Inquiry set up into taping of phone calls from Garda stations

Potential-Monke · 26-03-2014 08:43PM

dharma200 wrote: »

I think perhaps, my own two cents, that those serving in the force ought to read a bit of foucault....

Any chance of a TL;DR, I'm not a fan of philosophy.

Stavros Murphy · 26-03-2014 08:43PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Firstly, how does a guard not turning up for court for minor offences make their inspector look like a fool? An Inspector presents the case and the Garda is called as a witness. The court will want to know why the State doesn't have a witness, and if he doesn't have an answer he's left there standing like a fool apologising to the Judge.

Second. Why would the inspector care? What consequences are for him? The Inspector presents the case, and it makes the State look bad. This is turn can effect a Judges perception of the Inspector that he's not able to manage his personnel. It's up to the Inspector to ensure witnesses are there, as he has to answer as to why they're not.

Third. How does the inspector find out or follow whether the Garda turned up or not? If the Garda is supposed to be there and s/he isn't, the Inspector will know and will request a report from the member through his/her Sergeant.

Fourth. Would it not be in the interests of and actively encouraged by a unit specifically assigned the role of looking after public order/demonstrations to tie activists up in court? Pearse Street garda station, for example? No. They, like any member of AGS, bring people to court only if they believe they have sufficient grounds for believing so. It has nothing to do with tieing up activists. I'm guessing this is an indication of why you were in court.

Because from what I saw there was no consequences. You may not have heard of the consequences, but i can guarantee there was, and you may not be privy to that information either as it's an internal matter.

Personally, I think it's good to hear the other side as well, especially when the other side is as reasoned as Potential-Monke, and no, I'm not taking sides, I just like hearing both sides put their points.

coolemon · 26-03-2014 08:44PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Firstly, how does a guard not turning up for court for minor offences make their inspector look like a fool? An Inspector presents the case and the Garda is called as a witness. The court will want to know why the State doesn't have a witness, and if he doesn't have an answer he's left there standing like a fool apologising to the Judge.

Second. Why would the inspector care? What consequences are for him? The Inspector presents the case, and it makes the State look bad. This is turn can effect a Judges perception of the Inspector that he's not able to manage his personnel. It's up to the Inspector to ensure witnesses are there, as he has to answer as to why they're not.

Third. How does the inspector find out or follow whether the Garda turned up or not? If the Garda is supposed to be there and s/he isn't, the Inspector will know and will request a report from the member through his/her Sergeant.

Fourth. Would it not be in the interests of and actively encouraged by a unit specifically assigned the role of looking after public order/demonstrations to tie activists up in court? Pearse Street garda station, for example? No. They, like any member of AGS, bring people to court only if they believe they have sufficient grounds for believing so. It has nothing to do with tieing up activists. I'm guessing this is an indication of why you were in court.

Because from what I saw there was no consequences. You may not have heard of the consequences, but i can guarantee there was, and you may not be privy to that information either as it's an internal matter.

It sounds like you are talking about specific types of crimes there. Indictable crimes or mid to high level crimes.

I am talking about low level public order offences where, from what I can gather, there is no inspector directly involved or putting a case forward.

This is Gardaí charging people for low level public order offences in court themselves. Perhaps without even a prosecuting solicitor or DPP involved.

I have seen in one instance a judge telling a Garda sergeant who was present to get on to the no-show garda's superiors about it, but in others (and my own) the judge simply struck it out without any comment or instructions.

And with no apparent consequences.

No. They, like any member of AGS, bring people to court only if they believe they have sufficient grounds for believing so. It has nothing to do with tieing up activists. I'm guessing this is an indication of why you were in court.

Well from my own experiences and that of others I would disagree. I have seen cases where there are most certainly no grounds for a persons arrest and a no show.

Pressays frequently do not reflect what happened and make all sorts of allegations. But that's what the court is there for right?

Potential-Monke · 26-03-2014 08:48PM

coolemon wrote: »

It sounds like you are talking about specific types of crimes there. Indictable crimes or mid to high level crimes.

I am talking about low level public order offences where, from what I can gather, there is no inspector directly involved or putting a case forward.

This is Gardaí charging people for low level public order offences in court themselves. Perhaps without even a prosecuting solicitor or DPP involved.

I have seen in one instance a judge telling a Garda sergeant who was present to get on to the no-show garda's superiors about it, but in others (and my own) the judge simply struck it out without any comment or instructions.

