Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Gardai acquitted....
Comments
-
-
-
usernamegoes wrote: »No, I got all I need from that response. You clearly haven't a grasp on how logic works. You think that the jury have somehow got the power to change history. :rolleyes:
We're you getting that from
If the jury find someone not guilty, they aren't altering the course of history but simply found someone not guilty of a crime. As much as that hurts it means innocent :rolleyes: 0 -
-
We're you getting that from If the jury find someone not guilty, they aren't altering the course of history but simply found someone not guilty of a crime. As much as that hurts it means innocent :rolleyes:
So it seems you think people like OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony were all found to be innocent?0 -
-
-
-
We're you getting that from If the jury find someone not guilty, they aren't altering the course of history but simply found someone not guilty of a crime. As much as that hurts it means innocent :rolleyes:
You said he IS IN FACT innocent i.e. he did not do anything that would constitute a crime UNTIL the jury find him guilty. So logically, if before hand he didn't commit a crime then jury are able to say he did then they are changing facts. That way we say he was presumed not to have done it.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Sofa King Great wrote: »This Innocent/not guilty thing can be reasoned out quite easily...
A person is deemed INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY
Were the gardai in this case PROVEN GUILTY? No
Therefore if they were not PROVEN GUILY they are INNOCENT.
On the subject of this little scanger, people are forgetting that he had 30 previous convictions. Good enough for the scrote.
It is alleged that on the previous evening he assaulted a member of the Gardai, clearly showing no respect for the role of the Gardai or the Criminal Justice system. However, once he finds himself in the opposite scenario, he is the one going off relying on the Gardai and the Criminal Justice system to protect him.
There are plenty out there with vast numbers of convictions. Clearly these convictions mean nothing to them and have not worked. A bit of a hiding is the only thing they understand.
Well done on your reasoning of Innocence & Guilt, although your finishing paragraphs have really let you down or maybe not,maybe just shown you up for what you are.
One 'scrote' ALLEGEDLY assaults a garda,the civilised,proper and justifiable response to that is for a gang of gardai to go visit the (alleged) offender and kick the sweet bejaysus out of him whilst one (or two) restrain his mother from her most maternal instinct of protecting her child.
It's sick! regardless of wheter he was a little sh!t and deserved a slap or two,those uniformed scumbags where,are & always will be out of order,what they did just makes them the same as a thug in the street,no different from 'scrotes' like the victim in this case.
p.s.
I think you'll find that they were actually proven 'guily' they gave him a good hiding full of vigour and guile
0 -
-
EarlERizer wrote: »Well done on your reasoning of Innocence & Guilt, although your finishing paragraphs have really let you down or maybe not,maybe just shown you up for what you are.
One 'scrote' ALLEGEDLY assaults a garda,the civilised,proper and justifiable response to that is for a gang of gardai to go visit the (alleged) offender and kick the sweet bejaysus out of him whilst one (or two) restrain his mother from her most maternal instinct of protecting her child.
It's sick! regardless of wheter he was a little sh!t and deserved a slap or two,those uniformed scumbags where,are & always will be out of order,what they did just makes them the same as a thug in the street,no different from 'scrotes' like the victim in this case.
p.s.
I think you'll find that they were actually proven 'guily' they gave him a good hiding full of vigour and guile
I feel the use of the term scrote for a person with 30 convictions who steals a car from a nun to be entirely justified.
I also entirely stand by my view point that there are plenty of scumbags in cities, towns and villages around the country that only respond to a few slaps. The Gardai are there to protect civilised members of society, and if to do that they need to give out a few digs then so be it.
I will sleep soundly in the knowledge that the gardai arent going to enter my house and beat me up because I will not do something which results in the me being on the Gards radar.
Anyone who continues to break the law after 30 previous convictions revokes their right to be treated with the respect that law abiding people like you and I have earned.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
EarlERizer wrote: »One 'scrote' ALLEGEDLY assaults a garda,the civilised,proper and justifiable response to that is for a gang of gardai to go visit the (alleged) offender and kick the sweet bejaysus out of him whilst one (or two) restrain his mother from her most maternal instinct of protecting her child.
It's sick! regardless of wheter he was a little sh!t and deserved a slap or two,those uniformed scumbags where,are & always will be out of order,what they did just makes them the same as a thug in the street,no different from 'scrotes' like the victim in this case.
The gang of gardai ALLEGEDLY visited the (alleged) offender and "kicked the sweet bejaysus out of him."
P.S. They were tried for it and found not guilty btw 0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
The gang of gardai ALLEGEDLY visited the (alleged) offender and "kicked the sweet bejaysus out of him."
P.S. They were tried for it and found not guilty btw
:rolleyes: oh dear.
It is documented as FACT that the 'gardai' did indeed,with force,enter the abode of the victim without a search or arrest warrant and proceeded to give him a hiding resulting in injuries to the victim. These are FACTS not allegations,the defending gardai dont deny they entered the house or using force against the victim.
They went on trial and got off ,doesn't make them innocent of the crime, now come on, I'll hazzard a guess at you been intelligent enough to understand that? or do you believe that all those who are found "not guilty" are indeed innocent of the charges they stood trial for?
p.s. no need for capitals when writing a post script,it's just an after thought 0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
EarlERizer wrote: »:rolleyes: oh dear.
It is documented as FACT that the 'gardai' did indeed,with force,enter the abode of the victim without a search or arrest warrant and proceeded to give him a hiding resulting in injuries to the victim. These are FACTS not allegations,the defending gardai dont deny they entered the house or using force against the victim.
