Punched in face by stranger in broad daylight - what are my rights

GM228 wrote: »

The IF exists due to historical reasons, and has nothing to do with frivolous or vexatious claims.

The discretion you describe

There is a Code of Ethics in AGS, that every member signs up to.

- Every time I make a decision as to whether or not to use police powers I will be prepared to account for my actions. Wherever possible, I will explain my decisions to individuals affected.

GM228 wrote: »

Should disregard discretion for a saving face exercise? Bearing in mind the point made by 4ensic15 for example?

That is not the job of AGS. I saw the example you pointed to. Members of AGS are involved in policing and getting cases submitted. It is not their job to second guess the work of the DPP nor use it as an excuse to not carry out their own role.

GM228 wrote: »

The Garda Code does not force Gardaí to act either, when it comes to discretion the code is trumped.

Again the discretion you describe does not extend to the "discretion to use discretion" in not investigating complaints, or provide a second rate service to the citizens of this country.

GM228 wrote: »

Problem is a S2 assault carries no power of arrest, doing such would be unlawful and make sure there would be no successful prosecution.

Decisions on prosecution are a matter for the DPP.

If you want to get into a discussion about the re-classification of burglary, robbery, assault and theft down to less minor offences or to none at all, we can do that. Do you want to have that discussion ?

Again I would point out that the discretionary powers you are banging on about are not for this purpose.

Assault with intent to cause bodily harm or commit indictable offence under Section 18 of the Criminal Justice Act.

STB. wrote: »

The discretion you describe

There is a Code of Ethics in AGS, that every member signs up to.

- Every time I make a decision as to whether or not to use police powers I will be prepared to account for my actions. Wherever possible, I will explain my decisions to individuals affected.

And as I already stated a "code" does not and can not trump the law.

A policy saying you must do X can not over ride the law which says you can choose weather or not to do X.

Only a written judgement or statute can change the particulars of the common law power of discretion.

What is contained within the Code of Ethics has no legally binding force, same as the Oath of Attestation or the Garda Code. Statute only allows for the creation of standards of conduct and practice in the Code of Ethics, but does not actually give them legal force or make them mandatory. They are called a code and not a regulation for a reason and nothing prescribed under the Garda Síochána Act 2005 can interfere with the power of discretion.

It's interesting to note that one of the leading legal experts on the Gardaí, Professor Dermot Walsh has previously heavily criticised the Policing Authority (who wrote the Code of Ethics) stating they create an "impediment to accountability". It's hardly surprising it is to be replaced only a few short years after it's establishment.

STB. wrote: »

That is not the job of AGS.  I saw the example you pointed to.  Members of AGS are involved in policing and getting cases submitted.  It is not their job to second guess the work of the DPP nor use it as an excuse to not carry out their own role.

Where did I say they second guess the DPP etc? In the example given by 4ensic15 many such cases never actually come before the eyes of the DPP even when they proceed to prosecution.

STB. wrote: »

Again the discretion you describe does not extend to the "discretion to use discretion" in not investigating complaints, or provide a second rate service to the citizens of this country.

Actually it does.

Discretion applies to both their duties and their powers, and yes it does include a discretion to not investigate or prosecute complaints.

The Garda Professional Standards Unit stated a few years ago that the criminal justice system would "quite simply grind to a halt if the Gardaí were obliged to prosecute every single infraction of the law no matter how technical or no matter what the public interest is", whilst the Attorney General has stated "there is no obligation on prosecuting authority to prosecute in any given case".

This has also most recently been affirmed per se by the courts in 2011. The Gardaí refused to investigate an allegation of rape of a 12 year old, they eventually did 6 years later following consultation with UK authorities, the court held that it would be contrary to public interest to ensure the Gardaí had a duty of care towards the public in relation to their investigatory and prosecutorial functions.

The Garda Síochána Act 2005 makes it clear that no person is conferred a right in law that they would not otherwise have to demand they perform a function or provide a service, no executive authority in the state, not even Drew Harris has that right.

Their powers, duties and privileges are not conferred on them as a body with a view to being delegated, they inhere directly by law in each individual, when exercising these duties and powers Gardaí are considered to be constitutionally independent, even of the very force they are a member of and as such the application of such powers and duties is for each member to independently decide to use. As such Gardaí combine the public authority of the State and the private status of a citizen (in theory) which creates an argument that an action could lie in the context of a person vs a person as opposed to a person vs the State/Gardaí, that theory is as yet un-tested and most likely never will be.

STB. wrote: »

Decisions on prosecution are a matter for the DPP.

Wrong.

Only in relation to a select few offences. Otherwise the decision is with the Gardaí, they simply prosecute in the name of the DPP and do not need to seek DPP permission in relation to the majority of offences, and contrary to popular belief this also includes many indictable offences.

STB. wrote: »

If you want to get into a discussion about the re-classification of burglary, robbery, assault and theft down to less minor offences or to none at all, we can do that.  Do you want to have that discussion ?

The subject didn't even come up.

STB. wrote: »

Again I would point out that the discretionary powers you are banging on about are not for this purpose.

The power of discretion applies to all powers and duties, no executive authority can compel the Gardaí to act.

STB. wrote: »

Assault with intent to cause bodily harm or commit indictable offence under Section 18 of the Criminal Justice Act.

What's your point? S18 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994 confers no power of arrest, unless the Gardaí actually see the person making such an assault or they refuse to give their name and address.



I'll end with this:-
There are compelling considerations rooted in the welfare of the whole community, which outweigh the dictates of individualized justice - Mr. Justice Hedigan, High Court 2011.

JJayoo wrote: »

Perhaps the cops just didn't believe the OP? I think she said it happened at approx 23.30.

11.30am according to the OP.