It may be a possibility in smaller Jurisdictions, but every court i've been to has had at least an Inspector presenting the case. I would actually be surprised if a rank lower than Inspector was presenting. Maybe another member can advise me of this.

26-03-2014 08:51PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

It may be a possibility in smaller Jurisdictions, but every court i've been to has had at least an Inspector presenting the case. I would actually be surprised if a rank lower than Inspector was presenting. Maybe another member can advise me of this.

inspectors present cases in the country. in the city Guards present their own cases, however i believe all courts now have court presenters, who are usually sergeants, occasionally Guards.

renegademaster · 26-03-2014 08:58PM

May 2001: Shatter DEMANDS action on recorded phone conversations between solicitors & clients in Donegal Garda station (via www.twitter.com/Effanning )

so much for only finding out on Mon arvo!! he'll be gone by end of the week!!

WilyCoyote · 26-03-2014 09:06PM

renegademaster wrote: »

May 2001: Shatter DEMANDS action on recorded phone conversations between solicitors & clients in Donegal Garda station (via www.twitter.com/Effanning )

so much for only finding out on Mon arvo!! he'll be gone by end of the week!!

And The Bull looks a bigger buffoon than ever. His ruddy complexion saves his blushes.

renegademaster · 26-03-2014 09:10PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5JHGi0awgc

Potential-Monke · 26-03-2014 09:14PM

bubblypop wrote: »

inspectors present cases in the country. in the city Guards present their own cases, however i believe all courts now have court presenters, who are usually sergeants, occasionally Guards.

I'm in a city, one of the busiest, and we are called to give evidence but there's always a cig or higher to present the case...

Santa Cruz · 26-03-2014 09:27PM

coolemon wrote: »

It sounds like you are talking about specific types of crimes there. Indictable crimes or mid to high level crimes.

I am talking about low level public order offences where, from what I can gather, there is no inspector directly involved or putting a case forward.

This is Gardaí charging people for low level public order offences in court themselves. Perhaps without even a prosecuting solicitor or DPP involved.

I have seen in one instance a judge telling a Garda sergeant who was present to get on to the no-show garda's superiors about it, but in others (and my own) the judge simply struck it out without any comment or instructions.

And with no apparent consequences.

Well from my own experiences and that of others I would disagree. I have seen cases where there are most certainly no grounds for a persons arrest and a no show.

Pressays frequently do not reflect what happened and make all sorts of allegations. But that's what the court is there for right?

Perhaps you were arrested for boring people to death with repetitive unproved allegations

coolemon · 26-03-2014 09:45PM

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Perhaps you were arrested for boring people to death with repetitive unproved allegations

Yes, I was arrested for boring people to death with repetitive unproved allegations.

26-03-2014 10:06PM

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I'm in a city, one of the busiest, and we are called to give evidence but there's always a cig or higher to present the case...

sorry, i meant Dublin city!!
you would kinda forget there are others........:D:D

spunk_house · 26-03-2014 11:24PM

coolemon wrote: »

are you a cop?

Want to answer the question/example posed?

What consequences are there for Gardaí who do not turn up for court and waste peoples time, falsely arrest, charge people and waste tax payers money?

Ill tell you from my experience.

NONE.

You and your colleagues are riddled with malpractice.

The pathological attempt to downplay it and cover it up on here is pathetic.

I hear ya

I once spent four hours in a cell and another two in an interview room , my crime , buying a can of coke in a newsagents , a local troublemaker ( with friends in the force ) made a false complaint against me about how I made gestures towards him outside the same establishment ( we had previous ) and the local seargent who had his nose bent out of shape because I questioned his actions related to another matter ( he told my mum he would only ever call out in an unmarked car so as to save her embarrassment but subsequently always drove out in the squad - I have a brother with autism who got into some trouble a few years ago and the police were peripherally involved and called around occasionally , no charges were brought against him or anything , was a HSE case in the main ) , decided to exact revenge by running with this other guys bogus accusation , four hours of detention over a petty grudge which of course went nowhere

I was sensible enough to pick a spot on the wall as they say

spunk_house · 26-03-2014 11:26PM

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Have you taken a civil action for false arrest or complained to GSOC. If so what was the result?

