Article:Ahern and Briefcase of Cash issue

John_C

Akrasia wrote:

Corruption is an extremely difficult charge to prove, especially when the official investigating body is being frustrated at every turn by FF politicians and their cornies

The absence of any evidance doesn't help to prove the charge either.

Voipjunkie

Tristrame wrote:

A Guard illegally takes a look inside the brief case a decade ago

You have twice stated that the guard acted illegally

Can you please explain exactly what law the guard broke in looking inside a briefcase given to him for safe keeping by a ministers Girlfriend.

It is ironic that you state that there should be no unsubstantiated allegations in this thread and then proceed to make an allegation of illegal behaviour on the part of a former garda.


It may have been wrong or a breach of trust but I would love to know what law he broke.

Voipjunkie

For my money I would have to say that it is interesting in that the allegation relates to the same time period as the "loans and Gifts" that bertie received and that the Garda would not have known about these events when he made his statement.

Also the obvious question is why would a garda make up such as story it is not like he has tried to profit from the story and it appears that he has nothing to gain.


As far as I can see there are only 3 possible explanations the Garda is lying bertie is lying or the money belonged to Ms Larkin and had nothing to do with bertie in which case bertie and the garda could be telling the truth.

Dalfiatach

Voipjunkie wrote:

As far as I can see there are only 3 possible explanations the Garda is lying bertie is lying or the money belonged to Ms Larkin and had nothing to do with bertie in which case bertie and the garda could be telling the truth.

Except the Garda sez the next day he drove Bertie to the airport, and Bertie took the briefcase onto the plane. Celia left it in the car in the first place, but Bertie took it to the airport.

Allegedly, of course.

As for anyone who thinks Ahern's finances of the period are somhow just an amusing quirk - come off it. The Minister of Finance of a European country has been a TD for 15 years, has a mortgage and has just gone through a costly legal seperation, yet throughout all of this he gets his salary cheques cashed in Fagan's and carries the money about in a briefcase?

Me arse.

Why hasn't anyone done a FOI request to find out exactly how Bertie was being paid - salary and expenses - during this period? Who cashed the salary cheques, where and when? How did Bertie pay his outgoings? Did he pay all his phone bills, lecky bills, election expenses, full and part-time constituency workers, food - was all that paid for in cash out of the briefcase? Prrrrrf. I don't believe that for a second. And nobody with a functioning brain would. The only question is whether you decide to turn a blind eye to it, or decide to ask questions and point out the obvious flaws.

Dalfiatach

Dalfiatach wrote:

Except the Garda sez the next day he drove Bertie to the airport, and Bertie took the briefcase onto the plane. Celia left it in the car in the first place, but Bertie took it to the airport.

Allegedly, of course.

As for anyone who thinks Ahern's finances of the period are somhow just an amusing quirk - come off it. The Minister of Finance of a European country has been a TD for 15 years, has a mortgage and has just gone through a costly legal seperation, yet throughout all of this he gets his salary cheques cashed in Fagan's and carries the money about in a briefcase?

Me arse.

You are forgetting , this is Ireland.

Why hasn't anyone done a FOI request to find out exactly how Bertie was being paid - salary and expenses - during this period? Who cashed the salary cheques, where and when? How did Bertie pay his outgoings? Did he pay all his phone bills, lecky bills, election expenses, full and part-time constituency workers, food - was all that paid for in cash out of the briefcase?

Thats what mahon is for and he's fairly thorough.

Prrrrrf. I don't believe that for a second. And nobody with a functioning brain would. The only question is whether you decide to turn a blind eye to it, or decide to ask questions and point out the obvious flaws.

The only question is what kind of unsubstantiated speculation can be posted next it seems.
Other than that it's simple enough.One can't stand the guy or one can.

It may have been wrong or a breach of trust but I would love to know what law he broke.

Did he have a search warrant ? Should he have done so? No.
What if there were cabinet papers in there? Whats to stop him having a good read.Should he have a good read? No.

Don't get me wrong,I would have mentioned that I think it was illegal a third time if I thought it was say a bigger issue than dropping litter in the street or taking some of the money.
I only mentioned it one more time than once.

Red Alert

It sickens me how he got away with the whip-round and how is now getting away with this cash-stuffed briefcase. Enda Kenny's biggest failing in my opinion was not nailing him on the initial whip-round job. What is worse though, is that we're so immature in Ireland just because divorce was brought into it - plenty of people get divorced and do all their finances properly and are earning money at the time etc. However, it seemed that you couldn't criticise him because he was involved in divorce proceedings?

