Gardaí and underage searches

#Smokey#

Just a quick question for all you guys. Last night was walking to my friends house in castlecurragh w another mate of mine who had alcohol(he is 18 and was carrying his license) and all of a sudden a red ford mondeo stops and 3 guards jump out and search us.
Now the guard asked me before he searched me my age and i told him i was 17 so he just started searching my pockets and patting me down etc. When my friend asked him why was he doing this the oldest guard replied "we're entitled"

Also the guard who searched me asked me my details and also asked if i was "a roofer". strange or maybe slang i didnt understand it.

Now is it not against the law to search a minor without consent or reason?

the locust

They perhaps suspected yous had drugs and did a section 23 'drug search' under 18's can be searched

#Smokey#

yea maybe thats what it was.I know they were drug squad. But i had my phone and my ipod in my front pockets and they didnt search them only my jacket pockets and patted my legs and back down and pulled out my t-shirt and vest. Bloody disgrace though. If he had of told me he was going to search me rather than rifling through my pockets i would have understood.Not a badge number or and form of ID either

pirelli

You could make a complaint to the Garda Ombudsman. They will verify who they were if you give them the correct date time and place. Stipulate that you are entitled to know the identity number of the Garda or the station they are from. Tell them your not a roofer and to cease harrassing you.

#Smokey#

nah, i couldnt be bothered. Just wanted to know if it was legal to search me without any consent as im underage

Our man in Havana

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=roofer

#Smokey#

your a smart one arent you Bond?

Maybe he just needed his roof done

Turner

Its how gardai regularly find and prosecute people with drugs/knives. If you have nothing to hide just be courteous and forget about it.

johnnyskeleton

Chief--- wrote: »

Its how gardai regularly find and prosecute people with drugs/knives. If you have nothing to hide just be courteous and forget about it.

...& then take their badge numbers and make a complaint that the gardai:
A) had no reasonable cause to suspect you of possessing drugs
searched you without consent and without formally invoking their powers under the misuse of drugs act
C) did not inform you in a language that you could understand or at all why they were searching you & what their exact entitlement to search was.

You probably wont get very far (gardai being absolutely truthful at all times :rolleyes: ), but it's a good excuse for sabre rattling.

Potential-Monke

^^^ You see, thats why there's no respect for the law these days, and also why crime is rife. Why shouldn't Gardai be allowed to search anyone they want? Ya, ya, invading your rights, etc, etc blah blah blag. I guarantee they would find alot more if they could. They're accountable for everything now, which precents alot of Gardai from searching ("Is it legal, can i do it", etc) and "roofers" (whatever they are) and they get away with stuff then.

Granted, they should have told you what they were doing, but as Chief said, be courteous and let them off if you have nothing to hide.

Used to be a time when how you dressed was a factor for allowing a drug search, not anymore though... Pity.

I wouldn't mind being searched every second weekend if i knew it meant that other scumbags were being caught.

Dave!

Good for you Potential-Monke, but perhaps other people wouldn't be too happy about willy-nilly being subject to a drug search in public because they were wearing baggy pants/whatever.

johnnyskeleton

Potential-Monke wrote: »

^^^ You see, thats why there's no respect for the law these days, and also why crime is rife.

I would say that if there is no respect for the law these days (which I don't think is true) and if crime is rife (which to a certain extent I accept), it is more likely because people don't trust the gardai enough to assist them in their enquiries. As for why people don't trust the gardai enough, it is probably because you will always get a lot of bad gardai searching people for no reason, or for malice.

Potential-Monke wrote:

Why shouldn't Gardai be allowed to search anyone they want?

Because it's against the law. The gardai don't have the right to do so.

Potential-Monke wrote:

Ya, ya, invading your rights, etc, etc blah blah blag.

If you don't like your rights you can waive them, but other people are entitled to theirs.

Potential-Monke wrote:

I guarantee they would find alot more if they could.

Or more likely they just wouldn't go around searching everybody because it would be a complete waste of their time. It takes a lot of time to search one person, and searching hundred's of people would leave them no time to deal with actual crimes & criminals.

Potential-Monke wrote:

They're accountable for everything now, which precents alot of Gardai from searching ("Is it legal, can i do it", etc) and "roofers" (whatever they are) and they get away with stuff then.

But it doesn't stop them from searching, as evidenced by the original post. In any case I think they should be accountable, because otherwise they would just be a group of thugs in polyester uniforms.