I asked one of the countries top criminal lawyers about doing the above and he said " it would be a complete waste of time "

I have family in the legal profession who arranged for me to speak to one the top firms in the state , this man has worked on some very high profile criminal cases , I only wish I had known the man back in 2005 when I lost a stonewall case , I was assaulted on my own property but the guy I refered to earlier not only had a doctor lie for him , the guards done everything they could to steer the judge in favour of the other guy , I learned later ( from my utterly useless legal rep ) that the guards failed to hand in my medical evidence which detailed my injurys , I had my house searched for an illegal weapon due to the fact that the trespasser self inflicted injuries on his ears , I was not convicted of possession of an illegal weapon of course as none was found , again the guards tried to imply in court that I used an illegal weapon against this other guy despite nothing having been found

I was younger and more naïve at the time and in shock that the guards would so blatantly try and shill for one side , that combined with the fact that the small town solicitor was so utterly incompetent , I lost the case and was so dissilussioned , I made the awful descision not to appeal

PS , im based in a district of the country which has a notoriously erratic and outrageous district court judge

Turner · 26-03-2014 11:32PM

Gardai have to attend a lot of courts on a daily basis.

District Court
Circuit Court
Appeals Court
High Court
Family Law Court
Central Criminal
Coronors Court

If they are in multiple courts on one day they have to go to the one that take most precedence.

Its not always practicable to get somebody to go to the other (lower) courts on your behalf.

As well, members working a tour before they go to court might get caught up with an investigation, prisoners or a dead body that will take hours to deal with, which would stop them from going to court.

Its very rare that a member "forgets" to go to court in my experience.

markad1 · 26-03-2014 11:33PM

There's bad apples in every job, the garda are no exception. ...but I will say I have met more good garda than bad ......unfortunately it's the bad ones that get remembered

Santa Cruz · 26-03-2014 11:39PM

spunk_house wrote: »

I asked one of the countries top criminal lawyers about doing the above and he said " it would be a complete waste of time "

Must be because of an absence of any evidence.
As I said before check the GSOC reports on their website. They have had a number of successful prosecutions and cases which were dealt by disciplinary punishments.

spunk_house · 26-03-2014 11:44PM

markad1 wrote: »

There's bad apples in every job, the garda are no exception. ...but I will say I have met more good garda than bad ......unfortunately it's the bad ones that get remembered

the " few bad apples " line might have satisfied the masses as recently as last Friday ( and its exactly what the institution and government want us to believe )

only the very gullible are still content to slink away with that message plus a pat on the back

sopretty · 26-03-2014 11:57PM

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Must be because of an absence of any evidence.
As I said before check the GSOC reports on their website. They have had a number of successful prosecutions and cases which were dealt by disciplinary punishments.

The problem though is while there may be a lack of evidence, apart from your own two eyes and ears, it doesn't mean the guards were not in the wrong.
I heard a guard in a case perjure himself in court. I know, as I was there at the time he was referring to. What would be the point in reporting him though? His word against mine and my friend's? Give me a break. We're not that thick. They know when you've no proof of anything, and it's then that they do what they like.
You'd be a bigger eejit to make a complaint about such a thing. Sure who's going to investigate? Another guard? Yup. As corrupt as f**k, some of them!

Fred Swanson · 27-03-2014 12:02AM

This post has been deleted.

Cartel Mike · 27-03-2014 01:12AM

Massive respect to the initial garda whistleblowers who have basically started all this.

More Detectives , less plods -stitching us up on hearsay bullisht alledged traffic offences.

Too many plods with nothing to do vulturing for bull**** fines. Not enough usefullf or helpfull detectives helping people with actual problems -but then they don't bring in actual revenue.

At the moment the only Gardai I could actually stomach are the ones who actually investigate other Gardai and now that that nepoticstic plonker Callaghan has resigned hopefully the force's internal investigators can actually help clean up this dirty organization.

Wasn't there also examples in the whistleblowers report of the 'stitching up' techniques Gardai used to obtain fines in the first place. Not heard any 'progess' on that aspect.

