Temple Bar Assaults

Canis Lupus

and to that ill say what u have is an alleged eye witness of whose name is not given.... furthermore he is describing an alleged incident and never included any specific times, never mentioned any names of the alleged victims or assailants and gave the rough area of templebar square. in which im sure there are plenty of fights.

of course im not a solicitor so what do i know but the likelyhood of what yur saying is laughable... unless of course u can actually give me a specific case where a post on an internet forum caused a case to be thrown outta court....

secret_squirrel

Call me cynical but....

What are the chances of it actually getting to court????

and....

Im sure that this scumbag has been to court loads a times and its obviously stopped him behaving like that.

and

WHERE WERE THE GUARDS???

How many Guards would be needed to cover temple bar. 4-6?? Realistically 50 guards on foot at anyone time could cover ALL of the main drinking areas in town and keep this sort of stuff to a minimum.

There are at least 3 Guarda stations within an easy walk of Temple Bar too.

How many Guards are on duty on a Sunday night - anyone know??

_blank_

secret_squirrel wrote:

Call me cynical but....

What are the chances of it actually getting to court????

I would say quite high.

The Detective in Pearse St. was practically dying for me to tell him the probable racist element ( I'm surprised this hasn't received more comment in this thread in fact). In fact, it was the only thing he wrote down from our first "informal" meeting this morning. I have to visit the station again to give a full statement.

He had a file with him, and he had photocopies of all the Guards notebooks from last night, with all the names and details of all the witnesses taken, and he said he was going to be contacting me anyway.

Also, the fact that one of the victims remains in Intensive Care, and has not woken up yet, and the people responsible are still being held in custody would I would think that the Guards are taking it quite seriously. And about time too.

The Muppet

Of couse it will go to court they were caught on the scene and there were loads of witnesses. It could yet turn into a manslaughter/Murder case.
As for this thread damaging the case thats crap. Eye witness account of unlawfull incidents like this are reported and Published all the time. The chances of finding a jury who have not been infleuenced by this thread would be pretty high I would imagine

How 30 people can stand by and watch 2 scumbags Kick another human being to near death is beyond me. WTF were they all afraid of ?

Doper Than U

of course im not a solicitor so what do i know but the likelyhood of what yur saying is laughable... unless of course u can actually give me a specific case where a post on an internet forum caused a case to be thrown outta court....

There is always the chance that this case could set precedent. Never discount that.

I wouldn't takl to the papers, as we KNOW bias in court cases from newspaper reports has caused the case to be dismissed. Why the guards don't tell people to "say nothing" after they have given statements is beyond me. It seems so damn obvious to warn people that telling the story publicly could hinder the case... perhaps there's a great reason and I'm just not seeing it.

Anyway, what happened is truly horrific, I would love to think I would have the wherewithall to jump in a beat the ever-loving-crap outta the guy with a golf club, but I probably couldn't do it. I hope they rot in hell after some vigilante retribution (No.. *sigh* I know this isn't the right thing, that society cannot be civilised with vigilanteism... but, I just don't care at this point... coz no-one can offer a better solution, and don't say the gardai, coz even if they want to, they can't give the guy a good kicking.)

secret_squirrel

The Muppet wrote:

How 30 people can stand by and watch 2 scumbags Kick another human being to near death is beyond me. WTF were they all afraid of ?

You did read all the posts right??? This point was well covered and nobody who was there has anything to be ashamed of. (the witnesses I mean)

I hope it does go to court and the scum go down for a long long time. If they were young wans name and shame their parents too.

ixoy

There's a brief article about the incident on the RTE site here with accompanying video footage from the 18:00 news. A 27 year old man has been charged at least.

nlgbbbblth

Third_Echelon wrote:

****ing scum... they should be hung, drawn and quartered and their heads stuck on spikes of every scumbag housing estate.... that would make them think twice perhaps...

Jesus, I hope they are sent down for it... :mad:

If the perps were Blackrock boys the papers would be up in arms.
Seeing as they are not.....