Potential-Monke wrote:

Granted, they should have told you what they were doing, but as Chief said, be courteous and let them off if you have nothing to hide.

That's exactly the point. If they are to be accountable, they must use their powers in an accountable fashion. This means:
1) having reasonable cause to suspect
2) only searching with consent or under a specific power
3) informing the person of the reason why it is necessary so that the person might, if they are of the same opinion as you, allow themselves to be searched.

Potential-Monke wrote:

Used to be a time when how you dressed was a factor for allowing a drug search, not anymore though... Pity.

I think it's a good thing - it shows that the gardai are after the big dealers and white collar criminals as much as they are the petty thieves and drug users.

Potential-Monke wrote:

I wouldn't mind being searched every second weekend if i knew it meant that other scumbags were being caught.

Easy to say, but if you were the only one who was searched, and you got dirty stares from your neighbours & family, you would change your tune pretty promptly.

Turner

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

...& then take their badge numbers and make a complaint that the gardai:
A) had no reasonable cause to suspect you of possessing drugs
searched you without consent and without formally invoking their powers under the misuse of drugs act
C) did not inform you in a language that you could understand or at all why they were searching you & what their exact entitlement to search was.

You probably wont get very far (gardai being absolutely truthful at all times :rolleyes: ), but it's a good excuse for sabre rattling.

Tell that to the family of the man whos life was probably saved or the employees of some bank who werent held up, all because of the gardai stopping and searching this man.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1123/rifle.html

Wonder if this suspected inla man will make a garda ombudsman complaint about the manner in which he was searched??

Time to wake up and smell the coffee, its a dangerous world out there. Not all gards are tied up in ballinaboy pulling crusties off the road. They are out there taking seriously dangerous people off the streets.

Our man in Havana

Well said Chief.

+1 support for the Gardaí.

yayamark

Bond-007 wrote: »

Well said Chief.

+1 support for the Gardaí.

+1

pirelli

Thats one less replica for the airsoft gun parade.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055134787

johnnyskeleton

Chief--- wrote: »

Tell that to the family of the man whos life was probably saved or the employees of some bank who werent held up, all because of the gardai stopping and searching this man.

You are appealing to the lowest common denominator and inventing some emotive victims purely for the sensationalism. It is completely unfounded speculation and irrelevant to the point. It's some leap you're making between a person being found in possession of a firearm (the details of which are very spase in the article) and an agenda to increase police powers.

Chief wrote:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1123/rifle.html

Doesn't say anything about the circumstances - most likely he was known to the gardai, and if so then they may have had reasonable cause to suspect him of possessing firearms. They almost certainly either searched him by consent or invoked one of their powers of search (most probably s30 of the Offences Against the State Act, 1939). We simply don't know from that article, so it bears no relevance to the original post, which concerned a search outside of garda powers.

Chief wrote:

Wonder if this suspected inla man will make a garda ombudsman complaint about the manner in which he was searched??

If they breached his constitutional rights and/or acted outside of their powers, then yes, I imagine he would. And he would be right to do so.

Chief wrote:

Time to wake up and smell the coffee, its a dangerous world out there. Not all gards are tied up in ballinaboy pulling crusties off the road. They are out there taking seriously dangerous people off the streets.

I find it very hard to see your point - it's hidden behind a thick greasy layer of rhetoric. It is a dangerous world, that is why the gardai should spend their time investigating dangerous criminals. What they should NOT be doing is:

A) wasting their time searching everybody
searching people for no good reason
C) harrassing people because of their age/race/background;

because that would be a waste of their time (and consequently the streets would be more dangerous). Furthermore, not even the gardai themselves (or at least, the more senior and experienced members) would suggest that they should have unfettered powers of arrest, search and seizure. It is well established in law and in public perception that the gardai must act within the law and do things "by the book".

So you are either ignoring my point that gardai should follow proceedures and using it to take a sideswipe at constitutional rights, or you are advocating a police state.

I will stand for neither.

#Smokey#

pirelli wrote: »

Thats one less replica for the airsoft gun parade.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055134787

And this relates to my question in what way?

I understand the need to search people but what would you think if some random guy started rifling through your pockets showing no id.I could walk up to a person and search them take what i want and they'd think i was drug squad. This is why people don't trust guards.They don't show identification first which could lead to someone thinking they were being mugged.I was lucky i felt safe with my friends but if i was some unsuspecting person and three lads jumped out of a car and went for my pockets im sure a few punches would be thrown in reaction and as to that ak47 find i doubt an INLA man would leave a rifle barrel sticking out of a bag for all to see *hint* tipoff *hint* especially when moving it

pirelli

[And this relates to my question in what way?]

pirelli wrote: »

You could make a complaint to the Garda Ombudsman. They will verify who they were if you give them the correct date time and place. Stipulate that you are entitled to know the identity number of the Garda or the station they are from. Tell them your not a roofer and to cease harrassing you.

