McDowell Controversy

A Dub in Glasgo

One very simple question for McDowell and his apologists here

1. Why has Frank Connolly not been charged with any offence?

boidey

Sand wrote:

Imo its a cover organisation, designed to "uncover" and release damaging stories against the establishment electoral party as and when it is of most benefit to SFIRA. O Snodaighs electoral workers/punishment gang had lists of TDs and drug dealers in one of their houses. Its assumed the drug dealers were to be extorted, but the TDs were to be spied on in an attempt to discover damaging information.

i agree

MrPudding

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

One very simple question for McDowell and his apologists here

1. Why has Frank Connolly not been charged with any offence?

That is what it boils down to.

Was it 2 years ago McDowell was asked for information from a Garda file and his response was something like "I will not be compelled to release information from Garda files when that information has not be proven in a court of law?" What happened to that attitude.

Suppose Frank Connelly is actually guilty of a offense, surely McDowell's actions have made prosecution impossible now?

MrP

swiss

gandalf wrote:

I think you people need to separate Mr. Connelly now from McDowells behaviour.

I can't quite figure out what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?

I remember the concerns raised about the CPI and its links as it was being set up. Since then it has largely fallen off my radar (except for the Bertie allegation, naturally). There are two viewpoints on their activities. The first viewpoint is that the CPI was a legitimate centre for nonpartisan enquiry into alleged corruption. The other is that the CPI was a 'dirt digger' on establishment parties the purpose of which was ultimately to benefit Sinn Féin. Although it is impossible for me to know which is accurate for certain, I strongly suspect the latter is closer to the truth because of Frank Connollys links, and because of these allegations about his trip to Colombia.

The question is of course whether it was appropriate of McDowell to bring forth material under Dáil priviledge that alluded to the false passport claim. I have to admit, I feel very uneasy about the potentially dangerous precedent this has set. Nevertheless, I think I'll answer a very guarded yes. Provided the material was in the public domain (the passport application), then I don't necessarily see a problem with providing it to the public. Two caveats I would have is that I don't think it was appropriate that it was released under Dáil priviledge meaning that it can't be challenged, and secondly that it was released to a journalist with whom McDowell was friends.

Other than that, this idea that these documents bring a new concept of "guilty till proven innocent" jurisprudence into this country is bunkem, IMO. The only court in which he is being tried is the court of public opinion, which seems to be hung at the moment. Frankly, for a man who not only took an active part in, but attempted to head up this court, I have limited sympathy.

gurramok

Cover organisation or not, we live in a democracy allegedly and you are innocent until proven guilty. DPP decided that the man is innocent. Now the man will never face trial as McD has slurred him without proof.
What is more disturbing is the handing of a Garda file to a foreign citizen which is the real threat to national security nevermind the deliberate leak to a media outlet which does not represent the national media, only a small part of it.
McD wanted the public to know, why not leak to ALL the national media, that Sam Smyth looks to me a threat to national security with his influence of MdD 's office.
Even the judge Fergus Flood says what McD did was wrong and out of order.

ronbyrne2005

once i saw the shinners calling for his resignation i started to beleive mcdowell more than connolly and his media mates

ronbyrne2005

when the shinners get worked up about something its usually means they have something to hide or some vested interest

gurramok

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

when the shinners get worked up about something its usually means they have something to hide or some vested interest

Main opposition parties oppose what he had done, never knew the opposition in this country are all shinners.
You've just labelled all FG, Lab, Greens, Ind as shinners because they oppose McD.

Mighty_Mouse

Connelly has had ample opportunity to 'prove' his innocence

Jasus!! Surely even you admit this is nuts Mike?

Has anyone any further information in relation to the fact that the CPI was down the road to investigating the 30million development of McDowells new prison? Could be a slight twist on McDowells motivations.

The neck on the man is unbelievable!!!
http://www.irishexaminer.com/text/story.asp?j=178142007942&p=y78y4zxx84x8&n=178142008453

<quote>where somebody is leaking information for reward, or where somebody leaks information which seriously compromises a criminal investigation, or where somebody leaks information which seriously damages somebody else's privacy or confidentially, or where they do something which damages the security of the State.........................It can't be for individual gardaí to decide what the interests of the force are," ............................."I am not supposed to just throw out into the public domain facts which haven't been proven in court about people." .........................The only thing that people have to go on is that the minister believes that a garda leaked information to the Daily Star that his son had been assaulted in the street. </quote>

ronbyrne2005

gurramok wrote:

Main opposition parties oppose what he had done, never knew the opposition in this country are all shinners.
You've just labelled all FG, Lab, Greens, Ind as shinners because they oppose McD.

no i am talking about the sf/ira party solely

gurramok

gurramok wrote:

Cover organisation or not, we live in a democracy allegedly and you are innocent until proven guilty. DPP decided that the man is innocent. Now the man will never face trial as McD has slurred him without proof.