Tom Dunne

Sickening, just sickening.

seansouth wrote:

he Detective in Pearse St. was practically dying for me to tell him the probable racist element ( I'm surprised this hasn't received more comment in this thread in fact)

I was just about to ask this - was the victim a, and I hate the term, non-national?

That sickens me even more. To think that somebody who looks different was beaten to a pulp by the lowest form of scumbag, for no reason, makes my blood boil.

Wasn't a Lithuanian man beaten by scumbags in Dolphin's Barn last weekend, in similar circumstances?

Scum, there is no other word for them.

mycroft

zt wrote:

The initial posting is basically a full witness statement. Witnesses are not allowed to discuss or compare versions before a court case. Anybody who witnessed the assualt can fill in any blanks with the very detailed account given by seansouth.

Since the information is now in the public domain, a defence lawyer could request that it is not allowed into evidence.

The judge wouldn't mention individuals posters. He would name and potentially issue proceedings against the operators of the web site.

Okay just stop you honestly have no idea what you are talking about.

The defence would have to prove that the jury had access to this site, and had all looked at this article before the the trial and this account would bias the jury.
The jury once realising that the were aware of the story would and should ask to be removed if they felt they had been predjuced againist the defendents before the trial began.

Suggesting that an anonymous post on an internet site will radically effect the outcome of a trial in six months or a year and is further negated the fact that the case is already being wildly reported in mainstream media, and potential juriors are already reading about it now. Put simply more people will be aware of this story via live line et all.

ALSO Sean's post is not his witness statement it's a recount he is not making it sworn testimony, and seeing as a bunch of anonymous geeks on the internet don't make it so. It in no way is a full witness statement because it hasn't been taken infront of Gardai or solicitor. It in no way resembles a witness statement.

AND Other witnesses. Look witnesses in trials can and do compare notes, witnesses are often friends and family members it's impossible to not have bleeding between witness statements.

FURTHERMORE the defence lawyer would need to be made aware of this piece, serve a summons on Seans ISP and then PROVE without a doubt that Sean wrote what he said when he said it, for example if Sean is posting from a college pc on a shared account the prosecution could object to it as evidence.

FINALLY and most BLINDINGLY obviously this scumbag's state appointed solicitor would have to be willing to go to all this trouble to remove ONE of over a DOZEN potential witnesses on a pathetic and dubious legal technicality and then have to try and figure out a way to do similiar fecking jobs on the other witnesses DESPITE the fact his client is guilty as bloody sin and THE BEST he can offer the scumbag is trying to plea leinacy.

I'm sorry but that was the dumbest half smart "I'm on the internet and I'm going to show off my quasi awareness of this subject" post I've ever seen. You havent' a f*cking clue how our legal system works and instead just wanted to show off your half assed knowledge on some technical point that has still no legal president. in short SHUT THE HELL UP.

Sean. Fair ****s to you. Keep this in mind however, this case could be over in six months if he pleads guilty or insanity it could drag for years though so keep that in mind. Good luck

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

If they were young wans name and shame their parents too.

don't you mean shock and awe?

The Muppet

secret_squirrel wrote:

You did read all the posts right??? This point was well covered and nobody who was there has anything to be ashamed of. (the witnesses I mean)

I did read the whole thread and I did not say the witnesses should be ashamed but my question is still a valid one. There is no mention of the perpetrators being armed so what were the 30 young able bodied witnesses afraid of. We are talking about a life here. I wasn't there but I would like to think if I were I would have done something more to help the poor victim.

Esel

The Muppet wrote:

How 30 people can stand by and watch 2 scumbags Kick another human being to near death is beyond me. WTF were they all afraid of ?

Maybe because they were afraid of being kicked 'to near death' also?

You have a good handle.

Tom Dunne

The Muppet wrote:

so what were the 30 young able bodied witnesses afraid of. We are talking about a life here. I wasn't there but I would like to think if I were I would have done something more to help the poor victim.

