Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

Options
1…153154156158159…315

Comments

  • Options
    #4652
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    Ten Pin wrote: »
    From Irish Examiner...


    https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/taoiseach-government-will-nudge-people-to-change-behaviour-in-bid-to-tackle-climate-change-931207.html

    But of course the Greens are loving it as they eye up another few years of trough snouting to save the planet and ruin the country, it's 2007 all over again.

    YAWN!
    Maria Bailey made false statements on an Affidavit. The only reason that isn't treated as perjury is because Irish judges can't be trusted.


  • Options
    #4653
    Credit Checker Moose
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,226 ✭✭✭Credit Checker Moose


    I don't think there is any obligation on anyone to have health insurance.


  • Options
    #4654
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    Credit Checker Moose wrote: »
    I don't think there is any obligation on anyone to have health insurance.

    Yet.


  • Options
    #4655
    InTheShadows
    Closed Accounts Posts: 727 ✭✭✭InTheShadows


    Credit Checker Moose wrote: »
    I don't think there is any obligation on anyone to have health insurance.

    Watch this space. FG have been running the public system into the ground to drive people towards private care.


  • Options
    #4656
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    marieholmfan wrote: »
    YAWN!
    Maria Bailey made false statements on an Affidavit. The only reason that isn't treated as perjury is because Irish judges can't be trusted.

    I don't mean to be rude but I have to call you on that statement because you are wrong in what you say.

    People often make false statements on an Affidavit. That doesn't automatically mean that the person is lying. It can be because they are lying or it can be because of a memory lapse or it can be because of a genuine mistake. You can't know for certain which of those three reasons are the cause of the false statement on Maria Bailey's Affidavit. False statements on Affidavits are often corrected in court. I've seen it happen several times. Bailey might have argued that it was a typing error that she couldn't run for three months when she meant to write three weeks. That kind of thing is very easy to explain in court.

    My second point is that perjury can only happen in court. This case didn't go into court so there was no perjury.

    I'm not standing up for Maria Bailey by the way, just stating a couple of points.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4657
    CrankyHaus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,281 ✭✭✭CrankyHaus


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I don't mean to be rude but I have to call you on that statement because you are wrong in what you say.

    People often make false statements on an Affidavit. That doesn't automatically mean that the person is lying. It can be because they are lying or it can be because of a memory lapse or it can be because of a genuine mistake. You can't know for certain which of those three reasons are the cause of the false statement on Maria Bailey's Affidavit. False statements on Affidavits are often corrected in court. I've seen it happen several times. Bailey might have argued that it was a typing error that she couldn't run for three months when she meant to write three weeks. That kind of thing is very easy to explain in court.

    My second point is that perjury can only happen in court. This case didn't go into court so there was no perjury.

    I'm not standing up for Maria Bailey by the way, just stating a couple of points.


    I disagree. An affidavit is a formally sworn court document, not the back of a napkin. There is an onus on anyone submitting one to ensure that the information is correct and truthful.



    Just because courts may indulge "dog ate my homework" excuses for falsifications on affidavits does not mean that we the public have to.


  • Options
    #4658
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,526 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Credit Checker Moose wrote: »
    I don't think there is any obligation on anyone to have health insurance.

    There certainly is a moral obligation if you have a family and of course you can afford it.

    That or let them rot and progressively get worse waiting 5 years for an appointment.


  • Options
    #4659
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    InTheShadows wrote: »
    Watch this space. FG have been running the public system into the ground to drive people towards private care.

    FG promised to abolish the HSE by 2016.

    To be replaced by what, I've no idea, but the fact that the most expensive children's hospital in the world, funded by tax payers, will have 'secret passages' built in for private kids might be indicative of how leo and the lads want to push a two tiered system.

    S.D summed it up well when he said that despite our Constitution stating all children in our state should be cherished equally, it's s thundering disgrace that we can have a publicly funded hospital - where hypothetically 2 X children of the exact same age with the exact same illness could be brought in to the hospital, and be told that you can see a consultant in two years if you've no medical private cover, but you can go through that wee door over there and get access to a consultant in two days if your mum and dad have the money to pay for private care.

    Ireland Inc.


  • Options
    #4660
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Would I be correct that yer man has finished his investigation into Bailey? Leo said he hadn’t read it yet and not that it wasn’t ready.

    I’m not going to be forgetting any of this. You hear me, Leo?

    Oh, and if they try to coincide releasing the report with the jury in a certain case coming back with their verdict, I will be disgusted. That victim should not be used for political purposes.


  • Options
    #4661
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    I challenged wheeliebin on some shocking homeless comments in another thread and he seems to have run away.

    What’ll we do now for spin?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4662
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Is it bin day?


  • Options
    #4663
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,148 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    CrankyHaus wrote: »
    I disagree. An affidavit is a formally sworn court document, not the back of a napkin. There is an onus on anyone submitting one to ensure that the information is correct and truthful.



    Just because courts may indulge "dog ate my homework" excuses for falsifications on affidavits does not mean that we the public have to.

    Even if the courts did not allow changes to affidavits it is still quite a way from information on an affidavits being incorrect to perjury. There is a huge yawning chasm between the two called intention.


  • Options
    #4664
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    I find it strange other parties haven’t taken advantage of this and asked when the report will be published and if not why not?

    You’d at least expect to see SF asking about it?


  • Options
    #4665
    GavMan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,913 ✭✭✭GavMan


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    Oh dear, it seems Shatter has really tried to put the boot in.

    The Indo have gone with a direct quote from him for their headline.

    Taoiseach's dangerous reaction to Bailey case more befitting of a cult than a political party'

    I have to agree, it's very cult like altogether, and I've being saying it all along, I think David Kennedy's report might have turned into Pandora's box for Leo, load of stuff in it he doesn't want to see himself, never mind let us plebs have a gander at.

    Skid marked knickers aplenty that he won't air in public.

    Hard to argue against Shatter.

    Ultimately the issue here is the trial by media culture in this (and other countries). Ultimately its everyone's right to undertake litigation no matter who you are. The judiciary should judge it on its merits.and rule accordingly. Striking out bogus claims and discouraging compo culture.

    I didn't read the first thing about the merits of MB's case so I'm not going to get into it


  • Options
    #4666
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,148 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    I find it strange other parties haven’t taken advantage of this and asked when the report will be published and if not why not?

    You’d at least expect to see SF asking about it?

    yeah Mary-Lou could do with a good distraction after the recent disastrous election results.


  • Options
    #4667
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    CrankyHaus wrote: »
    I disagree. An affidavit is a formally sworn court document, not the back of a napkin. There is an onus on anyone submitting one to ensure that the information is correct and truthful.

    Just because courts may indulge "dog ate my homework" excuses for falsifications on affidavits does not mean that we the public have to.

    Disagree all you want. I'm just telling you my experience of errors on an Affidavit being corrected in court regularly.

    You are correct that it is a formally sworn document and the onus is on anyone swearing one to ensure it is correct. But genuine mistakes do occasionally happen and they are easily corrected in court. I've seen it happen several times.

    I've seen errors such as people having a genuine accident but they have put down the date incorrectly. They would swear this in an Affidavit. Does that mean that their case should be thrown out because they made a mistake with the date? No, it's very easy to correct mistakes like this in court.


  • Options
    #4668
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    Baileys affidavit wouldn’t have ‘mistaken’ content though. It’s likely it contains provable and intentional lies.


  • Options
    #4669
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,148 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    Baileys affidavit wouldn’t have ‘mistaken’ content though. It’s likely it contains provable and intentional lies.

    do you know how hard it is to prove that somebody intentionally lied?


  • Options
    #4670
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    do you know how hard it is to prove that somebody intentionally lied?

    This is where the cctv comes in. And her 10k race etc etc.
    Hotel were dead right to challenge the claim. If they had rolled the tape in court and her own tweets etc about the race, surely the judge would take issue with that no?


  • Options
    #4671
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,148 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    This is where the cctv comes in. And her 10k race etc etc.
    Hotel were dead right to challenge the claim. If they had rolled the tape in court and her own tweets etc about the race, surely the judge would take issue with that no?

    what lie would the cctv show? She can claim that her memory of what happened is faulty.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4672
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    I find it strange other parties haven’t taken advantage of this and asked when the report will be published and if not why not?

    You’d at least expect to see SF asking about it?

    I'd say the shinners might have a claim or two they made over the years that might not be based in truth.

