Ombudsman says one Garda should face diciplinary action over Corrib comments.

Discodog

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

I read the report and the ombudsman didnt even send a file to the DPP in relation to the altering of the tape at Maynooth, its the ombudsmans office that should be disiplined for such a poor investigation. Once this tape was altered no one could be prosecuted as it would not stand up in court. This should have been investigated fully and it was not. I doubt the Garda will accept any disipline for this reason and they also have every right to be aggreived at the poor investigation. if the tape held up in favour of the protestors it would have been handed over immediately, it wasnt and they clearly had something to hide. I think a precident has now been set in relation to CCTV evidence that will hinder investigations for all going forward. Ombudsmans cock up again!

Well the guy from Maynooth explained what was removed from the tape & the reasons why. He also stated that there were perfectly willing to carry out the deletions in the presence of witnesses. I do not support the S2S protests but his argument convinced me that Maynooth acted correctly.

Discodog

Sierra 117 wrote: »

It's safer.

So a Guard is at more risk that a UK officer :rolleyes:

It also dramatically reduces the area covered.

It wasn't me!

Discodog wrote: »

So a Guard is at more risk that a UK officer :rolleyes:

It also dramatically reduces the area covered.

Only on the assumption that the Garda budget would stretch to double the fleet of cars.

The Waltzing Consumer

Discodog wrote: »

So a Guard is at more risk that a UK officer :rolleyes:

It also dramatically reduces the area covered.

Maybe, but when you have protesters who throw allegations of violence and rape at Gardai without the slightest evidence and even when it is captured by witnesses and video cameras, you would have to worry what would happen if these protesters met a Gardai who was patrolling on his/her own.

There are reasons for these procedures.

Pappa Charlie

Discodog wrote: »

Well the guy from Maynooth explained what was removed from the tape & the reasons why. He also stated that there were perfectly willing to carry out the deletions in the presence of witnesses. I do not support the S2S protests but his argument convinced me that Maynooth acted correctly.

With all due respect that may be acceptable to you but it would not be to a court and why should Maynooth staff be allowed interfere with evidence and get away with it, in my opinion this aspect and the ombudsmans failure to investigate it is very damaging to its office. There is no way any garda will accept disipline in the circumstances and they should not!

Discodog

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Only on the assumption that the Garda budget would stretch to double the fleet of cars.

What's wrong with one of them being on the beat or on a bike ? There are not likely to meet S2S protesters during typical policing.

It wasn't me!

Discodog wrote: »

What's wrong with one of them being on the beat or on a bike ? There are not likely to meet S2S protesters during typical policing.

Because the vast majority of the country can't be effectively policed on either? Also, the UK's sheer size and the numbers in the police dictate that their numbers are going to be thinner. Ask any lone UK police officer whether they'd rather be accompanied by a partner all the time and see what response you get. Our size/numbers ratio means we can do a better job. No sense seeing how thinly you can spread butter on a slice of toast.

Discodog

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Because the vast majority of the country can't be effectively policed on either? Also, the UK's sheer size and the numbers in the police dictate that their numbers are going to be thinner. Ask any lone UK police officer whether they'd rather be accompanied by a partner all the time and see what response you get. Our size/numbers ratio means we can do a better job. No sense seeing how thinly you can spread butter on a slice of toast.

It should never be a case of what a Guard or Police officer prefers. A better job - are you serious ? I only live a few miles from Galway but none of us here would bet on getting the Guards out within a couple of hours & that would be on a good day.

It wasn't me!

Discodog wrote: »

It should never be a case of what a Guard or Police officer prefers. A better job - are you serious ? I only live a few miles from Galway but none of us here would bet on getting the Guards out within a couple of hours & that would be on a good day.

If you really believe that feedback from people who do the job isn't significant in determining how it's best done, then I despair for you. "Sure why bother asking their opinion?"

Garda response times aren't due to the numbers in the car. If you think having more of them on foot or bicycles rather than in cars is going to improve response times you're deluded.

Bricriu

humanji wrote: »

It wasn't the Gardai who got the footage deleted. It was the protestors who wanted to hide evidence, then published an edited version of the video on Indymedia. When the matter was brought to the publics attention, the gardai and the ombudsmand asked for the original tape, only to find huge sections of it missing.