Muppet, put yourself in their situation. 30 people, widely dispersed watching nothing short of a deranged scum beating a fellow human into a lifeless pulp. That scumbag was capable of anything. People were probably shocked at what they saw, a sort of rabbits in the headlights effect.

I would love to think I would have bailed in there to try an rescue the poor unfortunate, but fear, shock, and probably self-preservation all combined together may have made these people just stand there.

I am sure it is a truly shocking situation to find yourself in.

mycroft

The Muppet wrote:

I did read the whole thread and I did not say the witnesses should be ashamed but my question is still a valid one. There is no mention of the perpetrators being armed so what were the 30 young able bodied witnesses afraid of. We are talking about a life here. I wasn't there but I would like to think if I were I would have done something more to help the poor victim.

Y'know it's incredibly easy to say "Well what I woulda done". You're posting on an internet forum it's safe to assume you're well educated (compared to most in this world), come from a safe normal enough background. Your attitude "I would like to think" Implies you have never been in this kind of situation but have thought about it and seem confident you would do the "right thing"

You don't know though. You've been drinking so you're not the most aware, it's wet and it's cold, you're with friends some of them girls, and suddenly violence explodes around you. Real actual not on Walker texas ranger blood and guts, adrenaline flows but also confusion, it's incredibly confusing, you've never encountered really random unexplained acts of extreme violence, it is genuinely bizarre and kind of surreal, you've seen it on tv, you're aware it goes on, but when it's there and theres blood and rain and pavements and screaming, you kind of react in mute disbelieve, you almost stop being there and start being a passive particapant in what goes on like it's happening to someone else or it's just like tv

You're right "you'd like to think" you'd do the right thing but in the circumstances you just don't knowwhat you'd do. So stop, the moral highground is giving you altitude sicknesss

nlgbbbblth

mycroft wrote:

Y'know it's incredibly easy to say "Well what I woulda done". You're posting on an internet forum it's safe to assume you're well educated (compared to most in this world), come from a safe normal enough background.

what's so wrong about being well-educated and coming from a "safe normal background".

such things are nothing to be ashamed of. So why make an issue of them?
maybe you wish to imply that lack of education and coming for a dysfunctional background provide some form of justification for what the 27 year old from Ballyfermot did last night

mycroft wrote:

So stop, the moral highground is giving you altitude sicknesss

seeing as we're speaking of moral highground go back and read your full post again.

mycroft

nlgbbbblth wrote:

what's so wrong about being well-educated and coming from a "safe normal background".

such things are nothing to be ashamed of. So why make an issue of them?
maybe you wish to imply that lack of education and coming for a dysfunctional background provide some form of justification for what the 27 year old from Ballyfermot did last night

:rolleyes:

OFFS

Theres nothing wrong with growing up like that, I did, and nor was I defending the behaviour of the scumbag. I was refering to the fact that by the sounds of it the muppet comes from a nice normal background and therefore doesn't have any real experience with real vicious violence,and therefore he was ill equiped to speak about how he'd react when confronted by it, and therefore he should quit holding judgement over someone who behaved like most of us would.

were exactly do I defend the behaviour of the scumbag, I simply ask the muppet to get off his high horse.

Please actually read what I wrote.....

ionapaul

nlgbbbblth wrote:

what's so wrong about being well-educated and coming from a "safe normal background".

Seems like a case for the 'criminal is the real victim' crowd, Ivana Bacik and the rest of the brigade. Don't you know that because of the oppression visited upon these unfortunates by society, violence is the only form of self-expression possible? Blah blah blah...

There have been many studies on how strangers react to public violence. The more violent the action, the less likely people will intervene. There is a famous case of a screaming naked women running down Manhatten streets followed by a man with a gun or knife or chainsaw or something, and no-one intervening. I very much doubt anyone reading this thread would have intervened alone, or without a much larger group of close friends. To do so would have been too much of a risk.