In Britain he'd have been long gone - we're a lot better than our neighbours in many ways, but we're just too sleazy and thick to eject unsuitable people from office. If Bertie had behaved that way in a private organization and promoted people to top jobs for under the counter cash he'd have been fired.

Red Alert

Red Alert wrote:

If Bertie had behaved that way in a private organization and promoted people to top jobs for under the counter cash he'd have been fired.

I don't think its that we are too sleasy,I think it's because we are in a begorrah and begob society that back slaps that type of thing.
Shur mary , jack and joe wouldnt have got their Shivil Shervish job or trip up the ladder without it.
I do agree though that if this happened in Britain that Ahern would be gone-not because he took money to put people on boards but because of the implication that that might have been the case.

Voipjunkie

Tristrame wrote:

Did he have a search warrant ? Should he have done so? No.
What if there were cabinet papers in there? Whats to stop him having a good read.Should he have a good read? No.



Don't get me wrong,I would have mentioned that I think it was illegal a third time if I thought it was say a bigger issue than dropping litter in the street or taking some of the money.
I only mentioned it one more time than once.

Why would he need a search warrant the owner of the brief case had left it in his possession he was not investigating any crime or gathering evidence of a possible crime. It could be argued that he had an obligation to look in it if he was going to be bringing it on a plane the next day.
Also he may have been concerned with how secure he should make the briefcase if it was berties tootbrush and a clean pair of underpants then it would be safe enough leaving them in the car or in his house. If it was important ministerial papers or a large amount of cash then it would need to be more secure. In fact the garda brought it to a garda station for safe keeping when he had ascertained the value of the contents.
To state that the garda acted illegally is IMO an attempt to discredit the Garda especially when you cannot say what particular law you believe the Garda broke nor do you know why the garda looked in the briefcase.


Should the garda read important ministerial papers obviously not nor should a minister or his partner give a garda important ministerial papers to mind till tomorrow.

Voipjunkie

Voipjunkie wrote:

It could be argued that he had an obligation to look in it if he was going to be bringing it on a plane the next day.

Lol was the guard going to manchester too? because thats the only reason that he'd have to look in that brief case for a flight.

Why would he need a search warrant the owner of the brief case had left it in his possession he was not investigating any crime or gathering evidence of a possible crime.

He didn't leave it there with a post it "open me please".

Also he may have been concerned with how secure he should make the briefcase if it was berties tootbrush and a clean pair of underpants then it would be safe enough leaving them in the car or in his house.

Now for heavens sake,he could ask those kind of things.

If it was important ministerial papers or a large amount of cash then it would need to be more secure. In fact the garda brought it to a garda station for safe keeping when he had ascertained the value of the contents.
To state that the garda acted illegally is IMO an attempt to discredit the Garda especially when you cannot say what particular law you believe the Garda broke nor do you know why the garda looked in the briefcase.

It would be if I was harping on about it maybe-how many times did i mention that versus the number of replies I made on this thread.
I mentioned it twice, thats one more time than once .

Should the garda read important ministerial papers obviously not nor should a minister or his partner give a garda important ministerial papers to mind till tomorrow.

Why not are Guards not trustworthy?

Villain

I don't think the Garda should be accused of anything, if you are given something to keep in your pocession you surely would ensure the package doesn't contain anything illegal, e.g. Tristrame say I call down to your house and give you a briefcase and ask you to keep it overnight and it contains a kilo of drugs that are illegal would you be breaking any law by checking the contents?

Ah this is getting silly.

Villain

Maybe it is but I think the Garda had every right to look inside the briefcase, do you not agree?

I don't actually agree at all.
This Guard was on a detail with the minister of Finance.
The brief case would have been private.

And as it turns out the Guard in question in the context of today is staying quiet about the briefcase now probably because it wasnt illegal,there was no wrong doing proved shown or otherwise.
All the fuss (now died down and indeed short lived) was coming from people that apparantly if a scandal was the equivalent of a píss up couldnt organise one in a brewery.

Now have we anything new to add on this?

Villain

Whether he is on detail or not he should still always check he wasn't in pocession of any illegal packages. Its only a small detail now but I wouldn't go accusing him of anything illegal imo he had every right to check the contents in fact I would say he was obliged to do so.

The Garda in question probably knows that nothing can be proven now and doesn't want to get caught in FF - FG crossfire.

I still think the biggest thing from this affair and the last one is the fact that a Minister of Finance didn't have a bank account, why would he want to deal in cash only? Seems odd very odd imo.

Oh I said it was quirky alright but not unusual-though probably unusual for a finance minister.
It's hardly a sackable offence though is it ?

Now I was asking anything new here? Anything concrete worth discussing other than people presenting their dislike of Ahern in various different ways or in different combinations of sentences.
That gets boring after a while.

Villain

Oh its not a sackable by any means but it might give an insight into the type of person he is but its up to people to make their own minds up, I personally would never vote for the man or for his party while he is leader but thats just imo.

Anyhow,given that most of this thread is theory,It's got a new home now.

Villain

Moved to Conspiracy theories??? Thats seems a bit odd its still a political issue I would have thought?

Voipjunkie

irish1 wrote:

Moved to Conspiracy theories??? Thats seems a bit odd its still a political issue I would have thought?

Typical abuse of power IMO

Certain people are uncomfortable with the subject so try and make it into a tinfoil hat subject to discredit the story.

LoL but this thread is full of tinfoil hat stuff.It's basic modding to move it to here.

All I've seen in this thread (mostly) is speculation with the flimsiest of grounds bordering on no grounds at all.
Basically ye don't like the man so anything will do.

Why not stick to criticising him on the politics board for his record on politics and leave the speculation as to why he dealt in cash for a period to the tin foil hats untill ye have something solid.

And who would these people uncomfortable with the subject be ?
As for discrediting the story? What story?I already linked to an article in yesterdays Indo (the same paper) saying that their story was being pimped by a fine gael hack all along.

As I said,a píss up in a brewery comes to mind.

As for my politics coming into it,thats laughable,shur I'm a labour supporter, thats on record... so really perhaps I should be stickying all threads dealing with them and deleting negative posts...

yeah you've nailed me alright.
Hands up I've been arrested.

lostexpectation

from now on all sunday indo stories go here automatically until proven otherwise

Voipjunkie

Tristrame wrote:

All I've seen in this thread (mostly) is speculation with the flimsiest of grounds bordering on no grounds at all.
Basically ye don't like the man so anything will do.

.

Like your speculation that the Garda had acted illegally what grounds was that based on you could not back it up by pointing to any law.

And basically you do like the man so unless he is caught with his trousers down with documentary photographs witnessed by the pope with a signed affidavit from jesus himself its all just a conspiracy.

Honestly that is the atitude that let Haughey get away with it for years.

I don't know if it is true or not but in my opinion it raises questions.

Why would the garda lie
If Bertie was dealing in cash what bank account did the cash come from given that bertie claims not to have had an account.
Why would bertie need a briefcase full of cash for a weekend in manchester.


IMO there is some skeleton in berties closet and eventually it will come out
There appears to have been strange events in those years between what Gilmartin says then the whip around then the "gift" in manchester now the garda claiming a briefcase full of money going the other way he did not have a bank account yet claims to have saved 50 grand he was on a good salary yet claims to have been on his uppers despite the fact that he had saved such a large sum of money in the previous couple of years.
It does not add up.

As regards the FG involvement it is largely irrelevant we know why the story is coming out now but that does not change the circumstances of what the garda alledgedly saw. FG have not added to or enhanced the story they have just let it out now either it is true or not true the timing does not change that.

Voipjunkie

lostexpectation wrote:

from now on all sunday indo stories go here automatically until proven otherwise

Unless they are about the provos then we take it as verbatim no proof needed

Voipjunkie

Voipjunkie wrote:

Like your speculation that the Garda had acted illegally what grounds was that based on you could not back it up by pointing to any law.

yeah I couldn't other than speculate about search warrants.
So another reason the threads here.
Thanks for pointing that out.

And basically you do like the man so unless he is caught with his trousers down with documentary photographs witnessed by the pope with a signed affidavit from jesus himself its all just a conspiracy.

Honestly that is the atitude that let Haughey get away with it for years.

I believe in due process and a fair hearing.

I don't know if it is true or not but in my opinion it raises questions.

Why would the garda lie
If Bertie was dealing in cash what bank account did the cash come from given that bertie claims not to have had an account.
Why would bertie need a briefcase full of cash for a weekend in manchester.

Well he may have needed to cash his salary cheque or a few of them and left the lolly with the guard and took a few tenners for pints.

IMO there is some skeleton in berties closet and eventually it will come out
There appears to have been strange events in those years between what Gilmartin says then the whip around then the "gift" in manchester now the garda claiming a briefcase full of money going the other way he did not have a bank account yet claims to have saved 50 grand he was on a good salary yet claims to have been on his uppers despite the fact that he had saved such a large sum of money in the previous couple of years.

The only thing new there is the briefcase of cash at the time he said he dealt only in cash..
Come on.

It does not add up.

Well I dunno but if I was getting 800 a week and only spending 300,then after 2 years I'd have more than 50k saved.
Thats maths for you.

As regards the FG involvement it is largely irrelevant we know why the story is coming out now but that does not change the circumstances of what the garda alledgedly saw. FG have not added to or enhanced the story they have just let it out now either it is true or not true the timing does not change that.

Well they were silly politically to be caught with their pants down trying to promote a flimsy story.

Jonny Arson

No matter what Tristrame's strange desperate attempts are to sweep this topic under the carpet the fact remains that Garda Fallon has not made any comment or statement denying the SINDO article.

If a paper made an extremely serious false allegation about the Taoiseach and you at the centre of it surely, even if you are unwell like Garda Fallon is, would make an immediate statement denying the allegations to protect your integrity instead of having rumours thrown around about you left, right and centre? The silence is absolutely deafening and very strange to say the least.

Something more is bound to come of this, anyone without a vested interest can see that.

Case and topic is not closed and I ask another mod of the Poltics forum or a mod of this forum to move this thread back to its orginal location for further non-censored discussion. Thanks.

humanji

Jonny Arson wrote:

No matter what Tristrame's strange desperate attempts are to sweep this topic under the carpet the fact remains that Garda Fallon has not made any comment or statement denying the SINDO article.

Why would he? If he says it's true, he'll be accused of making it up. If he says it's false, he'll be accused of covering it up. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. The smart thing to do is to keep his mouth shut and let everyone else fight it out.

Villain

I think the very fact that Sunday Indo and Mail on Sunday published this story and don't seem to have had any legal challenges to it makes it more than a conspiracy theory imo.

oscarBravo

Jonny Arson wrote:

Case and topic is not closed and I ask another mod of the Poltics forum or a mod of this forum to move this thread back to its orginal location for further non-censored discussion. Thanks.

Only a mod of this forum can move it back, and I'd ask that they discuss it with us before doing so.

What makes you say discussion is censored on this forum?

Voipjunkie

Tristrame wrote:

yeah I couldn't other than speculate about search warrants.
So another reason the threads here.
Thanks for pointing that out.

So because you raised an issue that you knew nothing about it should be moved that is some kind of logic

Tristrame wrote:

I believe in due process and a fair hearing.

Sometimes you do I don't remember you being so concerned about those things when I suggested the same for slab murphy

Tristrame wrote:

Well he may have needed to cash his salary cheque or a few of them and left the lolly with the guard and took a few tenners for pints.

Unlikely that they would cash cheques when he did not have a bank account

Tristrame wrote:

The only thing new there is the briefcase of cash at the time he said he dealt only in cash..
Come on.

No the fact that he was bringing said briefcase to Manchester ie out of the jurisdiction and that the Minister of Finance thought it was easier to deposit large amounts of cash with a garda than open a bank account if he was that lax with his own money what was he like with ours.

Tristrame wrote:

Well I dunno but if I was getting 800 a week and only spending 300,then after 2 years I'd have more than 50k saved.
Thats maths for you.

Yes the Maths also suggests that if that was the case it would be hard to believe that the same person could be almost destitute needing to be bailed out by his pals just a few months later

Tristrame wrote:

Well they were silly politically to be caught with their pants down trying to promote a flimsy story.

What is flimsy about it this was after all a member of the Gardai who claims to have witnessed this

Glenbhoy

I am shocked and appalled that this was moved to 'conspiracy theories', presumably Tristrame was behind the move?
Let me ask you Tristrame, do you think FF are better off with Mr. Ahern as their leader and if so, why? Do you think that this little story on boards has the potential to derail FF's chances? How anyone can have such blind allegiance to such an incompetent leader is a little worrying imo, anyway, what will you do this sunday, when Frank Connolly and Jody Corcoran publish a whole new bunch of stories?