Unsafe convictions - Redmond cleared

beer enigma

Is it just me or is the whole judicial system turning into a bit of a farce with unsafe/overturned convictions & outdated warrants etc.....

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2004/07/28/story159041.html

28/07/2004 - 10:35:39

Former Assistant Dublin City and Council Manager George Redmond had his corruption charge overturned today by the Court of Criminal Appeal.

The court ruled that new evidence relating to bank records from 1988 rendered his conviction “unsafe and unsatisfactory”.

gandalf

Banana Republic comes to mind. Not surprised though, I now expect Ray Burkes full legal fees to be covered by the tax payers of the country.

Shagged twice by these cowboys, once for the mess that their opportunistic shoddy planning has caused and then paying their costs for the farce without conclusion that the tribunals have been.

ArthurDent

Sure isn't that great altogether!
What a bloody country - I'm sure George will now sue the arse of the taxpayer for his year in jail.:rolleyes:

beer enigma

I wonder is the problem that the evidence gathered isn't watertight in the first place, or that the appeals system is just too 'generous'...after all, thsi is the guy who was stopped in Dublin airport with a briefcase full of cash ! (allegedly - he says covering himself )

sceptre

Originally posted by Andip
(allegedly - he says covering himself )

No need - he was stopped, it was Dublin Airport in February 1999 and he was carrying £190,170 in cash and £94,747 in cheques
Examiner

He pleaded guilty to tax offences and was fined £7500 in 2000. Separate to the corruption conviction.

beer enigma

No need -

Lol - can never be too careful these days.....I hear on the news tonight that he's facing new charges anyway.

Bateman

As regards outdated warrants, the gardaí responsible for that should have been sacked, that was a disgrace, something as basic as that is the type os screw-up that most working people would absolutely crucified for in their job. ****ing Keystone Cops, never mind Banana Republic.

beer enigma

Don't you find in sooooo Bl**dy frustrating...the likes of a High Court judge walking free as result of a Guarda c**k up makes my blood boil.

I agree with you - I'd be out on my ear if I did that in work

Cork

gandalf wrote:

Banana Republic comes to mind. Not surprised though, I now expect Ray Burkes full legal fees to be covered by the tax payers of the country.
QUOTE]

People are entitled to recourse of the courts.

Are people not expected the right to appeal.

Are we as a society expected to stoop to the level of the IRA with their Kangaroo Courts?

The Courts are there to uphold the law - if new evidence was found. It was to be heard.

jesus_thats_gre

Bateman wrote:

As regards outdated warrants, the gardaí responsible for that should have been sacked, that was a disgrace, something as basic as that is the type os screw-up that most working people would absolutely crucified for in their job. ****ing Keystone Cops, never mind Banana Republic.

I personally think this is something that they do on purpose..

I have a personal experience that proves it.. About 2 years ago there was a car accident outside my house involving two cars, each with a single person.. Car A was stopping to turn into their driveway and Car B hit the rear of of Car A at about 30 mph.. Car A was been driven by an elderly lady while Car B was being driven by an ex/retired Garda.. The ex Garda in this case was absoutely slaughtered drunk however. The accident happened at about 11.40 pm or so and it too that Gardai about 10-20 minutes to turn up.. For argument sake the accident occurred on the 21/07/02 at 11.40pm.. The drievr of Car B was arrested on the spot and the process began for doing him for drink driving.. When it got to court however, the first Garda who got to the scene said it occurred on the 22/07/02 just after mid night..

The driver of Car B got off because of this one detail.. He worked in the same district as the accident before he retired. Some would argue that it was prob a genuine oversight but I couldn't accept that.

Victor

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

I have a personal experience that proves it.. About 2 years ago there was a car accident outside my house involving two cars, each with a single person.. Car A was stopping to turn into their driveway and Car B hit the rear of of Car A at about 30 mph.. Car A was been driven by an elderly lady while Car B was being driven by an ex/retired Garda.. The ex Garda in this case was absoutely slaughtered drunk however. The accident happened at about 11.40 pm or so and it too that Gardai about 10-20 minutes to turn up.. For argument sake the accident occurred on the 21/07/02 at 11.40pm.. The drievr of Car B was arrested on the spot and the process began for doing him for drink driving.. When it got to court however, the first Garda who got to the scene said it occurred on the 22/07/02 just after mid night.. The driver of Car B got off because of this one detail.. He worked in the same district as the accident before he retired. Some would argue that it was prob a genuine oversight but I couldn't accept that.

Meanwhile they hung-out one guy to dry last week after someone was killed. Simply because he was drinking in a garda club and they let him drive home drunk.

Of course prejudicial press reporting may help his case now.

Cork

Victor wrote:

Of course prejudicial press reporting may help his case now.

The quicker a Press Council is established in this country the better.

oscarBravo

Caveat: I'm not 100% familiar with the latest details of the Redmond case.

I'd like to offer a little balance to this thread. If I was convicted of something, and new information subsequently came to light that could have materially affected the outcome of the case, I'd like to think my conviction would be considered unsafe.

Wouldn't you?

Flukey

It is clear he was taking bribes, whatever about the mistakes made in the evidence. He is no angel.

rmacm

Wheather we like it or not George Redmond is entitled to the same processes as everyone else and if there is evidence there that supports his position it should be heard. I am far from a supporter of the man and it is clear that he is no angel but as a citizen he is entitled to all the protection that the law provides i.e. he has to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

What doesn't make sense to me is why the bank records of the person who allegedly bribed Redmond were not checked as part of the initial investigation. If they were they would have shown up the irregularities which allowed the appeal court to judge his conviction unsafe.

The Gardai seem to have a bit of trouble handling the obvious things of late like making sure warrants are valid and crap like that.

Cheers
Rory