    But the old addage stands, don't interrupt your enemy while they are destroying themselves.


  • Options
    #4673
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    Really?
    Well that’s a way out I guess.

    As someone said earlier lying in an affidavit /making false claims is an offence but as we see it’s rarely charged.
    Has it ever been I wonder?


  • Options
    #4674
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    Many thanks for your correction.
    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I don't mean to be rude but I have to call you on that statement because you are wrong in what you say.

    People often make false statements on an Affidavit. That doesn't automatically mean that the person is lying. It can be because they are lying or it can be because of a memory lapse or it can be because of a genuine mistake. You can't know for certain which of those three reasons are the cause of the false statement on Maria Bailey's Affidavit. False statements on Affidavits are often corrected in court. I've seen it happen several times. Bailey might have argued that it was a typing error that she couldn't run for three months when she meant to write three weeks. That kind of thing is very easy to explain in court.

    My second point is that perjury can only happen in court. This case didn't go into court so there was no perjury.

    I'm not standing up for Maria Bailey by the way, just stating a couple of points.


  • Options
    #4675
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,148 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    Really?
    Well that’s a way out I guess.

    As someone said earlier lying in an affidavit /making false claims is an offence but as we see it’s rarely charged.
    Has it ever been I wonder?

    It is rarely charged because it is damn near impossible to prove. You have to prove that they lied intentionally.


  • Options
    #4676
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    It is rarely charged because it is damn near impossible to prove. You have to prove that they lied intentionally.

    Right. That’s a shame.

    In a way raises the question. If it’s all simple and innocent why hasn’t the report been released? I know they’ll say ‘internal matter’. Bollox to that. It’s of public interest and only was investigated due to it emerging in the public eye and the legitimate outcry.

    This won’t go away the way they’d wish


  • Options
    #4677
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    do you know how hard it is to prove that somebody intentionally lied?

    Be hard to see how someone could innocently just forget taking part in a run three weeks after such a serious incident, especially if (as you'd expect) there was prep training for it too.

    Let's not forget she said no running at all for 3 months afterwards.

    Open to correction here, but wasn't the run in question one that she partook in annually, at in and around the same date?

    You'd be forgiven in thinking that the accident happening only 3 weeks previous to the run would help you recall the run, not make it slip your mind.


  • Options
    #4678
    CrankyHaus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,281 ✭✭✭CrankyHaus


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    what lie would the cctv show? She can claim that her memory of what happened is faulty.


    I think you're missing the point here.


    Any reasonable person can see that a false statement of this kind on a sworn affidavit is at least a prima facie example of a lie and anyone making it should be required to prove that they made the false statement by mistake if they wish to dispell the presumption that they're telling tall tales.



    Just because the Courts may turn a blind eye to this does not excuse it.


  • Options
    #4679
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,148 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    CrankyHaus wrote: »
    I think you're missing the point here.


    Any reasonable person can see that a false statement of this kind on a sworn affidavit is at least a prima facie example of a lie and anyone making it should be required to prove that they made the false statement by mistake if they wish to dispell the presumption that they're telling tall tales.



    Just because the Courts may turn a blind eye to this does not excuse it.

    You have the burden of proof for backwards there. the burden of proof is on the prosecution not the defendant.


  • Options
    #4680
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,148 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    Be hard to see how someone could innocently just forget taking part in a run three weeks after such a serious incident, especially if (as you'd expect) there was prep training for it too.

    Let's not forget she said no running at all for 3 months afterwards.

    Open to correction here, but wasn't the run in question one that she partook in annually, at in and around the same date?

    You'd be forgiven in thinking that the accident happening only 3 weeks previous to the run would help you recall the run, not make it slip your mind.

    I totally agree with you and think she is lying through her arse. I cant prove it though and i doubt anybody else can either.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4681
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    I totally agree with you and think she is lying through her arse. I cant prove it though and i doubt anybody else can either.

    Yeah, because we all have life events that we can relate to in certain years.

    1999 finished with ex
    2003 emigrated
    2005 came home
    2007 started work in such and such a place etc etc.

    In Bailey's run, I'd find it hard that she won't always relate that years run, to the "few weeks after me and the girls went to Sophie's and I tumbled off a swing like a big feckin eejit"


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement