, little beyond guesswork that we can add to that facet of the discussion.

So can I ask if you think that decisions made by a public official should not be questioned because said official was a victim of a crime (apparently)?

I think they should. And until we know enough to discuss the substantial question with some authority there is nothing amiss about asking these questions.

I never said they shouldn't be asked, I said they shouldn't be the top headline while the actual crime is a sub-bullet point. It should always be the other way around, whenever a crime is committed.

My name is URL · 11-02-2014 03:39PM

sopretty wrote: »

If they do go down the independent enquiry route, who exactly would be best placed to conduct such an enquiry?

I'm guessing it'd need to be some form of internationally based panel of experts if genuine independence is to be guaranteed in any inquiry.

coolhandspan · 11-02-2014 03:44PM

:D:D

knird evol · 11-02-2014 03:51PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Standard policing would ask - who has most to gain from

Is that 'standard policing' or an entertainment industry cliche?

I watch a lot of american tv myself and I love all the serious posts "Opportunity" and "Motive". I don't think we have enough to go to the DA with

Foxhound38 · 11-02-2014 03:54PM

Why does the Government seem more interested in pointing fingers at GSOC (who through their own initiative uncovered the incredibly illegal surveillence of their confidential goings-on) than finding out who it was that was spying on them, under what authority and for what purpose?

This whole thing seems dodgey as fcuk to me at least...

I mean, they did a bug sweep - as it turns out, they were completely fcuking right to do a bug sweep. And they were right to get external contractors to do it given the nature of their responsibilities and the conflict of interest that would arise if they asked the Gardai to do it.

And they were right to keep the information "need to know" until the sweep was complete - would have been a bit of a security lapse to pre-inform a bunch of politicians in the cabinet (especially the one who has remit over both the Gardai and the Defence Forces, and cause to avoid a scandal like this like the plague) who could in turn have a quiet word with Callinane or the Chief of Staff to get anything the Gardai or G2 have in there out of there before it's found. That would sort of defeat the purpose of doing the sweep in the first place...

I'm not necessarily saying the Gardai or DF have anything to do with this - nobody knows what the story is at the moment. But undertaking counter-surveillence measures isn't illegal, spying on the Garda Ombudsman definately is.

So why is the former the issue here, while the latter is being ignored?

Busted Flat. · 11-02-2014 03:58PM

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Why does the Government seem more interested in pointing fingers at GSOC (who through their own initiative uncovered the incredibly illegal surveillence of their confidential goings-on) than finding out who it was that was spying on them, under what authority and for what purpose?

This whole thing seems dodgey as fcuk to me at least...

I mean, they did a bug sweep - as it turns out, they were completely fcuking right to do a bug sweep. And they were right to get external contractors to do it given the nature of their responsibilities and the conflict of interest that would arise if they asked the Gardai to do it.

And they were right to keep the information "need to know" until the sweep was complete - would have been a bit of a security lapse to pre-inform a bunch of politicians in the cabinet (especially the one who has remit over both the Gardai and the Defence Forces, and cause to avoid a scandal like this like the plague) who could in turn have a quiet word with Callinane or the Chief of Staff to get anything the Gardai or G2 have in there out of there before it's found. That would sort of defeat the purpose of doing the sweep in the first place...

I'm not necessarily saying the Gardai or DF have anything to do with this - nobody knows what the story is at the moment. But undertaking counter-surveillence measures isn't illegal, spying on the Garda Ombudsman definately is.

So why is the former the issue here, while the latter is being ignored?

Because this is Ireland, the land of coverups and corruption.
Oop's forgot one, Scandal's.

golfball37 · 11-02-2014 04:02PM

When is Enda gonna be called up for lying to the Irish people yesterday about what the law states in relation to this?

He quite clealy stated under the 2005 act that they were legally obliged to report this to the Minister when the act says no such thing.

Have we any sort of free thinking media left in this cesspit to ask a pertinent question of an establishment figure?

sopretty · 11-02-2014 04:06PM

I really think it's a bit silly of the commissioner to query the mention of the gardai in the GSOC's statement. Sure the minister probably told him to clarify that.
Any guard worth his salt should surely know that suspects are identified based on means/motive/opportunity. OBVIOUSLY they would be a suspect. An independent body who investigates complaints against the gardai? Of course they have motive!
How many times do you hear gardai coming out with statements such as 'all lines of enquiry are being pursued' or 'no line of enquiry is being ruled out at this stage' etc. etc.
Like, for goodness sake, when a woman is murdered, usually the husband/partner is a prime 'suspect'. Just a 'suspect'. Obviously, an innocent and distraught husband would be quite annoyed at being treated as a suspect, but they accept this as being standard practice and cooperate, (ideally).
Someone who has made it to the highest position in the gardai, appears to me to be quite idiotic to respond with alarm at the notion that they might be a suspect.

If not idiotic, then arrogant to believe that anyone in this day and age would view the gardai as beyond any reproach or suspicion.

I Heart Internet · 11-02-2014 04:08PM

knird evol wrote: »

Is that 'standard policing' or an entertainment industry cliche?

I watch a lot of american tv myself and I love all the serious posts "Opportunity" and "Motive". I don't think we have enough to go to the DA with

Standard US policing would tell us a "crooked cop" is to blame. And perhaps that the guy from Internal Affairs knew all along.

Let's roll...:cool:

Foxhound38 · 11-02-2014 04:09PM

golfball37 wrote: »

When is Enda gonna be called up for lying to the Irish people yesterday about what the law states in relation to this?

He quite clealy stated under the 2005 act that they were legally obliged to report this to the Minister when the act says no such thing.

Have we any sort of free thinking media left in this cesspit to ask a pertinent question of an establishment figure?

Presumably it would be up to the Opposition to savage him over that? If I were Michael Martin or Gerry Adams I'd be all over that statement like a fly on shyte.

Presumably the Opposition could make it a media issue if they liked?

Satriale · 11-02-2014 04:13PM

sopretty wrote: »

If not idiotic, then arrogant to believe that anyone in this day and age would view the gardai as beyond any reproach or suspicion.

This is someone who described men who blew the whistle on corruption as "quite disgusting"

Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

Comments