The quote above is an instrumental form of vindication. As this did not suit you ( you couldnt be bothered) and now its obvious that you would rather take a more emotional or physical approach to vindicate the invasion to your privacy or was it the breach of trust. Could you slap the garda? or knee him in the head?, in order to do this it is best advised to find out whom the garda is. If you would rather make anomyous phone-calls then again you would need the garda's name. If you would like to have his details and the power to do these things without getting your hands dirty then I would suggest the Ombusdman. If you want to sue the Garda again you would have to know whom the Garda is and i refer back to the Ombudsman approach.

Therefore this thread is now discussing the sudden apparent need for random searches weighing against invading peoples privacy and thus making very angry people who might seek revenge through joining subversive organistaions and spitefully carry AK47's around safe in the knowledge that statistically a random search is like 1 in 500 per day.

johnnyskeleton

pirelli wrote: »

Therefore this thread is now discussing the sudden apparent need for random searches weighing against invading peoples privacy and thus making very angry people who might seek revenge through joining subversive organistaions and spitefully carry AK47's around safe in the knowledge that statistically a random search is like 1 in 500 per day.

Nah, I've gone much longer than 500 days without being searched (although, for some, that might be part of the problem).

#Smokey#

pirelli wrote: »

[And this relates to my question in what way?]




The quote above is an instrumental form of vindication. As this did not suit you ( you couldnt be bothered) and now its obvious that you would rather take a more emotional or physical approach to vindicate the invasion to your privacy or was it the breach of trust. Could you slap the garda? or knee him in the head?, in order to do this it is best advised to find out whom the garda is. If you would rather make anomyous phone-calls then again you would need the garda's name. If you would like to have his details and the power to do these things without getting your hands dirty then I would suggest the Ombusdman. If you want to sue the Garda again you would have to know whom the Garda is and i refer back to the Ombudsman approach.

Therefore this thread is now discussing the sudden apparent need for random searches weighing against invading peoples privacy and thus making very angry people who might seek revenge through joining subversive organistaions and spitefully carry AK47's around safe in the knowledge that statistically a random search is like 1 in 500 per day.

Ok i see what you mean but i am not against random searches nor am i pursuing an emotional or physical grudge against the gardaí i am just voicing my concern that no proper id was shown,no announce that i was to be searched nor was i given a proper reason for being searched and i was trying to point out what could happen to a garda if they perform an unannounced search on an unsuspecting person.

pirelli

I understand where you are coming from. I think you want to know what your rights are.

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA&feature=related

http://www.flexyourrights.org/

I have provided links that I think might bring to light the issue your discussing although the legislation is slightly different there is a law of natural justice.
JohnnySkeleton did say the Gardai were not entitled to just conduct a search at random. He seems to have the required knowledge the give a "best approach to the situation of a Garda approaching to conduct a random search" The ciizens information website Is the best place to get a good answer. http://www.citizensinformationboard.ie/

Dave!

That flexyourrights website is American, no?

pirelli

DaveMcG wrote: »

That flexyourrights website is American, no?

Yes.Read it anyway for the attitude you must display to the Garda.

Victor

pirelli wrote: »

Yes.Read it anyway for the attitude you must display to the Garda.

You say that in such an argumentative way.

Trojan911

Chief--- wrote: »

Its how gardai regularly find and prosecute people with drugs/knives.

Then unfortunately they are acting unlawfully. "Fishing Expeditions" are not allowed, reasonable grounds are. The Gardai have to realise that decent people will not tolerate that type of behaviour.

I for one, would not tolerate it, and I am firm believer in upholding the law. They have rules to adhere to and if applied correctly they will achieve their objectives with minimum fuss.

pirelli

You say that in such an argumentative way,



"your a mod,and You have 33,499 posts. Now thats one more post for you.Keep the count going coz thats all that matters Oh! and inspiring your 33,500. I might be skating on thin ice when I suggest nobody wants to see your 33,500th post."

The wrong attitude.. Mod could ban me..

"Yes i suppose my post was quite brief if not even ambiguous."

The correct attitude.... Mod feels he is contributing and feels in control.

P.s It was a quick post to answer the gentlemans brief question. I really do mean check the behaviour described as it is fully researched and is a fair and impartial
study of police behaviours. It is appropiate and relevant in this way although the legislation would be different the natural law of justice is usually the same.

dK1NG

Potential-Monke wrote: »

^^^ You see, thats why there's no respect for the law these days, and also why crime is rife. Why shouldn't Gardai be allowed to search anyone they want? Ya, ya, invading your rights, etc, etc blah blah blag. I guarantee they would find alot more if they could. They're accountable for everything now, which precents alot of Gardai from searching ("Is it legal, can i do it", etc) and "roofers" (whatever they are) and they get away with stuff then.

Granted, they should have told you what they were doing, but as Chief said, be courteous and let them off if you have nothing to hide.

Used to be a time when how you dressed was a factor for allowing a drug search, not anymore though... Pity.

I wouldn't mind being searched every second weekend if i knew it meant that other scumbags were being caught.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You are appealing to the lowest common denominator and inventing some emotive victims purely for the sensationalism. It is completely unfounded speculation and irrelevant to the point. It's some leap you're making between a person being found in possession of a firearm (the details of which are very spase in the article) and an agenda to increase police powers.
.
.
.
.
So you are either ignoring my point that gardai should follow proceedures and using it to take a sideswipe at constitutional rights, or you are advocating a police state.

I will stand for neither.

Hush now Johnny, dont ya know "the innocent have nothing to fear":D

pirelli

Victor wrote: »

You say that in such an argumentative way.

Perhaps it does need some herbs and spices as it's bit like a hard scone alright.

"Give it a read anyway as it might be an attitude that you could use with gardai in a random search."

Respectively
Pirelli

Victor

pirelli wrote: »

Yes.Read it anyway for the attitude you must display to the Garda.

Victor wrote: »

You say that in such an argumentative way.

I say this becuase of the tone of your post. You suggest that people must display a certain, possibly overly-assertive attitude towards the Garda. There are many approaches one can take from fawning, unquestioning cooperation to "Ger off moy land". That is for an individual to decide based on their circumstances and the situation, not for you to dictate.

pirelli wrote: »

"your a mod,and You have 33,499 posts. Now thats one more post for you.Keep the count going coz thats all that matters Oh! and inspiring your 33,500. I might be skating on thin ice when I suggest nobody wants to see your 33,500th post."

The wrong attitude.. Mod could ban me..

"Yes i suppose my post was quite brief if not even ambiguous."

The correct attitude.... Mod feels he is contributing and feels in control.

I think you have an unfounded persecution complex.

I was going to play this: http://www.boards.ie/gathering/setmypeoplefree.jpg

But I'll play this instead:

pirelli

Potential-Monke wrote: »

^^^ You see, thats why there's no respect for the law these days,

Used to be a time when how you dressed was a factor for allowing a drug search, not anymore though... Pity.

I wouldn't mind being searched every second weekend if i knew it meant that other scumbags were being caught.

Try hanging around dublin airport dressed in combat's with a bulky backpack
and fishing pole wrapped in a sheet one a forthnight or around the quays near the public toilet's every few weeks. Bound to get some action.

pirelli

Victor wrote: »

I was going to play this: http://www.boards.ie/gathering/setmypeoplefree.jpg

But I'll play this instead:
QUOTE]


Ha Ha not bad, But! thats your 33,501 post.Not 33,500 which you wasted on mentioning the gradient of a steep hill you cycled on with your bicycle.
But as a consolation for this unfortunate development ( to keep in tone with potential monks tone...hee hee ) I have provided a link to the ghost rider website, in this movie Ghost Rider tackles a 90 degree angle when he rides vertically up a 100 meter building on a 'Bike'.
http://www.ghostridermovie.net/

johnnyskeleton

dK1NG wrote: »

Hush now Johnny, dont ya know "the innocent have nothing to fear":D

It's ironic that the gardai take this stance, because the whole purpose of the constitution and our system of constitutional rights is to protect the innocent from having their privacy interfered with.

And I'll never be quiet when the constitution is being torn apart.

dK1NG

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It's ironic that the gardai take this stance, because the whole purpose of the constitution and our system of constitutional rights is to protect the innocent from having their privacy interfered with.

And I'll never be quiet when the constitution is being torn apart.

Johnny, just to follow up on this....

