Judge appalled at video of Gardai

SocSocPol

croker1 wrote: »

I can admit that maybe the guard went a bit far BUT it would have never happened if the man in question hadn't been acting the gowl in the first place.

Has such a thing ever happened you? Probably not, because you were never being a scumbag. People draw this kind of thing on themselves mostly.

Can we have a link to some evidence of this, because the video evidence shows him being co-operative!
Love the way you describe breaking the chaps arm and then trying to frame him as "Maybe" going too far!

Paparazzo

croker1 wrote: »

I can admit that maybe the guard went a bit far BUT it would have never happened if the man in question hadn't been acting the gowl in the first place.

Has such a thing ever happened you? Probably not, because you were never being a scumbag. People draw this kind of thing on themselves mostly.

That's rubbish, how do you know he was "acting the gowl"? The guard basically broke the guys arm on the word of a bouncer. Imagine you were refused entry to a pub by a bouncer for one of those reasons that really wind people up (regulars only, not tonight, over 23's only etc) and you called him a wánker cos your mates are inside so your night is ruined.
Guards walk by and bouncer calls him over and says you were causing trouble. Before you know it you have your arm broken.
Nothing in the story to suggest the guy was a scumbag


The guard made a complete bollocks of the situation, it's as simple as that.

Chucky the tree

I'm sure Croker is just sticking up for his colleagues. No one impartial could be that stupid.

Gummy Panda

Sky King wrote: »

I always thought it was illegal to record the gardai doing their job...

In northern Ireland it was illegal to record RUC members. Not sure if law still applies to psni

croker1

What i am trying to point out is that the guards were called for a reason. It says in the article that the man in question was drunk and abusive. He was asked to leave the premisise 4 times but did not do so.

All I am trying to say is that people are always very quick to jump down the gardai's throats. I've seen incidents like this in other countries and guards are just as bad if not much worse

jhegarty

croker1 wrote: »

What i am trying to point out is that the guards were called for a reason. It says in the article that the man in question was drunk and abusive. He was asked to leave the premisise 4 times but did not do so.

All I am trying to say is that people are always very quick to jump down the gardai's throats. I've seen incidents like this in other countries and guards are just as bad if not much worse

They was pointed out.

But then a video was shown to disprove most of it.

RobbieTheRobber

croker1 wrote: »

What i am trying to point out is that the guards were called for a reason. It says in the article that the man in question was drunk and abusive. He was asked to leave the premisise 4 times but did not do so.

All I am trying to say is that people are always very quick to jump down the gardai's throats. I've seen incidents like this in other countries and guards are just as bad if not much worse

This is a quote from the article

It showed that Garda Bentley had “no interaction whatsoever” with Mr Daly prior to his arrest. And it demonstrated that Garda O’Connor spoke to the doormen for a minute and a half after arriving at the scene. Addressing Garda O’Connor, Mr Twomey said; “it shows that you then went to my client; asked him for ID, which he produced as the footage shows; and then 30 seconds later, you push him - violently . . . and when my client did something small like take video footage, you broke his arm, although I accept probably not deliberately,” Mr Twomey said.

No interaction means he was not asked to leave four times it measn no interaction, no contact, no discussion, nothing.
From the video footage the Judge was shown there was no evidence that the garda asked him to leave four times. Absolutely none. So please stop repeating this false information.

croker1

croker1 wrote: »

What i am trying to point out is that the guards were called for a reason. It says in the article that the man in question was drunk and abusive. He was asked to leave the premisise 4 times but did not do so.

All I am trying to say is that people are always very quick to jump down the gardai's throats. I've seen incidents like this in other countries and guards are just as bad if not much worse

the garda claimed yer man was asked to leave and then later admitted he wasnt

Chucky the tree

Will the Gardai be charged for giving false evidence?

El Weirdo

jhegarty wrote: »

They was pointed out.

But then a video was shown to disprove most of it.

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

No interaction means he was not asked to leave four times it measn no interaction, no contact, no discussion, nothing.
From the video footage the Judge was shown there was no evidence that the garda asked him to leave four times. Absolutely none. So please stop repeating this false information.

bluewolf wrote: »

the garda claimed yer man was asked to leave and then later admitted he wasnt

But... but... but... he's a Guard and we all know that a Guard would never lie.

Don't we?

RobbieTheRobber

El Weirdo wrote: »

But... but... but... he's a Guard and we all know that a Guard would never lie.

Don't we?

I cant believe croker argued for four pages seemingly without reading a small (400 word) article just because it was a garda.
Garda are people too and they make mistakes, get annoyed. Just because they put on a uniform does not make them immune to the failings of all humans.

syklops

croker1 wrote: »

What i am trying to point out is that the guards were called for a reason. It says in the article that the man in question was drunk and abusive. He was asked to leave the premisise 4 times but did not do so.

All I am trying to say is that people are always very quick to jump down the gardai's throats. I've seen incidents like this in other countries and guards are just as bad if not much worse

I'd give up if I were you. Your fighting a one man battle of "surely we are missing something, for instance why were the guards called" against a wave of "terka terka, police brutality yada yada ordinary decent people bla blah".

I lived in Limerick for 6 years(great city! Yurt!) and never was I robbed, beaten up, stolen, murdered, arrested, had any bones broken. I did get hammered regularly though. I've been in Mollys numerous times, and if you didnt get in, you went somewhere else. And if a Guard asks you to leave an area, you leave it.

The video might show what happened after the guards arrived, but the article does not state whether it showed the antics of the accused before their arrival, or describe why the guards were called in the first place. If the judge saw evidence of police brutality, then that should be investigated seperately. I'm not defending the Gardai, I just think there is more to it, thats all.

RustyNut

syklops wrote: »

I just think there is more to it, thats all.

Based on what?

Boombastic

Based on the evidence presented in court, the video evidence, the garda lying to the court, I can feel it in my bones

syklops

RustyNut wrote: »

Based on what?

Based on why were the gardai called?

"999 emergency response?"
"Hi, Im the owner of Mollys niteclub. A bouncer just refused entry to two patrons and they are now calmly and quietly standing outside the club"
"Don't worry sir, we'll have the paddy wagon and some lads with batons down in 10 minutes"

Why were the gardai called?

Logical Fallacy

Sleepy wrote: »

And if cops weren't afraid to use physical force to apprehend violent thugs in case they lose their jobs over it, do you think the Swedish House Mafia gig would have gotten out of control?

An unarmed police force will only be as effective as the respect it can gain from all members of society. When the criminal classes have no fear of the police force, what hope have they of protecting the rest of us?

What the **** are you on about Sleepy? Did you read the article?

syklops

Boombastic wrote: »

Based on the evidence presented in court, the video evidence, the garda lying to the court, I can feel it in my bones

So the gardai were called because of events that happened after the initial call?

Right.

Very well, I drop my argument. Y'all have a nice day.

books4sale

Read the first few posts, scanned for a video,

No video = Waste of time

May as well be arguing over chalk and cheese.

Good luck!

rgmmg

syklops wrote: »

Based on why were the gardai called?

"999 emergency response?"
"Hi, Im the owner of Mollys niteclub. A bouncer just refused entry to two patrons and they are now calmly and quietly standing outside the club"
"Don't worry sir, we'll have the paddy wagon and some lads with batons down in 10 minutes"

Why were the gardai called?

Owner: "Batons Sir? Batons? Bring hula hoops instead and let's resolve this through rhythmic hooping alone."

Scioch

Gardai called to a pub where idiots were being idiots, they decided to film and antagonize the gardai.

Who gives a shít if one of them got an arm broken ? Dont really give a shít what happens to the Guard either tbh. If he cant do his job thats his problem.

But cop on ppl he didnt assault some innocent randomer for no reason. It was a drunken idiot outside a pub. He lost the head dealing with an asshole while trying to keep the peace after being called to a scene to assist the pub staff.

If it was the pub owner who did this would he be a thug or just a frustrated man trying to do his job while dealing with retards looking to cause trouble ?

Plazaman

"Please leave the vicinity"

"No"

"Please leave the vicinity"

"I said No"

"Please leave the vicinity now Sir"

"NO!"

"Ah come on Guard, will you not leave the vicinity?"

"No, now here's a broken arm for you"



See, we can all make up different versions of the same story. Unless someone was there or has unedited footage with surround sound of the full incident from start to finish, then both parties are at fault.

Paparazzo

Plazaman wrote: »

"Please leave the vicinity"

"No"

"Please leave the vicinity"

"I said No"

"Please leave the vicinity now Sir"

"NO!"

"Ah come on Guard, will you not leave the vicinity?"

"No, now here's a broken arm for you"



See, we can all make up different versions of the same story. Unless someone was there or has unedited footage with surround sound of the full incident from start to finish, then both parties are at fault.