I think there is a new system in the UK comming in where coppers will have to wear mini cams on their helmets. God knows...with the reputation Gardai have here that's starting to sound like a must do in Ireland.

hatrickpatrick · 27-03-2014 10:57AM

Any chance we could split the thread into one about general allegations about Garda misconduct and one specifically for the phone taping issue?
It's not that I'm being in any way dismissive of the other debate going on here, just that with so many different explosive issues coming out at the moment it wouldn't be a bad idea to have more focused threads. Otherwise I find the debates tend to drown eachother out.

renegademaster · 27-03-2014 11:06AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Any chance we could split the thread into one about general allegations about Garda misconduct and one specifically for the phone taping issue?
It's not that I'm being in any way dismissive of the other debate going on here, just that with so many different explosive issues coming out at the moment it wouldn't be a bad idea to have more focused threads. Otherwise I find the debates tend to drown eachother out.

by joining them they'll all be lost in one thread and easier for trolls and paid shills to derail the debates

martingriff · 27-03-2014 01:20PM

WilyCoyote wrote: »

You have got a selective view of corruption. If a garda knows of illegality within the force he should expose that or else he is complicit in the crime.
It is black and white ........ no exceptions for colleagues, family etc. That's what the law/democracy is all about.

I agree with you in what you say. All I said was not all garda are corrupt. I am going by your sefinition above.

martingriff · 27-03-2014 01:28PM

spunk_house wrote: »

the " few bad apples " line might have satisfied the masses as recently as last Friday ( and its exactly what the institution and government want us to believe )

only the very gullible are still content to slink away with that message plus a pat on the back

I Dont get your point "the few bad apples" line for me anyway is not to absolve anyone from blame all bad apples should be dealt with but it is to say that everone should not be tarred with the same brush.

Santa Cruz · 27-03-2014 01:45PM

I suppose we could always wait and see what comes out of this commission before getting the firing squads prepared. Of course it is easier to jump the gun and make up what we want to believe

sopretty · 27-03-2014 02:05PM

The thing is, one bad apple gives the force a bad name. It has been acknowledged by members themselves on here even, that any thing they do, represents the entire force. That is why, they can't afford too many bad apples! And unfortunately, I know of a group of them in one case (relative bullied out of force, settled outside High Court in his favour, now suffers from depression), and two from personal experience, the first of which was the fella who lied in court, and the last of whom was reported to the ombudsman, was then referred to Internal Complaints of AGS (investigation overseen by ombudsman but carried out by a superintendent of AGS), was investigated and found not to have breached the disciplinary code. That is sufficient for me to not trust them. As I said, I have occasionally encountered a couple of nice ones. But generally, I fear them. They are a law unto themselves and you're in a very vulnerable position dealing with them.

That is just my experience with them.

I'd imagine everyone in the country knows at least one bad apple. That's a whole bunch of bad apples!!!

donegal__road · 27-03-2014 02:33PM

this entire phone bugging story serves one purpose, and one purpose only... it takes the Anglo court case out of the spotlight and off the front page of the newspapers.

dxhound2005 · 27-03-2014 03:12PM

donegal__road wrote: »

this entire phone bugging story serves one purpose, and one purpose only... it takes the Anglo court case out of the spotlight and off the front page of the newspapers.

That would seem to me like a lot of trouble to go to. And the case still made the Court page of the Indo as recently as two days ago. I wouldn't want the papers to make front page stories every day for weeks on end of mundane evidence in the case.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/loan-letters-were-to-protect-maple-10-in-case-of-anglo-takeover-court-hears-30123726.html

My name is URL · 27-03-2014 03:26PM

Gardaí sought advice on disposing recordings four days before Taoiseach was told of tapes

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/garda%C3%AD-sought-advice-on-disposing-recordings-four-days-before-taoiseach-was-told-of-tapes-1.1739548

The Garda sought advice from the Data Protection Commissioner on how to dispose of illegally obtained recordings of phone calls from Garda stations four days before Taoiseach Enda Kenny was informed of the practice.

Mr Kenny told the Dáil on Tuesday that he was only informed on Sunday by Attorney General Máire Whelan of the widespread use of recordings and its attendant implications.

However, following a query from The Irish Times yesterday, the office of Data Protection Commissioner Billy Hawkes confirmed that it was contacted by the Garda Síochána on Wednesday March 19th in order to seek advice on the disposal of the recordings.

In response to further queries, the spokeswoman for Mr Hawkes said he had not issued any instruction to delete personal data in this case.

That's a blatant lie. Hawkes was on Today FM a few days ago and said that he had advised Gardai to 'delete the information'.

http://player.todayfm.com/player/podcasts/The_Last_Word_with_Matt_Cooper/The_Last_Word_with_Matt_Cooper/12995/0/billy_hawkes_gardai_unaware_of_recordings

^^ 2 minutes in. He said it.. numerous times!

Utterly useless regulatory body.

Inquiry set up into taping of phone calls from Garda stations

Comments