What do you think about various measures introduced to combat organised crime/ terrorism etc etc etc that have the effect of impinging on civil liberties? (bail, increased detention, confiscation, reverse burdens, right to silence etc)

Are they justifiable/ proportionate, or is the media frenzy simply giving the Gov. the excuse to bring in draconian powers? Media reporting of crime is undoubtedly distorted, with the effect taht the fear of crime is actually greater than the threat of crime. Popular opinion therefore acquiesces (even demands) that harsh measures be brought in to deal with this "growing" problem.

Can we trust the courts to act as a proper safeguard in this regard? I know they have rejected the notion that the innocent have nothing to fear (in theory anyway, but whether they do so in practice is open to debate), but then, arguably, bow down to the legislature.


Twould be interesting to hear some viewpoints on this.:)

johnnyskeleton

dK1NG wrote: »

What do you think about various measures introduced to combat organised crime/ terrorism etc etc etc that have the effect of impinging on civil liberties? (bail, increased detention, confiscation, reverse burdens, right to silence etc)

I think there is an ever increasing void between politicians and the criminal justice system. Policitians seem to bring in laws to allow things that are never used. What's happened to electronic tagging from the 2006 act? One politician tried to put the witness protection scheme on a statutory footing, until they were told that the gardai don't want this. Another wanted to bring in a self defence bill (based on public outcry etc), until they were told that their bill doesn't change the law at all.

So the former Minister, who was unwilling to spend money on crime fighting, but at the same time wanted to seem tough on crime, brought in a load of these measures but I think they are just empty provisions.

When the 2007 bill was released it seemed pretty shocking, but the actual act was relatively mild. I don't think the right to silence provisions are anything to worry about for the moment - similar powers have been around since 1984 but they are very rarely used (because it's too much hassle for the gardai to invoke them). When they are used, they will only be used in very limited circumstances and are likely to be challenged.

The bail provisions, having to swear a statement etc, seem to be stupid.

Are they justifiable/ proportionate, or is the media frenzy simply giving the Gov. the excuse to bring in draconian powers?

I don't think they are either; I think they are half baked and likely to be found unconstitutional.

Media reporting of crime is undoubtedly distorted, with the effect taht the fear of crime is actually greater than the threat of crime. Popular opinion therefore acquiesces (even demands) that harsh measures be brought in to deal with this "growing" problem.

The dogs on the street know that if you want to combat crime in any meaningful way you need to:
1) employ more gardai and put them on patrol
2) employ more detective gardai and gardai who are prepared to tackle dangerous crime
3) employ more solicitors in the CPS / State solicitors so that books of evidence can be prepared in a matter a days
4) invest in more drug treatment places
5) build more community centres to prevent kids choosing a life of crime over a more regular life
6) provide basic standards in prisons so that a term of imprisonment offers people a chance to recover and / or get a job
7) empannel more judges so that there is a much shorter wait for a trial date

But of course all these things cost lots of the tax payer's money, so instead they just blast out legislation that is unnecessary, unwanted and an erosion of our rights.

Can we trust the courts to act as a proper safeguard in this regard? I know they have rejected the notion that the innocent have nothing to fear (in theory anyway, but whether they do so in practice is open to debate), but then, arguably, bow down to the legislature.

The courts are bound by the law. They can interpret the legislation in the context of a fair trial, or if the legislation is challenged on constitutional grounds they can find it unconsitutional, but otherwise they have to apply the law.

kopparberg

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

...& then take their badge numbers and make a complaint that the gardai:
A) had no reasonable cause to suspect you of possessing drugs
searched you without consent and without formally invoking their powers under the misuse of drugs act
C) did not inform you in a language that you could understand or at all why they were searching you & what their exact entitlement to search was.

You probably wont get very far (gardai being absolutely truthful at all times :rolleyes: ), but it's a good excuse for sabre rattling.

read this was a discussion page sounds laike advice (or a command to me)

kopparberg

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

..... to the original post, which concerned a search outside of garda powers.

section 23 misuse of drugs act no a garda power now you should stay on law school because the real world is a dangerous place

johnnyskeleton

kopparberg wrote: »

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

..... to the original post, which concerned a search outside of garda powers.

section 23 misuse of drugs act no a garda power now you should stay on law school because the real world is a dangerous place

I can't work out quite what you're saying. This real world place you speak of, is that what they write about in the Evening Herald?

kopparberg

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

kopparberg wrote: »

I can't work out quite what you're saying. This real world place you speak of, is that what they write about in the Evening Herald?

YES