This is NOT true. There were interviews, conducted as part of academic research, on the tape, as well as the conversation between the Gardaí.

Before conducting those interviews, the researchers recording them had given a commitment of complete confidentiality to the interviewees. Good journalists have gone to prison to uphold such confidentiality.

Academics from NUIM had offered to have those interviews deleted from the machine in conjunction with, and in the presence of, the Garda Ombudsman (GSOC) as they had nothing to do with the matter at issue, but GSOC refused this offer -- see, or listen to interview wiith Dr Laurence Cox, Dept of Sociology, NUIM, with RTÉ news on day GSOC announced their verdict.

I think GSOC has lost some of its impartiality and objectivity as a result of this case.

Incidentally, the person who penned the totally erroneous quote above is a MODERATOR on Boards.ie, God help us.

Discodog

It wasn't me! wrote: »

If you really believe that feedback from people who do the job isn't significant in determining how it's best done, then I despair for you. "Sure why bother asking their opinion?"

Garda response times aren't due to the numbers in the car. If you think having more of them on foot or bicycles rather than in cars is going to improve response times you're deluded.

Of course you ask their opinion but you don't let them have carte blanche.

Response times in the City (I can only speak for Galway) are poor. A woman who called the Guards during the afternoon was told that there was no car available - she was only 10 mins by bike from Mill St. More motorcycles would be an obvious idea - especially with traffic delays.

The sad thing is that mature responsible citizens where I live rarely have a good word for the Guards. Some have had bad personal experiences.

Discodog

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

There is no way any garda will accept disipline in the circumstances and they should not!

They have no choice & if they don't like it then get another job. With so many unemployed there must be plenty of people who would make excellent Guards.

Discodog

Bricriu wrote: »

listen to interview wiith Dr Laurence Cox, Dept of Sociology, NUIM, with RTÉ news on day GSOC announced their verdict.
.

He was excellent & his intelligent remarks made the GSOC look very stupid. He also stated that they had been threatened over the deletion. Any Police/Garda complaints procedure has to be seen as independent - the GSOC failed.

MagicSean

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

With all due respect that may be acceptable to you but it would not be to a court and why should Maynooth staff be allowed interfere with evidence and get away with it, in my opinion this aspect and the ombudsmans failure to investigate it is very damaging to its office. There is no way any garda will accept disipline in the circumstances and they should not!

The Ombudsman don't investigate false complaints. They don't see it as their job. To my knowledge nobody has ever been prosecuted for making a false allegation about a Garda to their office.

Bricriu wrote: »

This is NOT true. There were interviews, conducted as part of academic research, on the tape, as well as the conversation between the Gardaí.

Before conducting those interviews, the researchers recording them had given a commitment of complete confidentiality to the interviewees. Good journalists have gone to prison to uphold such confidentiality.

Academics from NUIM had offered to have those interviews deleted from the machine in conjunction with, and in the presence of, the Garda Ombudsman (GSOC) as they had nothing to do with the matter at issue, but GSOC refused this offer -- see, or listen to interview wiith Dr Laurence Cox, Dept of Sociology, NUIM, with RTÉ news on day GSOC announced their verdict.

I think GSOC has lost some of its impartiality and objectivity as a result of this case.

Incidentally, the person who penned the totally erroneous quote above is a MODERATOR on Boards.ie, God help us.

It doesn't matter what was on it. They had no right to delete anything if they planned on handing it over as evidence. It wasn't their decision to make. It's for a court to decide what is relevent.

humanji

Bricriu wrote: »

This is NOT true. There were interviews, conducted as part of academic research, on the tape, as well as the conversation between the Gardaí.

Before conducting those interviews, the researchers recording them had given a commitment of complete confidentiality to the interviewees. Good journalists have gone to prison to uphold such confidentiality.

Academics from NUIM had offered to have those interviews deleted from the machine in conjunction with, and in the presence of, the Garda Ombudsman (GSOC) as they had nothing to do with the matter at issue, but GSOC refused this offer -- see, or listen to interview wiith Dr Laurence Cox, Dept of Sociology, NUIM, with RTÉ news on day GSOC announced their verdict.

I think GSOC has lost some of its impartiality and objectivity as a result of this case.