The public cannot and should not be relied upon to deal with this. We need more police, better trained and equipped, and ready to deal harshly with such violent actions. I was literally sickened and shocked today to see a hard drug deal taking place on Thomas Street as I walked past the dealer and his junkies. The same group are there all day long, behind the bus shelter near Vicar Street. This was during lunchtime. Always knew the lads were drugdealers, but I actually saw the plastic vial being exchanged today. Sickening.

The Muppet

mycroft wrote:

You're right "you'd like to think" you'd do the right thing but in the circumstances you just don't knowwhat you'd do. So stop, the moral highground is giving you altitude sicknesss

Dont be so condescending . I am not trying to take the High Moral ground if there is any to take in this instance. After reading this thread I dont believe the crowd did enough to help that is my opinion and I would be surprised if I was alone in that.

I can not be 100% sure how I would have reacted as I wasn,t there that is why I said " I would Like to think". I am in my own mind positive I would have intervened given the threat and situation as explained here.


God forbid if it were your Son being kicked to within inches of his life on the ground with 30 people looking on you may also be taking the same "High Moral Ground".

.

ionapaul

Ahh, if it was your son no doubt you would intervene (he shares so much of your DNA and thus ensures your evolutionary success if he lives and reproduces) but a complete stranger? Very different story. We can't and shouldn't judge those people, I am fully confident most of us would have acted the same way. Which is why we need more gardai, better trained and armed, available to put a halt to this violence.

mycroft

The Muppet wrote:

Dont be so condescending . I am not trying to take the High Moral ground if there is any to take in this instance. After reading this thread I dont believe the crowd did enough to help that is my opinion and I would be surprised if I was alone in that.

I can not be 100% sure how I would have reacted as I wasn,t there that is why I said " I would Like to think". I am in my own mind positive I would have intervened given the threat and situation as explained here.


God forbid if it were your Son being kicked to within inches of his life on the ground with 30 people looking on you may also be taking the same "High Moral Ground".

.

Oh pluze, you're on one being condescending, with your "i would like to thik" You've never been in these circumstances so you're ill equiped to lecture Sean on this behaviour.

What sean saw and what those people saw was traumatic, and your "god forbid if it was your son" attitude isn't helping anyone get over the trauma nor help the people injured.

milltown

The Muppet wrote:

I did read the whole thread and I did not say the witnesses should be ashamed but my question is still a valid one. There is no mention of the perpetrators being armed so what were the 30 young able bodied witnesses afraid of. We are talking about a life here. I wasn't there but I would like to think if I were I would have done something more to help the poor victim.

I don't think the words "able bodied" would ever be used to describe me at that hour in Temple bar. It was a shocking event and it made my blood run cold reading about it. I was in town last night and was on my way to Temple bar but we ended up staying around Grafton st. as luck would have it.

We would all LIKE to think we would weigh in and help out. The fact is that Seán and the others did what they were trained and qualified to do, that is they pestered the Gardai into leaving the nice warm station and popping out to see what all the fuss was about.

I would also be very interested to know how many Gardai are on foot patrol around the city centre on a Sunday night. My guess would be no more than 3 or 4 from each station. There certainly seems to be enough of the hungry hoors up for a bit of overtime when there's a concert or a football match on, or a minister for fizzy drinks visiting from Elbonia needing a 6 car and 4 bike escort from Dáil Eireann to the K club.

zt

mycroft

I never tried to pass my self off as a legal type. I simply asked had anybody considered the legal implications of publishing this type of information on the Internet.

I know newspapers have guidelines for reporting prior and during a court case. I would openly admit that I don't know what these guidelines are, but I would suggest that few posters would? Given that you are our resident legal expert maybe you can tell us what types of comments or statements would cause problems?

As I can see from your articulate posting you obviously have a superior knowledge of the legal system. However, I do know the difference between "legal president" and "legal precedence". Didn't Dana want to be "legal president"?

mycroft wrote:

You havent' a f*cking clue how our legal system works and instead just wanted to show off your half assed knowledge on some technical point that has still no legal president. in short SHUT THE HELL UP.

