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

The George Gibney case.

Options
  • 22-02-2021 12:50am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 4,464 ✭✭✭


    The following article was published on broadsheet.ie in 2016.

    https://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/04/29/the-chief-justice-her-brother-and-how-george-gibney-got-away/
    On July 12, 1993 Mr Gibney’s legal team, including barrister Patrick Gageby, applied in the High Court for a judicial review restraining the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) from proceeding with the prosecution.

    A judicial review allows orders to be made against State decision-makers (including the DPP) if there is a a breach of fair procedures in the decision making process.

    Mr Gibney’s legal team argued that the delay in initiating the prosecution infringed their client’s right to a fair trial.

    On July 19, Justice Vivian Lavan in the High Court refused to stop the DPP from proceeding with the charges. He said that the delay did not infringe Mr Gibney’s right to a fair trial.

    Mr Gibney appealed this decision to the Supreme Court.

    On December 14, 1993, the Supreme Court granted Mr Gibney leave to apply for judicial review on the basis that his right to a fair trial might possibly have been infringed.

    This was the first case in Ireland to recognise that delay in making a complaint of sexual abuse could preclude a subsequent prosecution.

    Justice Declan Costello conducted the judicial review and held that Mr Gibney’s right to a fair trial would be infringed if the prosecution were to be proceeded with.

    He granted an order precluding the DPP from proceeding with the charges.

    An opportunity to appeal the decision was declined by Eamonn Barnes, then Director of Public Prosecutions.

    George Gibney left Ireland – travelling first to Scotland, where he coached young swimmers, and then to America.

    What went unreported at the time of the Supreme Court decision and what few outside the legal fraternity knew, least of all Mr Gibney’s alleged victims, was that Susan Denham, sister of Patrick Gageby, was on the bench that day.

    Ms Denham was in ‘complete agreement’ with the majority judgement and placed her feelings on the record.
    There was no objection to Ms Denham hearing her brother’s case from the Director of Public Prosecutions, represented in court by the late Eamon Leahy.

    Is this true? If it is true, why did the DPP not object to this incidence of conflict of interest?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,445 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    I find it hard to believe that the judge would risk her career for a paedo that she had no ties.


Advertisement