But by the same token Connolly has a golden opportunity to do more damage to McDowell than McDowell could ever have done to him by declaring his whereabouts via bank statements and several other means.
He would of course be completely demolishing any blackening of his name in the process because he wasn't in columbia right?

Surely Doing so would be in keeping with his CPQ profile as he would be exposing someone in high office.

The longer he waits, the worse it looks-its within his power to do this and the fact that it would damage his accuser via a total clearance of Connollys own name strengthens the imperative on him to do it.
Not doing it of course is fishy as it suggests theres something to the allegations.
I mean why give up the opportunity to put McDowells head on a spear...

What is more disturbing is the handing of a Garda file to a foreign citizen which is the real threat to national security nevermind the deliberate leak to a media outlet which does not represent the national media, only a small part of it.

I understand that it was in a department of justice file and not a Garda file according to McDowells statement yesterday.There is a significant difference.

McD wanted the public to know, why not leak to ALL the national media, that Sam Smyth looks to me a threat to national security with his influence of MdD 's office.

Why ? he's only a journalist-he's uncovered a lot of corruption amongst politicians in his time,wheres the evidence that he's ever tried to corrupt the state?

Even the judge Fergus Flood says what McD did was wrong and out of order.

Well thats a valid opinion held by Flood, but its not the case in law.

gandalf wrote:

I think you people need to separate Mr. Connelly now from McDowells behaviour. McDowell has abused his power and has endangered any future chances of prosecution here.

As regards a prosecution in this matter,it now appears patently obvious to me, that since the DPP had this information for the last 3 or 4 years, that for whatever reason he had decided not to prosecute.
It could be that there was no evidence as to who submitted the false passport and who collected it.
If there is none, there can be none.The address information that it was sent to would have been looked into.
In that case McDowell would have been satisfied that he wasnt jepordising a trial-but in his own mind then he wanted to put connolly in the position of having to declare his whereabouts when it is suspected he was in colombia.

McDowells motives seem clear to me, though his methods are far from ideal.He is clearly certain in his own mind that Connolly cant shake this accusation because he was in colombia.
The ball is now in connollys court which is no use to him and damning if he doesnt use it especially when proving he was elsewhere, if he was is so simple.

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Has anyone any further information in relation to the fact that the CPI was down the road to investigating the 30million development of McDowells new prison? Could be a slight twist on McDowells motivations.

How would that have a bearing on it? Surely if theres corruption there it will come to light.I would suggest that if McDowell thought there was, he's not stupid and wouldnt be leaving himself open to that angle.Secondly if there is a problem there, it will come to light, if the guys have any evidence wont it?

The neck on the man is unbelievable!!!

Well he's not sticking in the sand anyway thats for sure...

Connolly on the other hand would want to take his out of it or otherwise, theres few conclusions one can make other than fishyness as to his innocence-the ability to prove he wasnt in Columbia as I've said over and over again should be simple, unless he was there of course.

gandalf

swiss wrote:

I can't quite figure out what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?

Its quite simple, maybe I haven't expressed it well.

The biggest and most important issue is that McDowell has given out information that could damage any future prosecution.

He has set a precidence of giving information from a garda file to a media organisation selectively. Something a civil servant would get fired for and a garda would get imprisoned for.

He has used Dail privilage as a shield from litigation for his opinions. Because without a case being taken by the DPP this is just opinion.

While there are questions about this CPI organisation there is also the issue of him doing this to head off an examination by this organisation of the sale of lands for the new super prison.

I have no love for SF/IRA or any of their supporters but by his actions Michael McDowell has cast a shadow over the office of the Minister of Justice. He is saying that the principle of innocent until proven guilty can be tossed to one side if in his opinion the person in question is a bad person. This is a very slippery slope we are now on.

Sponge Bob

The questions are for Frank,Herr Flick has plenty to answer for in another thread (nearby ) .

