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

Some Gardai were present at a murder

bjork

and their superiors told them to keep stum.

Gardaí helped cover up the murder of a civilian by a member of the force, it has been claimed.

Using Dáil privilege, independent TD Clare Daly said that an officer witnessed a colleague shooting a member of the public but was told by senior officers to say he was not present during the incident

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/daly-garda-carried-out-murder-but-force-helped-cover-it-up-31147049.html

Is the darker side of the GS going to be uncovered? Forget speeding tickets; this is where it's going down.

Would you cover for a colleague if he'd done same in your work place?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

seamus

bjork wrote: »

But isn't that the point. How would we know who was murdered by the Gardai, because apparently, from what we are being told, none of them were there. They all have alibis for being back in the station drinking tea with the sergeant.

From what is alleged, one Garda was told to deny his presence.

We have no allegation that any other Gardai were told to keep schtum or that this incident was never reported.

mynamejeff

it always annoys me that when of these stories appears in the headlines they make as much noise as they can.
but when it transpires that the ags in fact did nothing wrong its bottom of page 12 and never a retraction or apology form the person who was shouting from a megaphone a few weeks before hand

waulie_palnuts

So Clare Daly uses her position to undermine the integrity of the Gardai further. The sooner she is voted out and returns back up her hole the better. The woman has quite clearly, lost the plot. Just goes to show, money can't by class. She's a spoilt little brat.

listermint

mynamejeff wrote: »

it always annoys me that when of these stories appears in the headlines they make as much noise as they can.
but when it transpires that the ags in fact did nothing wrong its bottom of page 12 and never a retraction or apology form the person who was shouting from a megaphone a few weeks before hand

A bit like how the commissioner was sacked then ... sorry resigned...

bjork

seamus wrote: »

From what is alleged, one Garda was told to deny his presence.

We have no allegation that any other Gardai were told to keep schtum or that this incident was never reported.

Using Dáil privilege, independent TD Clare Daly said that an officer witnessed a colleague shooting a member of the public but was told by senior officers to say he was not present during the incident.

Who was the colleague if he wasn't a Garda? Surely he would have been told to keep schtum too?

listermint

What annoys me most is that out of all the TDs in the Dail. Clare Daly is one of a very few that can actually speak articulately on the subject matter that she raises. She puts forward points and where she has the complete information she talks like someone who is fully informed on the discussion. Why someone would not want a politician that takes their job seriously. Puts the work in and can actually articulate topics in our house of government is beyond me.

There is some amount of posters on here who prefer the nod and wink approach. The dithering and deflection when asked a direct question and the complete lack of insight on the topics that lets be frank some people hold the ministry for.

I just dont get it, its perplexing.

tipptom

Her question to the taosaigh was why was this garda not interviewed on foot of a serious allegation made about a shooting by a garda and the taosaoigh was informed about this in 2014.

This garda could be a complete Walter Mitty for all I know but to have not even interviewed him immediately and discount his claims or make further investigations is a serious dereliction of duty in any democratic society and heads should roll from the very top if this proves to be the case for incompetence at least if not a more serious charges.

Cats fur sale

rocky911 wrote: »

I call bull**** on anything that woman comes out with.

You're a bright one.

mynamejeff

listermint wrote: »

A bit like how the commissioner was sacked then ... sorry resigned...

when was the last time some on in the Dail resigned or was sacked after being proved wrong ?

we have a house of representatives full of criminals and liars and we wonder why the country is slowly grinding to a halt

melissak

Jawgap wrote: »

Yes, because the Office of the Taoiseach is the proper authority to whom murders should be reported!

To be fair who would you report this alleged murder too. The guards?

seamus

bjork wrote: »

Using Dáil privilege, independent TD Clare Daly said that an officer witnessed a colleague shooting a member of the public but was told by senior officers to say he was not present during the incident.

Who was the colleague if he wasn't a Garda? Surely he would have been told to keep schtum too?

Speculation. The allegation doesn't say that the colleague was told to keep schtum.

Stick to the facts, don't speculate.

bjork

seamus wrote: »

Speculation. The allegation doesn't say that the colleague was told to keep schtum.

Stick to the facts, don't speculate.

How can the cover up work of "the Garda not being there", unless those who where there keep quiet?

Surely that's how cover ups work?
I'm not saying that's what happened, but that's a logical conclusion to draw from the allegation made.

geosynchronous orbit

waulie_palnuts wrote: »

So Clare Daly uses her position to undermine the integrity of the Gardai further. The sooner she is voted out and returns back up her hole the better. The woman has quite clearly, lost the plot. Just goes to show, money can't by class. She's a spoilt little brat.

The fact you felt the need to use the 'further' speaks volumes.
She has been vindicated in her actions thus far. She is a smart operator and I for one will watch this space further

If by wishing to have her silenced by being "voted out and return back up her hole", then your views on democracy wrt. public accountability gives a critical insight into the weight of your musings.

seamus

bjork wrote: »

How can the cover up work of "the Garda not being there", unless those who where there keep quiet?

Well pretty easily. Gardai A, B & C are present at a fatal shooting. Garda B did the the shooting.

It's discovered that Garda A shouldn't have been there (he was supposed to be elsewhere) and his presence may complicate matters when reporting the incident.

Garda A is told to shut up about it and B & C are told to not mention Garda A when reporting the incident. His presence at the shooting is incidental and doesn't affect the material facts of the death, but may raise disciplinary or operational questions.

For example; http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/force-used-by-armed-garda-in-foiled-post-office-robbery-proportionate-26783677.html

Now, that's speculation on my part. But to assume that this allegation automatically means a murder must have been covered up is equally speculation.

What we do know is that a Garda appears to believe there was something improper about an instruction given to him by a superior, and for some bizarre reason decided to send that allegation directly to the Taoiseach than to an appropriate body.

It probably wouldn't be outside the realms of possibility to suggest that he was "directed" to send the allegation to the Taoiseach rather than GSOC or the review board so that another member of the house could then use it as a political football later on...

geosynchronous orbit

seamus wrote: »

Well pretty easily. Gardai A, B & C are present at a fatal shooting. Garda B did the the shooting.

It's discovered that Garda A shouldn't have been there (he was supposed to be elsewhere) and his presence may complicate matters when reporting the incident.

Garda A is told to shut up about it and B & C are told to not mention Garda A when reporting the incident. His presence at the shooting is incidental and doesn't affect the material facts of the death, but may raise disciplinary or operational questions.

For example; http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/force-used-by-armed-garda-in-foiled-post-office-robbery-proportionate-26783677.html

Now, that's speculation on my part. But to assume that this allegation automatically means a murder must have been covered up is equally speculation.

What we do know is that a Garda appears to believe there was something improper about an instruction given to him by a superior, and for some bizarre reason decided to send that allegation directly to the Taoiseach than to an appropriate body.

It probably wouldn't be outside the realms of possibility to suggest that he was "directed" to send the allegation to the Taoiseach rather than GSOC or the review board so that another member of the house could then use it as a political football later on...

The "bizarre reason" you outline above has striking similarities to the McCabe affair; would you not agree that there appears to be form in this regard?

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/confidential-recipient-oliver-connolly-relieved-of-duties-1.1697956

Mr Martin said when Mr McCabe sent the Taoiseach a dossier he wrote to his office saying he had not been interviewed by Assistant Garda Commissioner John O’Mahony, though he had made all of the allegations.
“The Taoiseach wrote to the Department of Justice and the Minister told him that whether Mr McCabe would be interviewed was an operational matter for the head of the inquiry team,’’ Mr Martin added.
He said it was an extraordinary reply. Yet, having sent that letter to the Taoiseach, Mr Shatter told the Dáil that the whistleblower had not co-operated with the inquiry. “That was a blatant untruth,’’ said Mr Martin

tipptom

seamus wrote: »

Well pretty easily. Gardai A, B & C are present at a fatal shooting. Garda B did the the shooting.

It's discovered that Garda A shouldn't have been there (he was supposed to be elsewhere) and his presence may complicate matters when reporting the incident.

Garda A is told to shut up about it and B & C are told to not mention Garda A when reporting the incident. His presence at the shooting is incidental and doesn't affect the material facts of the death, but may raise disciplinary or operational questions.

For example; http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/force-used-by-armed-garda-in-foiled-post-office-robbery-proportionate-26783677.html

Now, that's speculation on my part. But to assume that this allegation automatically means a murder must have been covered up is equally speculation.

What we do know is that a Garda appears to believe there was something improper about an instruction given to him by a superior, and for some bizarre reason decided to send that allegation directly to the Taoiseach than to an appropriate body.

It probably wouldn't be outside the realms of possibility to suggest that he was "directed" to send the allegation to the Taoiseach rather than GSOC or the review board so that another member of the house could then use it as a political football later on...

Well if this is the way senior Garda interfere with a garda related fatal shooting crime scene and you think that is the way to do things we are in bigger mire that I thought

jimmycrackcorm

melissak wrote:

To be fair who would you report this alleged murder too. The guards?

The Garda ombudsman. I don't know why this incident is a question for the taoiseach

bjork

seamus wrote: »

Well pretty easily. ....
Garda A is told to shut up about it and B & C are told to not mention Garda A when reporting the incident. H..............

Yes, B&C are told to keep schtum about Garda A. That's what I said?!?

melissak

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The Garda ombudsman. I don't know why this incident is a question for the taoiseach

Are the independant review panel and the garda ombudsman the same.? If not who is the ombudsman? Is it a guard or an independant entity?

Floppybits

seamus wrote: »

What we do know is that a Garda appears to believe there was something improper about an instruction given to him by a superior, and for some bizarre reason decided to send that allegation directly to the Taoiseach than to an appropriate body.

It probably wouldn't be outside the realms of possibility to suggest that he was "directed" to send the allegation to the Taoiseach rather than GSOC or the review board so that another member of the house could then use it as a political football later on...

Maybe he did go through the relevant channels and maybe those channels blocked him or fobbed him off or tried to bury the allegation and that is why the person went to the Taoiseach.

I am basing my maybe's on is what Maurice McCabe went through before he gave the information about the penalty points to Claire Daly to bring up in the Dail.

This is the problem the AGS now face after their behavior during the penalty points fiasco, it is my personal opinion that when any sort of allegation is made by a Guard that impact badly upon the AGS, the AGS's first reaction is try and bury it rather than deal with it.

Jawgap

melissak wrote: »

To be fair who would you report this alleged murder too. The guards?

No, if it involved a Guard, I'd report it to GSOC.

If I was a TD and someone brought the allegation to me, I'd want so more information before proceeding to use PP, for example who, what and when. And if it involved a miscarriage of justice or a death that had been mis-attributed I'd be straight on to the people / families concerned to keep them informed......but that's just me.

Floppybits

Jawgap wrote: »

No, if it involved a Guard, I'd report it to GSOC.

If I was a TD and someone brought the allegation to me, I'd want so more information before proceeding to use PP, for example who, what and when. And if it involved a miscarriage of justice or a death that had been mis-attributed I'd be straight on to the people / families concerned to keep them informed......but that's just me.

How do you know that Claire Daly doesn't have all the facts? Maybe she is giving the government a warning by asking the Taoiseach the question in the Dail to give them notice not to try bury it like they tried with the Penalty points and are currently trying to do with the Resignation/sacking of the Garda Commissioner.

melissak

Floppybits wrote: »

Maybe he did go through the relevant channels and maybe those channels blocked him or fobbed him off or tried to bury the allegation and that is why the person went to the Taoiseach.

I am basing my maybe's on is what Maurice McCabe went through before he gave the information about the penalty points to Claire Daly to bring up in the Dail.

This is the problem the AGS now face after their behavior during the penalty points fiasco, it is my personal opinion that when any sort of allegation is made by a Guard that impact badly upon the AGS, the AGS's first reaction is try and bury it rather than deal with it.

Didn't she say it was reported to the independent review board last year amd hasn't been followed up.?

Happyman42

Floppybits wrote: »

How do you know that Claire Daly doesn't have all the facts? Maybe she is giving the government a warning by asking the Taoiseach the question in the Dail to give them notice not to try bury it like they tried with the Penalty points and are currently trying to do with the Resignation/sacking of the Garda Commissioner.

Precisely, it was a shot across their bows.
Brave opposition imo. The FGbots will never accept that though.

tipptom

They are looking for salacious details about the case when she was merely asking why this garda was not interviewed,pretty straightforward really.

But to a lot of posters here that is just getting above their station from the left and a woman to boot,only corrupt establishment party's may use Dail privilege to be cheerleaded by establishment Irish media.

Happyman42

tipptom wrote: »

They are looking for salacious details about the case when she was merely asking why this garda was not interviewed,pretty straightforward really.

But to a lot of posters here that is just getting above their station from the left and a woman to boot,only corrupt establishment party's may use Dail privilege to be cheerleaded by establishment Irish media.

Good job she isn't overweight, the place would have exploded in righteous indignation.

Little CuChulainn

Jawgap wrote: »

No, if it involved a Guard, I'd report it to GSOC.

If I was a TD and someone brought the allegation to me, I'd want so more information before proceeding to use PP, for example who, what and when. And if it involved a miscarriage of justice or a death that had been mis-attributed I'd be straight on to the people / families concerned to keep them informed......but that's just me.

Gardaí cannot report matters to GSOC, unless that has changed recently.

Jawgap

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Gardaí cannot report matters to GSOC, unless that has changed recently.

So if a Guard smashes a squad car into a civvy who reports it?

The Guards report stuff to GSOC all the time.

Little CuChulainn

Jawgap wrote: »

So if a Guard smashes a squad car into a civvy who reports it?

The Guards report stuff to GSOC all the time.

There are situations where a matter can be referred to GSOC by the organisation, like shootings or collisions, but individual Gardaí cannot report misconduct to GSOC.

Guy:Incognito

If it was all just in the righteous pursuit of the truth, why didnt she first just ask the Taoiseach in passing in the corridor or in the Dail bar. Would she not have got the answer? Does grandstanding help the cause more or does it just have the happy side effect of scoring some points?