Should Judge Mahon be replaced?

Cork · 13-10-2003 6:09pm #1

Should Judge Mahon be replaced?

I disagree with yesterdays Sunday Tribune editorial. Judge Mahon made a mis-calculation on his taxes many years ago.

It is human to err. I think we expect infalability from those in public life. "For he who has not sinned cast the first stone".

Making haman errors is common place. I think as a society, we have become too judgemental and always looking for a head.

mike65 · 13-10-2003 6:19pm

As much as I agree Cork, its the nature of the tribunals that those in charge have to be cleaner than clean - the idea of Liam Lawless
slinging mud towards Judge Mahon in the "courtroom" is not to be
entertained!

Mike.

star gazer · 13-10-2003 6:19pm

Nope.

people have been working to undermine Flood/Mahon since it began. I saw in Ireland on Sunday that Liam Lawlor is suspected of having released the information about Alan Mahon. just before the Summer there were calls that It was going to cost hundreds of million and take fifteen years to complete, what they don't want to tell you is that with the extra tax and fines so far collected as a result of investigations into planning irregularities have almost paid for the costs so far. If uncooperative witnesses don't get costs and pay for some of the courts costs it will make extra money.

Cork · 13-10-2003 6:36pm

Originally posted by mike65
Liam Lawless
slinging mud towards Judge Mahon in the "courtroom" is not to be
entertained!

Mike.

I think that these tribunerals are not courts of law.

It will be pretty impossible to find anybody who has not made any errors thru the years - you'd be looking for a saint.

Everybody makes mistakes & everybody has regrets.

I think there is much to be said to have Senete Hearings like the US. But, I think we need to be willing to accept that people make oversights & errors.

bonkey · 14-10-2003 9:15am

Originally posted by Cork
Judge Mahon made a mis-calculation on his taxes many years ago.

What value was this "miscalculation"???

star gazer · 14-10-2003 11:46am

What value was this "miscalculation"???
bonkey

More than the average industrial wage at the time. But then again Senior counsel earn a multiple of the average industrial wage at the time and even still. It's all relative and if the Revenue thought there was something sinister they would have fined him more than twenty five percent. The offshore accounts people got fined and penalties of roughly 100% so there isn't the same magnitude.
If there really is a fundamental problem with Mahon being on the tribunal then he shouldn't be at fault, the people who recommended his appointment will have to answer the questions.

Sleipnir · 14-10-2003 11:53am

So the guy screwed up. Or he did something to get away with paying taxes but didn't get away with it.
If it was your dad would you be so quick to condemn him and call for his removal from his job?
Most people would do it if they could get away with, I know I would.

Sparks · 14-10-2003 3:17pm

He needs to resign. Not because of any moral judgement on him per se, but because if he doesn't, schmucks like Lawlor can drag the whole tribunal through the mud with ease.

Cork · 14-10-2003 7:02pm

Originally posted by Sparks
He needs to resign. Not because of any moral judgement on him per se, but because if he doesn't, schmucks like Lawlor can drag the whole tribunal through the mud with ease.

Even if we follow the US excellent senate hearings system - It is human to err.

Judge Mahon is well capable of chairing this tribuneral. It is not a court of law & he should continue.

Sparks · 15-10-2003 12:34am

Originally posted by Cork
Even if we follow the US excellent senate hearings system - It is human to err.

Indeed. However, just because it's human doesn't meant there shouldn't be consequences. But then, expecting a FF supporter to acknowlege that might be expecting a bit much, given the history of FF for unpunished corruption...

Judge Mahon is well capable of chairing this tribuneral. It is not a court of law & he should continue.

Missed the point there, didn't ya cork? It's not a matter of competency - it's not a matter of moral judgement - it's a matter of protecting the tribunal from attack by prats like Lawlor.

star gazer · 15-10-2003 10:22am

Missed the point there, didn't ya cork? It's not a matter of competency - it's not a matter of moral judgement - it's a matter of protecting the tribunal from attack by prats like Lawlor.
Sparks

But Mahon revealed all this to the interview panel that were vetting the new judges. Why should he have to carry the can for someone elses decision. Maybe he should go but shouln't that only happen when the people who recommended Alan Mahon for the job admit they used suspect judgement?
To lose one judge could be seen as unlucky to lose two looks like...

Sparks · 15-10-2003 10:45am

Originally posted by star gazer
But Mahon revealed all this to the interview panel that were vetting the new judges. Why should he have to carry the can for someone elses decision. Maybe he should go but shouln't that only happen when the people who recommended Alan Mahon for the job admit they used suspect judgement?
To lose one judge could be seen as unlucky to lose two looks like...

It's not about Mahon carrying the can for someone else's decision, it's about him taking responsibility for his own error and not letting that error compromise important work that's costing millions already.

15-10-2003 11:36am

How would it comprimise the tribunal at this stage?
what more is to be said about it, the matter is sorted.
mm

Sparks · 17-10-2003 2:12pm

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2003/10/17/story117713.html

Judge walks out of Tribunal hearing
17/10/2003 - 12:47:59 pm

The Chairman of the Planning Tribunal, Justice Alan Mahon, walked out of the Tribunal today.

Justice Mahon walked out after Liam Lawlor raised the issue of the judge's own tax settlement.

Justice Mahon told Mr Lawlor that the hearing was concerned only with the issue of costs against Mr Lawlor.

The judge walked out when Mr Lawlor continued to bring up the issue.

Justice Mahon adjourned proceedings later saying he will give his ruling on this matter within a few days.

I - told - you - so ....

Villain · 17-10-2003 2:17pm

Walking out was the worst thing he could have done, thats just plain stupid.

star gazer · 17-10-2003 2:24pm

I - told - you - so ....
sparks

is it in the public interest that lawlor should get his own way? I would wait for his ruling next week to see if walking out was the right thing.

Sparks · 17-10-2003 2:35pm

Guys, it's not directly evident from the breakingnews.ie site, but he walked out for ten minutes and then returned. The reason he walked out was because talking to lawlor in that room has got to be just like talking to Cork about bin charges in that thread. The walkout wasn't the big deal, nor was it the reason for the "I told you so". The fact that lawlor now has a legally valid reason to challenge the tribunal is the big deal.

sceptre · 17-10-2003 2:37pm

At this point I'd be very much in favour of horsewhipping Lawlor.

Oh, for the laugh (or the record)...

Liam Lawlor is a lying, cheating, corrupt, ignorant, scumbag of a taxcheat (a repeated taxcheat) who has been a perfect example of the type of scummy self-promoting corrupt whore politicians that we've had elected on behalf of Fianna Fail (who seem to have had a habit of nominating corrupt taxcheats) in this country. Oh yeah, he's ugly as well. I called you a liar Liam. So sue me. Your solicitors may PM me for my address. Do't think I won't send it on - I will.

On-topic, Mahon has two options here. Resign (and in the process give Lawlor the lying taxcheat what he wants) OR find the corrupt idiot in contempt of court (or rather the tribunal) and send the lying (repeated) taxcheat off to proper jail where he'll get the attention he so obviously craves. A few months of sharing a mattress and a potty with a few drug addicts might make Lawlor (the fat lying cheating ignorant corrupt taxcheat) a little more contrite. I'd like to see the latter even if Mahon does resign.

Villain · 17-10-2003 2:43pm

More on the story:http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1017/mahon.html

sceptre · 17-10-2003 2:51pm

He told the chairman he not behind the story and that he has written to the Garda Commissioner asking him to investigate the allegation.

The Garda commissioner? Might sound good in a soundbite but what in the name of corrupt fatsos might the Garda commissioner have to do with investigating a report in a Sunday newspaper that Lawlor says isn't true? That's a civil matter Liam, you're fooling no-one.

star gazer · 17-10-2003 2:56pm

The fact that lawlor now has a legally valid reason to challenge the tribunal is the big deal.
sparks

I'm not so sure it works like that for a tribunal. If it were a criminal trial by jury then yes it would, but Mahon is a judge and would be expected to have no problem in dismissing news reports to ensure they had no bearing on his judgement.

just like talking to Cork about bin charges in that thread.
Cork

Everybody needs a nemesis

besides it's more fun!

bonkey · 17-10-2003 4:51pm

Originally posted by Sparks
The fact that lawlor now has a legally valid reason to challenge the tribunal is the big deal.

Does he? And how would changing the judge do anything, when Lawlor can still bring up the same issue about teh same judge.

Whether or not this particular judge is presiding is irrelevant - either the reason applies to Lawlor's case, or it does not. I cannot see how its a "well, if he's adjudicating, its a valid legal challenge, but if someone else is, it isn't".

jc

Should Judge Mahon be replaced?

Comments