MrSinn

MrSinn wrote:

Its all political points scoring by FF

:eek:

Hobart

1. Where Were you that April Frank ?, you was not working at the SBP it appears .

A. He was still working at the SBP. He was on holidays at that time

2. Did you , during that April , travel to France as Frank using Franks passport and travel back to Ireland from France as Frank using Franks passport 'some time later'

A No idea. I don't see why that is relevant

3. Do you accept that that passport which does not have your photo on it was used by someone to travel from France to Columbia and back to France while you were.......in France all the time of course

A See ans above

4. Do you have any further comment to make on this co-incidence , is it publicly enquireable about ...to coin a phrase ?

A He probably does, but I suspect that all comments are currently sub judice, and he would not resort to trial by media/public at this stage.

Tuars

Michael McDowell has said that the threat to national security was that money raised by the selling of explosives expertise to FARC would be used to fund Sinn Fein election campaigns and therefore distort the democratic process.

If this is the case then how have the actions of the minister in relation to Frank Connolly and the CPI countered this threat?

Have they seized the money or what? If it is still out there then surely the threat is still alive.

If McDowell really believes in this threat to national security then he has done a very poor job of dealing with it.

Sponge Bob

Hobart wrote:

1. Where Were you that April Frank ?, you was not working at the SBP it appears .

A. He was still working at the SBP. He was on holidays at that time

He was not at the SBP so where WAS he ????

2. Did you , during that April , travel to France as Frank using Franks passport and travel back to Ireland from France as Frank using Franks passport 'some time later'

A No idea. I don't see why that is relevant

I wont explain it to you then . Let Frank answer that one.

3. Do you accept that that passport which does not have your photo on it was used by someone to travel from France to Columbia and back to France while you were.......in France all the time of course

A See ans above

What answer , you actually said it was not relevant while knowing full well that I DO want an answer and would disagree with you . Thats why I asked a simple question and want a simple answer.

4. Do you have any further comment to make on this co-incidence , is it publicly enquireable about ...to coin a phrase ?

A He probably does, but I suspect that all comments are currently sub judice, and he would not resort to trial by media/public at this stage.

Not. The DPP decided not to prosecute at some stage a few years back. As the DPP is not prosecuting we are therefore asking for information not evidence and nothing is sub judice at all . You knew there was no prosecution Hobart so do not try to kill a discussion with rubbish about 'sub judice' principles when in actual fact you should answer "NO IDEA" like your spurious answer to question 2

Send Frank a PM and tell him to hopshee over here with the simple answers, I have every confidence in his ability to clear this Public Enquiry up PDQ. naturally I fully subscribe to the ethos of the Public Enquiry and the logical corollary thereto of the equally Public Response to the Public Enquiry.

gurramok

Earthman wrote:

But by the same token Connolly has a golden opportunity to do more damage to McDowell than McDowell could ever have done to him by declaring his whereabouts via bank statements and several other means.
He would of course be completely demolishing any blackening of his name in the process because he wasn't in columbia right?

Yes, Connolly is not helping matters with his silence oh is whereabouts but if the DPP won't prosecute him, he does not anyone to answer to other than the forces of law (garda/DPP), not McD who cannot instruct his arrest!

Earthman wrote:

I understand that it was in a department of justice file and not a Garda file according to McDowells statement yesterday.There is a significant difference.

The media reports have been of a garda file, whether its either..it's still wrong to disclose it to above all a non-EU citizen without any conviction on Connolly

Earthman wrote:

Why ? he's only a journalist-he's uncovered a lot of corruption amongst politicians in his time,wheres the evidence that he's ever tried to corrupt the state?

Its reported hat he asked for info on Connolly and McD handed it over favourably, it stinks of a news media outlet having influence over the justice dept. If McD don't like someone, he can just hand over any info on them to the media who can damage reputations, trial by media.

Earthman wrote:

Well thats a valid opinion held by Flood, but its not the case in law.

You are taking the mick here?
Flood is a very senior judge on the national judiciary who has presided over many tribunals, court cases etc, he DOES know what the law is.
His opinion of the law in this case is backed up by his experience as a top judge.

Akrasia

ReefBreak wrote:

You know I would love to see that photo that he says isn't him. Because Sam Smyth, Chuck feeney, Michael McDowell and a host of others thought otherwise.

so why doesn't Sam Smyth publish the photograph he recieved alongside a picture of Frank Connolly and let everyone else decide?

The Independent's refusal to publish the photograph is equally as suspicious as Frank Connolly's refusal to say where he was at the time of the alleged trip to colombia

Hobart

I think Gandalf has hit the nail on the head here. I will address the issues surrounding Connolly later in this post, but 1 thing must be made clear. The minister has acted in a totally inappropiate way towards a citizen of this country. My understanding is that the suspicons surrounding Connolly were known for some time. A file was prepared and sebt to the DPP. The DPP decided that there was insufficent evidence to convict. That should be end of that. The Minister has taken it upon himself to discredit an indiviudal of this state with no evidence whatsoever. He has passed on information, which was part of a confidental file, to a media outlet. He has used Dail privelage to accuse thuis individual of something, that the best lawyers in the land could not prove. He is a disgrace for treating this individual in this way and should resign.

Now for the question of Connolly's whereabouts. Maybe Connolly is going to use this information to refute these claims in a court of law, should a civil case ever be taken by him. Secondly it could also be that Frank was in another part of the world that would lend credence to the argument that he is part of SF/IRA?

Does nobody think that it's a coincidence that these allegations were put forward when the CPI where conducting an investigation into the purchase of land for a Prison? Does nobody find it unusual that the Minister fro Justice approached an American billionaire and asked him to cease his funding to the CPI based on unproven and unprovable allegations?

Mighty_Mouse

I mean why give up the opportunity to put McDowells head on a spear...

In the least you must admit it's "innocence until proven guilty" out hte window. Are you comfortable with that?

How would that have a bearing on it?

As said, a slight twist on the ministers motivations for shutting the CPI down.

Surely if theres corruption there it will come to light

How? Isn't that what the CPI was doing?

I would suggest that if McDowell thought there was, he's not stupid and wouldnt be leaving himself open to that angle.

so your 100% confident on the basis of Mcdowells not stupid? Even though the CPI was investigating the 30 million prison development for corruption?

Secondly if there is a problem there, it will come to light, if the guys have any evidence wont it?

Not if they dont get to write their report. Plus they weren't finished their investigations

Well he's not sticking in the sand anyway thats for sure...

Connolly on the other hand would want to take his out of it or otherwise, theres few conclusions one can make other than fishyness as to his innocence-the ability to prove he wasnt in Columbia as I've said over and over again should be simple, unless he was there of course.

Are you infavour of guilty until innocent being adopted by our courts?

How about we just assign all criminal matters over to Mcdowell for adjudication. That way due process wont get in the way and he can rely on gut feeling and instinct where necessary.

Akrasia

Rock Climber wrote:

He said today it wasnt from a Garda file, it was in the passport office and was brought to his attention in the dept of justice.Thats nothing to do with a Garda file.

Files from the passport office are private and confidential. He would have absolutely no right to disclose documents such as passport applications to the media. In this case he claims that the document was a fraudulant document and so was not confidential, but if it was a fraudulant document then it becomes a matter for the gardai and so it is no longer accurate to describe it as a passport office document and not a part of a Garda File.

Hobart

Sponge Bob wrote:

He was not at the SBP so where WAS he ????

Do you mean that he was not physically at the SBP or no longer employed there?

I wont explain it to you then . Let Frank answer that one.

I'm not looking for an explanation.

What answer , you actually said it was not relevant while knowing full well that I DO want an answer and would disagree with you . Thats why I asked a simple question and want a simple answer.

Your right, it was a simple question. But it is not relevant. It is not relevant because, and if you actually read the question you will see this, it could be put to any citizen in this land with about as much relevance. Do you accept that that passport which does not have his photo on it was used by someone to travel from France to Columbia and back to France while he was.......in France all the time of course? Well do you?

Not. The DPP decided not to prosecute at some stage a few years back. As the DPP is not prosecuting we are therefore asking for information not evidence and nothing is sub judice at all . You knew there was no prosecution Hobart so do not try to kill a discussion with rubbish about 'sub judice' principles when in actual fact you should answer "NO IDEA" like your spurious answer to question 2

Prosecutions can come from any side. I never suggested that my answer was in relation to what the DPP was deciding to do, did I? Connolly could prosecute. Why should he show his hand at this stage, and give McDowell an opportunity to build a defence?

Send Frank a PM and tell him to hopshee over here with the simple answers, I have every confidence in his ability to clear this Public Enquiry up PDQ. naturally I fully subscribe to the ethos of the Public Enquiry and the logical corollary thereto of the equally Public Response to the Public Enquiry.