Within a day of the incident, the tape was published by the protestors on Indymedia. Within an hour or two of that, it was taken down and an edited version was put in it's place. This edit version took out all footage of the protestors hurling abuse at the gardai and the woman who was screaming "Rape!".

The interviews are a different matter, but it didn't help things that the college tampered with the tape.

Incidentally, the person who penned the totally erroneous quote above is a MODERATOR on Boards.ie, God help us.

Yeah, you'd almost think I'm actually your average joe who volunteers their free time to help out on this site, instead of being the high paid billionaire who scans the site for evil-doers that I must actually be.

Discodog wrote: »

He was excellent & his intelligent remarks made the GSOC look very stupid. He also stated that they had been threatened over the deletion. Any Police/Garda complaints procedure has to be seen as independent - the GSOC failed.

Of course they were threatened over the deletion. They tampered with possible evidence. That's a crime. If there had been an actual rape, it could be possible that that tape would be rendered inadmissable because of it.

Mossie27

Paco Rodriguez wrote: »

The Guardai got Maynooth students to delete some content of the camera before handing it back to the girl.
That guard should have his pension seriously reduced but thats not going to happen. They are as crooked as the politicians.

Your facts are as incorrect as your spelling. I think you will find staff at Maynooth interfered with evidence in a criminal prosecution.

BattleCorp

Discodog wrote: »

The Guard should be dismissed without question because the Guards have to be beyond reproach. If that is too much to ask then recruit Guards that will act professionally. The Gardai need to grow up & decide whether they want to be a proper modern police force or continue being a caricature.

Are you fcuking serious? You think we should sack the Guard for a poxy little joke that was said in private? :eek::eek::eek:

It is perfectly clear to anybody with half a brain that the comment wasn't actually a direct threat to rape the woman. It was a throwaway comment between work colleagues.

And yes, it was a private conversation. If I placed an evesdropping device in your home and recorded your what you said, would that mean that what you said could no longer be classed as being a private conversation between you and whoever you were talking to? The fact that the recording device was left in the back of the car by the Gardai was irrelevant. It was still a recording device and they didn't know that it was switched on so therefore the conversation was meant to be private.

Are you serious that the Gardai's life should be ruined because of a poxy little joke?

I don't know what grudge you have against the Gardai but it's clear in my book that what the Garda did is so trivial, it doesn't even warrant a tongue lashing from his superior, let alone dismissal.

Micky Dolenz

Rape jokes in any context are inappropriate in any work place. If you were on office time saying similar there would be consequences.

The boys got caught out and should be sanctioned.

hondasam

Discodog wrote: »

They have no choice & if they don't like it then get another job. With so many unemployed there must be plenty of people who would make excellent Guards.

This is the answer to everything, sack all the ps staff and give the jobs to the unemployed. I think you will find everyone has a choice.

@Micky Dolenz, what punishment would you suggest? they were in a private car at the time not work.

prinz

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

With all due respect that may be acceptable to you but it would not be to a court and why should Maynooth staff be allowed interfere with evidence and get away with it.....

Firstly the device belonged to Maynooth and there was info on it that belonged to other students. Secondly prior to going Maynooth it was in the possession of the solicitor of one of the women involved in making the complaint about the gardaí.

MagicSean

prinz wrote: »

Firstly the device belonged to Maynooth and there was info on it that belonged to other students. Secondly prior to going Maynooth it was in the possession of the solicitor of one of the women involved in making the complaint about the gardaí.

So?

prinz

MagicSean wrote: »

So?

SO it wasn't some conspiracy that the gardaí organised for parts of the tape to be deleted to protect themselves. They way it is being presented on this thread it's as if it was all something underhand on the side of AGS to cover up

Paco Rodriguez wrote: »

The Guardai got Maynooth students to delete some content of the camera before handing it back to the girl....

hondasam

prinz wrote: »

Firstly the device belonged to Maynooth and there was info on it that belonged to other students. Secondly prior to going Maynooth it was in the possession of the solicitor of one of the women involved in making the complaint about the gardaí.

Was it not just interviews they had done, could they not ask the people involved for there permission to view them?

Pappa Charlie

Discodog wrote: »

It should never be a case of what a Guard or Police officer prefers. A better job - are you serious ? I only live a few miles from Galway but none of us here would bet on getting the Guards out within a couple of hours & that would be on a good day.

Carrowbrowne?