The Muppet

mycroft wrote:

Oh pluze, you're on one being condescending, with your "i would like to thik" You've never been in these circumstances so you're ill equiped to lecture Sean on this behaviour.

What sean saw and what those people saw was traumatic, and your "god forbid if it was your son" attitude isn't helping anyone get over the trauma nor help the people injured.

You know nothing of me or my life experiences so stop being so condescending . I am not lecturing anyone. In fact I have made Sean aware of where I am coming from and took steps earlier to assure him I was not taking a shot at him.

I assume Seans reason for posting was to get opinions . I didn't realise we are all supposed to have a uniform opinion here. I have given my mine which differs from yours I can deal with that. you should do likewise.

I'll leave it at that as we are starting to go round in circles

mycroft

zt wrote:

mycroft

I never tried to pass my self off as a legal type. I simply asked had anybody considered the legal implications of publishing this type of information on the Internet.

I know newspapers have guidelines for reporting prior and during a court case. I would openly admit that I don't know what these guidelines are, but I would suggest that few posters would? Given that you are our resident legal expert maybe you can tell us what types of comments or statements would cause problems?

As I can see from your articulate posting you obviously have a superior knowledge of the legal system. However, I do know the difference between "legal president" and "legal precedence". Didn't Dana want to be "legal president"?

For starts slagging off spelling is one of the lowest forms of wit on the internet.

1. YOU refered to the original post as a sworn statement, not I, implying that you had some knowledge of the legality, and furthermore You suggested that this could lead to a mistrial. If you don't have a clue about this matters stop weighing into the debate, and stop offering your opinion as someone who does. You posted in such a manner to make sean concerned about whether he should remove his first post.

Secondly I have more than a passing pratical knowledge of this kind of matter. While during a trial the media suffer under strict guidelines over what they can report, the recent example of the primetime special on garda brutality forced the trial dates to be changed on several gardai charged under the reclaim the streets protest, despite the trials being weeks away. Witness some of the press re the infamous Katherine Nevin trial. It's impossible to control what a jury has seen before a trial which is why jurors excuse themselves during the selection process if they feel they have awareness of the matter which may effect their judgement. During a trial as you know, the jury are instructed not read the papers or watch the news. It's impossible to inforce without sequistering your jury a costly and rare act. The justice system hinges on the honesty of the jury.

But getting back on point, the defence would need to show that sean's comments having been read by a large porportion of society, and furthermore would unfairly bias or effect the judgement of other witnesses or jury. I'd really like to see that happening! Because is that was the case every caller on live line would have be censored if they spoke on any matter relating to a case.

However. It is utterly murky the legality of the internet and internet comments. For example the recent case of a police officer involved in the Ian Huntly case, was accused of having child porn on his computer the charge was dropped because the the crown could not prove he was the only person with access to the laptop. Similarily the defence in your la la land world would need to prove not only sean's idenity, that sean was the only person able to access this site from his computer, and THEN prove that Sean's statement had predjuced the jury or another witnesses.

You know nothing of me or my life experiences so stop being so condescending . I am not lecturing anyone. In fact I have made Sean aware of where I am coming from and took steps earlier to assure him I was not taking a shot at him.

Yes yes you chewed broken glass for breakfast and kick jean claude van dammes ass every day before school.

I stand over my previous posts.

Dathai

The funny thing is that no matter how much you say you are disgusted on this subject and what you would do to the scumbags, the truth is not a single one of ye would do anything to them when it came down to it.

Ph3n0m

Dathai wrote:

The funny thing is that no matter how much you say you are disgusted on this subject and what you would do to the scumbags, the truth is not a single one of ye would do anything to them when it came down to it.

For some people that would be the truth and for others it would not be.