They went on trial and got off ,doesn't make them innocent of the crime, now come on, I'll hazzard a guess at you been intelligent enough to understand that? or do you believe that all those who are found "not guilty" are indeed innocent of the charges they stood trial for?
p.s. no need for capitals when writing a post script,it's just an after thought
Neither does it make them guilty of one.0 -
-
EarlERizer wrote: »:rolleyes: oh dear.
It is documented as FACT that the 'gardai' did indeed,with force,enter the abode of the victim without a search or arrest warrant and proceeded to give him a hiding resulting in injuries to the victim. These are FACTS not allegations,the defending gardai dont deny they entered the house or using force against the victim.
They went on trial and got off ,doesn't make them innocent of the crime, now come on, I'll hazzard a guess at you been intelligent enough to understand that? or do you believe that all those who are found "not guilty" are indeed innocent of the charges they stood trial for?
p.s. no need for capitals when writing a post script,it's just an after thought
No they didn't get off. They were found not guilty. Do you reject the decision made by the jury?0 -
-
-
Dont know,might not be too nice in there...I notice all the big "tough" gardai faced with even the very remote prospect of ending up there turn into whimpering little girls....little Shirley Templemoresand a stint in jail with other like minded thugs plus tv, hot food and a roof over his head will definitely turn him off committing further crimes? rrrrrrrriiiiiiiight
. 0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
No they didn't get off. They were found not guilty. Do you reject the decision made by the jury?
Yes,they are afterall just human like the rest of us,and like the rest of us,prone to errors in judgement.Getting away with it implies they did something wrong. Something which the jury obviously did not agree with. But you clearly know better than the people who heard all the facts and testimony. Why thank you , but in fairness I wasn't aware that anyone had heard all the facts ,more rather just the ones they wanted people to hear. 0 -
-
-
-
-
end a eknny wrote: »i agree if the gardai ever come to my house i will lock the door and retreat upstairs with a loaded shotgun. you just cant let these scum go around making up there own laws
spoken like someone who has had the gardai at thier door a time or two before.....so tell us, were they heavy handed with you too??
Personally speaking, Ive never brought the gardai to my parents door, or I can tell ye this, it wouldnt have been them giving me the "hiding", they would have had to pull my parents off me, the first time. But then, I was brought up properly, my parents understood that kids no matter how innocent they may seem at home, can go off the rails, and they disciplined accordinglyhe brought it on himself by laying in his bed in his room.some people on this thread deserve to have a run in with those fine upstanding members of the gardai
Again, am definately getting a sense of "sack of spuds on the shoulder", Ive always found the gardai to be extremely nice and helpful, but then, I never went around robbing cars or beating people up....could there be a link there I wonder :rolleyes:EarlERizer wrote: »
I think one distorted area in all this is the severity of the attack on the victim.There are those who believe it to have been "a few slaps" and those who believe it was a "severe hiding"
So,what is "a few slaps"? and when does a few slaps turn into a hiding? where is the line crossed?
We as parents,the responsibility is with us & our partners to dicipline our children,it starts from the time they are born,instilling values in them as they grow,not waiting for them to grow up to be little sh!ts and then wanting someone else to put them right!
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/gardai-locked-my-mum-in-bathroom-and-then-beat-me-2808222.html
Doctors later noted a bruise on Mr Gaffney's head, swelling to his nose which had been bleeding, bruising to the front and back of his upper body and a superficial laceration on his right upper arm when he arrived at St James's Hospital.
Hardly a severe hiding, he was aggresive towards the gardai, and I seriously doubt his mother stood there quietly, or asked them reasonably to leave her son alone. She was most likely hurling abuse at them too, doesnt take a genius to figure out she was hardly mother of the year. Lokk at the cat, look at the kittensFlutterinBantam wrote: »Look, will you get over it buddy.
Guards were acquitted by a jury ,end of story, justice done.
Why don't you people direct your attention to some of the scrotes who patrol this town robbing and mugging people.
the taxpayer is being bled dry by these wasters but you people decide to champion their cause??
No time for that bleeding heart crappage.:mad:
couldnt agree more. Its all bleeding hearts until you're at the mercy of a little sh(t like this whos terrorising you, your kids and half the neighbourhoodI think we need to step back and look at this logically.
The verdict does seem to defeat all logic and warp established notions of what is right and that which is wrong.
12 of the accuseds "Peers" (ie. true peers - all named Anto who somehow found themselves registered to vote etc.) delivered a judgement so sound that they cried (?)
The 12 Jurors couldn't all have been locked in the Court Bathroom - Cause then there would have been nobody to beat up - I'd guess that they locked them up in 3 groups of 4 or similar.
I'd say whoever got to reason with them was almost defintiely on the verge of obtaining offical paperwork granting them permission to "talk" to the Jury and "convince" them to play ball.
I doubt they actually imprisoned they Jurors Mothers - Now thats just being silly..... I'd say they probably just threatened to!!!
Eh I think you completely defeated your point that I highlighted above with the rest of the drivvel you posted. Is that good LSDEarlERizer wrote: »I'm not making any suggestions whatsoever,you can stop with that angle for starters!
I'm stating that in the practice of law not all the facts are submitted,both sides will submit facts they consider best serves their side of the story in order to strenghten their case, both hoping what comes of it will benefit them.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is in for a surprise if ever they find themselves in the position of going to court with a case,be it to prosecute or defend.
Yes indeed, which is why he failed to mention to the garda ombudsman that he had 27 prior convictions, the first in a long line of lies, and omissions
Any one want to take bets on how long it will be before hes back in the papers having commited yet another crime ????? Any takers, I'd say before xmas 0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement