Traffic Corp Superintendent Arrested for Drunk Driving

Stephen

ninty9er wrote:

He above anyone should have known the system and known give a sample unless you have something to hide!!!!

Should at least be demoted....damn public service job protection!!!

Demoted? Are you crazy? He should be f**king well sacked.

ninty9er

Stephen wrote:

Demoted? Are you crazy? He should be f**king well sacked.

our groupin on campus at UL are putting a petition of this nature together for McDowell, but liklihoods of a public servant getting sacked are very slim, especially with rumours that he was "done"

I agree though, what I said was at least

Seth Brundle

Stephen wrote:

Demoted? Are you crazy? He should be f**king well sacked.

Given that two members of FF were caught pissed behind the wheel (GV Wright & Jim McDaid) and nothing happened them then I doubt the political will exists to make his sacking inevitable.

RuggieBear

kbannon wrote:

Given that two members of FF were caught pissed behind the wheel (GV Wright & Jim McDaid) and nothing happened them then I doubt the political will exists to make his sacking inevitable.

Aye...tis a great little country we live in.

CrowdedHouse

I see he's going to 'retire'. Which probably means he'll keep his pension.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0331/fitzgeraldj.html

Dilbert75

It says here that he's resigned / resigning.

Traffic chief was appointed to post only three weeks ago

A SENIOR Garda traffic officer, who was arrested on suspicion of drink driving, has resigned from the force.

Garda Supt James Fitzgerald (54) told the authorities yesterday afternoon that he intended to quit, the Irish Independent can reveal.

The dramatic move came hours after it emerged that he had been arrested for alleged drink driving and taken to Loughrea garda station in county Galway.

It is understood that when his official car was stopped by local gardai at a roundabout outside Loughrea he claimed that he had been "set up" by the garda authorities.

But his arrest stemmed from a telephone call from a member of the public, who had been concerned about his well-being earlier at a filling station at Craughwell on the main Dublin-Galway road.

Three weeks ago Supt Fitzgerald was one of five members of his rank to be appointed to the new posts of full-time traffic superintendents in the regions outside Dublin.

He was placed in charge of traffic duties in the Western region and was based in Galway city.

Two years ago he was granted an injunction by the High Court blocking his transfer from Nenagh to Garda headquarters and stopping an official investigation into anonymous allegations that he had been regularly drunk and owed money - accusations which he strongly denied.

But the injunction against the transfer was later lifted by the court on the application of the Garda authorities and about a year ago he was moved to Garda headquarters in the Phoenix Park in Dublin.

Supt Fitzgerald recently withdrew his outstanding court actions and then sought a transfer to Galway.

His new post as a dedicated traffic superintendent in the west meant he was to work full time in co-ordinating traffic operations between regions and enforcing the policies laid down by the Garda Commissioner.

Around 7.30pm on Thursday a member of the public saw Supt Fitzgerald drive his unmarked official car into the forecourt of a garage in the village of Craughwell on the main Dublin-Galway road.

The officer bought a cup of coffee in the garage shop and was drinking it in his official car when the person decided to contact a garda in Gort station and tell him about his concerns over the driver's well-being.

Supt Fitzgerald then drove out of the garage in the direction of Loughrea. The garda in Gort relayed the information to Loughrea and the local district car intercepted Supt Fitzgerald's car at the roundabout outside the town. A young garda spoke to Supt Fitzgerald, who produced his official identity and a pass to Garda headquarters.

The garda told the traffic superintendent he had formed the opinion he had been drinking and told him he was being arrested and taken to Loughrea garda station.

At that stage it is believed that Supt Fitzgerald made his remarks about being set up by the authorities.

It is understood that his first evidential breath test on the intoxilyser showed his alcohol levels to be above the legal limit.

As part of the process, he was then asked to take a second test. He attempted to take the second test twice but on each occasion failed to produce sufficient breath and this was deemed to be a refusal. Supt Fitzgerald was then released from custody.

Under the new road traffic legislation conviction for refusing to take a breath test can result in disqualification from the roads for up to three years and a fine.

Tom Brady

Seth Brundle

ideally his resignation should be refused and he then receives his cards but as we all know, this will never happen.

patrickc

again as in another thread, one rule for us one rule for them, lets hope I'm proved wrong though and he gets sacked like anyone else would and goes through our wonderful court system:rolleyes:

Altreab

kbannon wrote:

Given that two members of FF were caught pissed behind the wheel (GV Wright & Jim McDaid) and nothing happened them then I doubt the political will exists to make his sacking inevitable.

Jim McDaid was banned from driving .....as was GV Wright (correct me if im wrong on that one)

Guy:Incognito

patrickc2006 wrote:

again as in another thread, one rule for us one rule for them, lets hope I'm proved wrong though and he gets sacked like anyone else would and goes through our wonderful court system:rolleyes:

Set aside the fact he is a gard.
Assuming your job doesnt involve drivign, would you be happy if you were sacked for being caught drink driving. It may well be policy to sack him but if it isnt I dotn see why he should be sacke danymore than you should in similar circumstances.

The fact he is part of the traffic corps is really relevant either, I mean a gard in the drug squad shouldnt be treated any different to a gard in any other division if he is found in posetion of drugs.

patrickc

Stekelly wrote:

Set aside the fact he is a gard.
Assuming your job doesnt involve drivign, would you be happy if you were sacked for being caught drink driving. It may well be policy to sack him but if it isnt I dotn see why he should be sacke danymore than you should in similar circumstances.

The fact he is part of the traffic corps is really relevant either, I mean a gard in the drug squad shouldnt be treated any different to a gard in any other division if he is found in posetion of drugs.

what about leading by example?

CLADA

Stekelly wrote:

Set aside the fact he is a gard.
Assuming your job doesnt involve drivign, would you be happy if you were sacked for being caught drink driving. It may well be policy to sack him but if it isnt I dotn see why he should be sacke danymore than you should in similar circumstances.

The fact he is part of the traffic corps is really relevant either, I mean a gard in the drug squad shouldnt be treated any different to a gard in any other division if he is found in posetion of drugs.

A good point Stekelly, drink driving is not a sackable offence in any non driving job. so why should it be for him?

You could argue:
(A) The Gardai should lead by example, so sack him.
(B) As Regional Traffic Supt he should be more accountable than the ordinary punter, so sack him.

or

(A) If a Garda is the only occupation where you can be sacked for drink driving, is that not one rule for them and another for us?
(B) The man has resigned, his career is over. Is that punishment enough?

It was one stupid thing to do and I honestly believe that the managerial positions in the guards are occupied by a lot of the old brigade who are preaching the political correctness etc.. but don't seem to be able to practice it themselves.

Mitch Connor

if a guard can't abide by the law like they are entrusted to force everyone else too, they should not have the job.

patrickc

Tauren wrote:

if a guard can't abide by the law like they are entrusted to force everyone else too, they should not have the job.

agreed

I've worked in a number of jobs (where driving is not my job) and drink driving is a sackable offence

CLADA

So should he be allowed to resign before the case is dealt with?

Mitch Connor

CLADA wrote:

So should he be allowed to resign before the case is dealt with?

yes - but he should still be banned from driving.

CLADA

Theres no disputing the ban, but my mistake in saying resign, he has applied to retire. Remember that you retire on full pension, you get sacked with nothing.

So do they let him go with his pension or gut him?

Fey!

patrickc2006 wrote:

I've worked in a number of jobs (where driving is not my job) and drink driving is a sackable offence

Name 3 where it is distinctly drink driving as opposed to having gained a criminal record.

Stekelly - very valid point.

To a few others on here - drink driving is not a sackable offence, IIRC, even if the internet lawyers/internet civil-rights-activists/internet I've-never-done-wrong-people on here believe it should be. If you were a clerical worker and you got fired for drink driving, wouldn't you be bringing your former employer to the labour court and moaning to us all on here? Of course you would. Why? Because a large element of the people on here would rather gouge out their eyes than say anything positive about anything.

Yes, this superintendent should not be placed in a position of trust again, but after the governments exposure to a certain judge with filthy pictures last year, can you see them blocking this idiots retiring so that they can sack him? And to those political animals amongst you, it'd be the same no matter who was in power. Severe lack of backbone backed by our constitution and a good solicitor.

All I can say is good work to the garda who arrested him and charged him when they could easily have smudged things enough to let him off despite the report from a member of the public; test results didn't have to become public knowledge. A lot of people will say that that gardas career is now over, but s/he may have done more for PR for the force in one night than their press office has in 5 years.

Boards motors section will continue to Garda bash as people can do so anonymously; 99% of you wouldn't have the guts to bitch and snipe so much in a public non-internet forum. The thing is, despite your moaning, this is actually one of the few threads on here where a garda has done the right thing.

Golferx

Fey! wrote:

................................. The thing is, despite your moaning, this is actually one of the few threads on here where a garda has done the right thing.

Done the Right thing? Are you joking?

What this man has done is nothing more than damage limitation.

1. It appears he was driving while drunk.

2. In a State Car

and

3. He refused to give the necessary samples.


Now, instead of standing up like a man and taking his medicine, as a member of the Garda Siochana, he is trying to run away with his pension intact.



Doing the right thing. Fey!, you should be ashamed of yourself, defending such an individual.

This Garda should be sacked , without pension. His actions and behaviour have been deplorable.

Thank God he didn't kill some poor innocent..

patrickc

Fey! wrote:

Name 3 where it is distinctly drink driving as opposed to having gained a criminal record.

ok maybe it's more the criminal record, but he still has done wrong, in his job with his power and authority he should be setting a good example, he therefore should be sacked and not resigning with his full pension.. (half of it maybe)

we might bitch and moan about Gardai on boards, but look at the praise the Garda that arrested him is getting, if someone has done wrong, they deserve to suffer the consequences.
and he clearly has done wrong, (whatever about even being in his own car, and not a state owned car he might have some leeway)

Fey!

GolferX - Stop, Think, Type.

I wasn't defending the idiot super, I was refering to the guy who arrested him.

Next time try reading before attacking. I have extreme views on drink driving, which I'm sure I have made known on this forum before, which do not come too short of turning offenders into organ donors before their meet their demise.

Altreab

Golferx wrote:

Done the Right thing? Are you joking?

What this man has done is nothing more than damage limitation.

1. It appears he was driving while drunk.

2. In a State Car

and

3. He refused to give the necessary samples.


Now, instead of standing up like a man and taking his medicine, as a member of the Garda Siochana, he is trying to run away with his pension intact.



Doing the right thing. Fey!, you should be ashamed of yourself, defending such an individual.

This Garda should be sacked , without pension. His actions and behaviour have been deplorable.

Thank God he didn't kill some poor innocent..

I think he meant the Garda that did the arresting did the right thing NOT the drunk driving Garda.

P.S. Ya got there before me Fey

Fey!

Patrick - I don't deny that someone should be punished for their wrong doings, but sacking him would not be as effective as stripping him of his position as he has blatantly shown that he cannot perform the tasks given to him.

ninty9er

Fey! wrote:

Name 3 where it is distinctly drink driving as opposed to having gained a criminal record.

Know a manager at a chemical plant who has sacked people after observing them driving on public roads....reasoning...if they would take such risks in their own time...he wasn't going to giive them the chance with corrosives..or processes around them

Golferx

Fey! wrote:

GolferX - Stop, Think, Type.

I wasn't defending the idiot super, I was refering to the guy who arrested him.
..................

My apologies. I read the last paragraph where it was not clear.

We are both singing from the same sheet!

tvr

under the new rules of the roads , by failing to give a specimen for testing does he now have to get 4 years in jail?

patrickc

Fey! wrote:

Patrick - I don't deny that someone should be punished for their wrong doings, but sacking him would not be as effective as stripping him of his position as he has blatantly shown that he cannot perform the tasks given to him.

He is retiring though so effectively he's stripping himself of his position, whereas his position should be stripped from him..

Stephen

The new rules get you a 4 year driving ban, not 4 years in jail.

patrickc

Stephen wrote:

The new rules get you a 4 year driving ban, not 4 years in jail.

and I think a hefty fine if not mistaken, how long your off the road depends on the amount of alcohol in your system.. You can no longer appeal your driving ban until at least 3/4's of it is up.

Guy:Incognito

CLADA wrote:

So should he be allowed to resign before the case is dealt with?

It's not a case of allowing him to resign, he cant be stopped resigning. If they want to sack him they have to follow a procedure, suspension, inquiry etc etc. Theres nothing that canstop him resigning before due process is served.


EDIT, just saw your second post, ignore.:)