In the past I have, on occasion, intervened in street fights between people I did not know at all - however in recent times, I have tended to avoid such incidents, as its all too easy for a weapon to be produced and me to hit the ground, then my family would have lost me for no reason at all. Does that make me a coward or indifferent - no, just concerned about my own welfare

Kêrmêttê

I just read the article in today's (05.10.04) Evening Herald on page 4.
It appears to be a fairly balanced report and is mostly "Dave's" recount of what happened.
I wonder do reporters twist things or is this article printed as it was given in the first place?
Fair play for mentioning the Gardaís bumbling and farting about when the call was first put through to them. I've had reason to call for them on a few occasions in the last 3 years and they NEVER turn up.
It's time the donut eating fatsos got a poke in their rather ample behinds.

b3t4

I am shocked and appalled. I found Sean's post disturbing and distressing. My best wishes go out to the victims.

From reading all the posts (and I did) a lot of people seem to think that someone should of done something. They did, they rang the police who are trained to deal with these things. It's a huge shame the police weren't around in the first place to prevent such an incident.

My thoughts were that if people were to carry around those panic buttons. Would such a noise have distracted this "scumbag" long enough for someone to intervene effectly or scare the sh!t off? One half none violent approach. Just my thoughts.

A.

ionapaul

Dathai wrote:

The funny thing is that no matter how much you say you are disgusted on this subject and what you would do to the scumbags, the truth is not a single one of ye would do anything to them when it came down to it.

Incorrect. If I had a method to eliminate (with extreme prejudice!) the perps without placing myself at risk, I would have done so gladly. As that is not possible in our state, I would gladly and enthuisiasticly back / vote in any measure granting the gardai more personnel, greater funding, heavier weapons, etc, to tackle this sort of behaviour.

However in today's world even if the Gardai had the wherewithall to put an immediate halt to this sort of behaviour via the most effective method (state-sanctioned use of force), there would be an immediate cry of 'police brutality' from the usual suspects and another few million of taxpayers money would be wasted on an endless tribunal.

Redleslie2

ionapaul wrote:

Incorrect. If I had a method to eliminate (with extreme prejudice!) the perps without placing myself at risk, I would have done so gladly.

When you arrive on the scene as it were (with your flaming sword of justice) how would you know that the guy on the ground taking the beating is not actually the 'baddie' to begin with. I've come across several incidents like that.

Canis Lupus

lol.... i wish i had a shining sword of justice....

_blank_

So, I just got a phone call from the Gardai in Pearse St.

They want me to head in tomorrow morning to give my full statement.

I can't wait to tell them every little detail of what I saw them scumbags do, maybe help to put them away for a long time.

Another thing, to all the people saying they would have jumped in, I say to you, you simply were not there. I was. I saw the look in these guys eyes. They were waiting for people to approach them so they could claim another victim, they were inviting people on to them.

When it first all started, there was an initial reaction sure, some people tried to help, but we know what happened to them. There were people scattered around the place. It would have taken more than one person to approach these people to try and make them stop. I was seperated from my friends, and the people near me were not standing in groups, we were a group of thirty, sure, but a random, fractured group. I didn't know in the first few minutes who was who. I could have asked the bloke standing eight feet from me to join me and try to tackle the scumbags, but I didn't know if he was in fact their cohort.

Add to this the shock everyone was feeling. Sure, we've all probably seen street fights at one stage or another, but this was not a street fight, it was a vicious beating the likes of which I have never seen.

Have you seen American History X? Not a patch on this.

When you encounter something like this, all rational thought goes out the window.

To anyone who wasn't there, please don't preach to me about not trying to help these unfortunate victims. I was afraid for my life. I was afraid that if I did approach these scumbags, then I'd end up on the ground with my body being used as a dancefloor. I did what I could, I rang the Emergency Services three times.

When I felt it was safe to do so, when I felt I had adequate support, I did approach these scumbags, but with a group. Then the Guards arrived anyway, but we didn't know how long it wuld have taken them. We were preparing to tackle them, we just didn't get the chance.

When one of the scumbags broke free from the Guards cluthces, we gave chase, I and two others actually outran the Guards in this pursuit.

Until you encounter something like this, don't presume that you will act entirely rationally, because I promise you, you will not.

This incident has impacted on my life in different ways, but for people to come along and tell me I should have jumped in is the least of my worries. I don't care what you say I should have done. My conscious is clear. I did all I could given the viciousness I witnessed, once I got over the initial shock, which probably lasted three to four minutes, and once a coherent group of people was formed, I was willing to try and intervene. Only my complete horror stopped me from doing so earlier, and I make no apologies for that.

ferdi

write down everything you can remember right now, every detail, just so your sure your giving the cops all the info you can so that hopfully these scumbags can get sent down for a good long stretch.

as for helping and hopping in on these lads, what i said in my previous post was that i would like to think i would have organised the 30 by-standers to attack the 2 scumbags (for which i got neg rep and abusive comments). i know when your there and the **** is hitting the fan right before your eyes, its alot different. Any ways, i can only commend you for the steps your taking now to help ensure those pricks get their asses nailed to the wall.

peace.

passive

so you changed your mind about giving the herald your story? reading it here... they seem to have stuck perfectly to your account of it anyway

Tiriel

nobody can say you didn't do your best. those kind of people are just wild and you jumping in would only have ended badly. calling emergency services was brilliant.. that is what was needed.. get the culprits behind bars.

_blank_

passive wrote:

so you changed your mind about giving the herald your story? reading it here... they seem to have stuck perfectly to your account of it anyway

I have to say, I will never buy a copy of this rag again.

The journalist in question, AnnMarie Walsh, spoke to me twice yesterday.

On the first occasion she told me she read the account, and could she use it, I told her to wait until she heard from me, as I wanted to make a joint decision among my friends who were present as to wether we would actually speak to them or not.

She agreed with this. Five minutes later she rang me back, asking for my surname, I told her no, I won't give that to her. She wanted me to meet her late last night, about 10.30ish to get a picture with my friends she could print.

I conferred with my friends, and we decided not to talk to the papers until we had at least given full statements to the Guards.

I didn't get back to her at all.

At 11.05 she got back to me, in a text message, asking me to comment again, and clarify some points in the piece she stole from me.

I didn't get back.

I never agreed for her to use my story in any shape or form.

She didn't use my real name in the piece in her rag.

adjodlo

If she didn't use you name then why object to here using your story that you've already posted online for the public to read?

I think what happened is more important.

HelterSkelter

Sean, first of all, fair play to you for going ahead and making the statement to the cops. I hope these scumbags get locked up for a long time. Make sure you write down everything you saw now as you'll be surprised how much you will forget or become hazy on even within a week or two. It could take a long time for this to come to trial. Also remember that a lot of the other witnesses could have been fairly drunk on the night and might not be able to give as accurate account as you and your friends can.

And I think it would be a very bad idea to give your name to any paper, or allow them take a photo of you. You don't want the scumbags or their family to find out anything about you.

ionapaul

Redleslie2 wrote:

When you arrive on the scene as it were (with your flaming sword of justice) how would you know that the guy on the ground taking the beating is not actually the 'baddie' to begin with. I've come across several incidents like that.

Hmm, that would be quite a conundrum, wouldn't it? Wouldn't know where to stick my 'flaming sword of justice' in that case...got any suggestions?

Can't paint the criminal as a criminal, right? He's the oppressed one and the guy on the ground getting kicked into the coma is the real criminal, right? Maybe I'm mis-reading your post, of course...

Doper Than U

I think what Redles meant was that the one the ground could be a stinkin paedophile, and the guy kickin his head in could be some poor kids dad... in which case I'd be more than happy to leave him to it...

pickarooney

Or the guy doing the kicking could be some hero who leaped in to the defence of some lad getting his head kicked off and was administering the kind of justice everyone seems to want for the guys in this story.

The Muppet

seansouth wrote:

I have to say, I will never buy a copy of this rag again.

The journalist in question, AnnMarie Walsh, spoke to me twice yesterday.

On the first occasion she told me she read the account, and could she use it, I told her to wait until she heard from me, as I wanted to make a joint decision among my friends who were present as to wether we would actually speak to them or not.

She agreed with this. Five minutes later she rang me back, asking for my surname, I told her no, I won't give that to her. She wanted me to meet her late last night, about 10.30ish to get a picture with my friends she could print.

I conferred with my friends, and we decided not to talk to the papers until we had at least given full statements to the Guards.

I didn't get back to her at all.

At 11.05 she got back to me, in a text message, asking me to comment again, and clarify some points in the piece she stole from me.

I didn't get back.

I never agreed for her to use my story in any shape or form.

She didn't use my real name in the piece in her rag.

How did she get your number?

You have published your account here so you have put it in the public domain . The journo can quote your account with impunity without your permission.

ionapaul

pickarooney wrote:

Or the guy doing the kicking could be some hero who leaped in to the defence of some lad getting his head kicked off and was administering the kind of justice everyone seems to want for the guys in this story.

Which is why, rather than resorting to vigilante-style justice, we need...(large gulp of air) a better trained, heavily armed and more numerous garda force! Right? Harsher prison sentences for violent crime wouldn't go astray either...

Obviously the SWP hander-outers amoung us will be opposed to additional gardai (quick, film that guard, he looked at me funny and his arm went over his badge for a split second, he's going to bash my stylishly-dreadlocked head in!), but it might go some way to reducing these incidents of violent crime by thugs*

*I apologise for calling them thugs if that is offensive to some, which I am sure it will be! Also apologise for being a contrary bastard, but this type of thing upsets me.

_blank_

The Muppet wrote:

How did she get your number?

You have published your account here so you have put it in the public domain . The journo can quote your account with impunity without your permission.

She got in contact with me through a third party, fair enough I rang her, and gave my number.

BUT She told me she wouldn't publish the story without asking me first. She went back on her word.

RuggieBear

seansouth wrote:

BUT She told me she wouldn't publish the story without asking me first. She went back on her word.

That's what she is paid to do....it's her job. Having said that....they are only interested in one thing and it aint your moral wellbeing or that poor man who was set upon....it's themselves!

The Evening Hysterical is a ****ing rag of a paper

Seraphina

seriously sean, write down what you're going to tell the gardai. add to it every time you remember something. re read it, and go over the events in your head. its easy to leave out details and once the statement is made you cant go back adding stuff.
considering complaining to someone about the extremely slow response of the gardai, write a letter to someone, justice minister, gardai commissioner, whoever. its a widely reported case, and you've got to highlight the fact that there were NO police around, and that they took three calls to get there. had they turned up after the first call the victim might not be unconscious right now...

maxheadroom

The Muppet wrote:

You have published your account here so you have put it in the public domain . The journo can quote your account with impunity without your permission.

IANAL, but I think that everything here is copyright boards.ie ltd - something to do with the website being considered a form of publishing under Irish law. That and the "© boards.ie Ltd. (Ireland)" on the bottom of each page. If that's the case, maye the admins could sue the Herald for copyright infringement and be able to afford that cluster we'll need to run the site in a few years

_blank_

Just one thing.

It wasn't this site she took it from. I put it on another site too. That is where she got it.

(Checking for a copyright notice there).....

There isn't one.

Redleslie2

Doper Than U wrote:

I think what Redles meant was that the one the ground could be a stinkin paedophile, and the guy kickin his head in could be some poor kids dad... in which case I'd be more than happy to leave him to it...

pickarooney wrote:

Or the guy doing the kicking could be some hero who leaped in to the defence of some lad getting his head kicked off and was administering the kind of justice everyone seems to want for the guys in this story.

Exactly what I meant but try explaining it to the kneejerks. I'd say plenty of people here have witnessed enough fights to realise how confusing things quickly become and how the situation is not always what it first appears to be.