Your use of language and your lame atempts at Humour/Sarcasm/Whatever give your flawed and badly thought out argument little help. I thought that you may want to have a debate on the issue, and not act like a child. I'll leave you to it.

Sponge Bob

Hobart wrote:

I think Gandalf has hit the nail on the head here. I will address the issues surrounding Connolly later in this post, but 1 thing must be made clear. The minister has acted in a totally inappropiate way towards a citizen of this country. My understanding is that the suspicons surrounding Connolly were known for some time. A file was prepared and sebt to the DPP. The DPP decided that there was insufficent evidence to convict.

You carefully avoided discussion Connolly in the thread about Connolly so forgive me if I am totally underwhemed in advance at anything you come up with in this thread.

Once McDowell opened his gob (and after the DPP decided not to prosecute) there was no chance of the issue of the false passport being dealt with thru the criminal court EVER. Frank cannot be convicted of anything to do with the false passport issue EVER. There is no investigation or charge in the pipeline from the DPP or the State or the Dept of Foreign Affairs who issued the passport so the matter is no longer sub judice .

McDowell has banked on the different standards of proof in Civil vs Criminal proceedings .

The DPP felt he could not prove Frank got the passport beyond reasonable doubt ...the criminal standard . McDowell feels that Frank has no case to sue him (McDowell that is or Sam Smyth) on the balance of probabilities ...the civil standard .

We have a Mexican standoff here . Neither side has enough artillery to take and win a case. Frank will not sue McDowell or Sam Smyth because the prime witness for the defence will be Frank . Frank is not a little man of modest means, the NUJ will back him to the hilt if he has a case .

Off with ya so Frank and give us the day in court with McDowell in the dock

Sponge Bob

Hobart wrote:

<snip>

Phew.

Less Wind and more Frank-ness . Get him in here now.

MrPudding

Sponge Bob wrote:

Once McDowell opened his gob (and after the DPP decided not to prosecute) there was no chance of the issue of the false passport being dealt with thru the criminal court EVER. Frank cannot be convicted of anything to do with the false passport issue EVER. There is no investigation or charge in the pipeline from the DPP or the State or the Dept of Foreign Affairs who issued the passport so the matter is no longer sub judice .

This assumes that no other evidence is forthcoming. What if someone comes forward to thre police say "actually, I was sitting beside him on the plane. Now that I think about it the air hostess did not call him Mr Connelly."

Just because it is no longer actively being investigated does not mean new evidence will not appear.

I don't know much about Frank Connelly but I was always under the impression that a person has the right to defend himself in court and is not obliged to take part in a prosecution by media.

MrP

Akrasia

mike65 wrote:

McDowell has done nothing wrong, as much as that annoys/worries some. He was asked a question he answered it, not breaking any laws. His 'leak' was'nt anything of the sort, Sam Smyth asked the Minister if he could shed light on Connelly and he supplied him with documents and the info is in the public domain.

If you're referring to the quesation asked In the Dail by Finian McGrath, By the time that question was asked McDowell had already been making efforts to shut down the CPI by private consultations with Chuck Feeney and leaking documents to the Independent.
How could a passport application possibly have already been in the public domain? Perhaps it could have been retrieved through a convoluted FOI request, but if nobody knew that it existed then how could anyone request it, and the request would almost certainly have been denied

Hobart

Sponge Bob wrote:

Phew.

Less Wind and more Frank-ness . Get him in here now.

Hobart wrote:

...have a debate on the issue, and not act like a child. I'll leave you to it.

QED.

Sponge Bob

MrPudding wrote:

This assumes that no other evidence is forthcoming. What if someone comes forward to thre police say "actually, I was sitting beside him on the plane. Now that I think about it the air hostess did not call him Mr Connelly."

Just because it is no longer actively being investigated does not mean new evidence will not appear.

There can be no prosecution (on the false passport issue) no matter how much new evidence is forthcoming because of all the recent publicity .

Akrasia

Tuars wrote:

Michael McDowell has said that the threat to national security was that money raised by the selling of explosives expertise to FARC would be used to fund Sinn Fein election campaigns and therefore distort the democratic process.

If this is the case then how have the actions of the minister in relation to Frank Connolly and the CPI countered this threat?

Have they seized the money or what? If it is still out there then surely the threat is still alive.

the government could announce tighter campaign finance auditing procedures... but then their own corruption might be exposed