“no interaction whatsoever”

croker1

syklops wrote: »

Based on why were the gardai called?

"999 emergency response?"
"Hi, Im the owner of Mollys niteclub. A bouncer just refused entry to two patrons and they are now calmly and quietly standing outside the club"
"Don't worry sir, we'll have the paddy wagon and some lads with batons down in 10 minutes"

Why were the gardai called?

My point exactly!
There will always be the group that insist the guards are always wrong.

SocSocPol

croker1 wrote: »

My point exactly!
There will always be the group that insist the guards are always wrong.

They were wrong in this case and in others, there will always be those who argue that the Gardai are never wrong.

Scioch

croker1 wrote: »

My point exactly!
There will always be the group that insist the guards are always wrong.

Like the OP, absolutely delighted at finding this out so he could declare "They just cant help themselves".

What I'd like to know though is all these people who despise the gardai and think a police force should be made up of people with unerring knowledge of the law, unwavering professionalism in the face of anything and incorruptible integrity to place them above everyone else in the country as the epitome of all that is good about mankind.

Where do we find these people ? This isnt a perfect world, Gardai are not perfect human beings. How does a small percentage of them losing the head when dealing with retards equate to "they are all thugs" ??

BoardsMember

There's a fairly widely held view in the courts, by solicitors & barristers, that it is not unknown for some Gardaí to say whatever it takes to help get a conviction. This view is held by people who represent those accused, and those defending all sorts of cases. Obviously there are loads of good Gardai, presumably more than bad ones.

My only experience with a Garda that pissed me right off was when I was nearly knocked down at a pedestrian crossing. I was crossing with the green man, and a truck came round the corner and nearly flattened me. I jumped out of the way. A Garda happened to be right there. I asked him did he see what happened, and told him the truck broke the lights and nearly flattened me. His response? Ah sure, I know him, he's alright.

croker1

croker1 wrote: »

My point exactly!
There will always be the group that insist the guards are always wrong.

I'm a group that insists people read an article properly before mouthing off

kevmol88

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/local/judge-appalled-by-video-footage-after-man-says-garda-broke-his-arm-1-4036016

RobbieTheRobber

croker1 wrote: »

The guy probably deserved it tbh! I'm pretty sure he wasn't as innocent as a lot of people are making him out to be

croker1 wrote: »

Bouncers wouldn't call the guards for nothing! He was obviously being a scumbag in the first place.

Just because the video cuts in at a time which favours the 'victim' doesn't mean he was completely innocent

croker1 wrote: »

I can admit that maybe the guard went a bit far BUT it would have never happened if the man in question hadn't been acting the gowl in the first place.

Has such a thing ever happened you? Probably not, because you were never being a scumbag. People draw this kind of thing on themselves mostly.

croker1 wrote: »

So why were the guards called in the first place?

croker1 wrote: »

What i am trying to point out is that the guards were called for a reason. It says in the article that the man in question was drunk and abusive. He was asked to leave the premisise 4 times but did not do so.

All I am trying to say is that people are always very quick to jump down the gardai's throats. I've seen incidents like this in other countries and guards are just as bad if not much worse

croker1 wrote: »

My point exactly!
There will always be the group that insist the guards are always wrong.

And there will always be those who argue the inexcusable. :rolleyes:
Good God man let it go, this Garda was wrong.
In court a judge in possesion of the available evidence made a ruling!
The garda was wrong, does this mean all garda are wrong?
I would say No it does not, but it does prove this one lied and was guilty IMHO of assault.

super_furry

croker1 wrote: »

My point exactly!
There will always be the group that insist the guards are always wrong.

Conversely there will always be the group who are willing to flat out just ignore the evidence given to a court, the proof that the Garda is lying and a judges findings and just make excuse after excuse after excuse for a Garda assaulting someone and breaking their arm.

I honestly hope you're never called for jury duty.

syklops

bluewolf wrote: »

I'm a group that insists people read an article properly before mouthing off

Great, so you can shed some light on why the gardai were called then?

SocSocPol

LordSmeg wrote: »

Like the OP, absolutely delighted at finding this out so he could declare "They just cant help themselves".

What I'd like to know though is all these people who despise the gardai and think a police force should be made up of people with unerring knowledge of the law, unwavering professionalism in the face of anything and incorruptible integrity to place them above everyone else in the country as the epitome of all that is good about mankind.

Where do we find these people ? This isnt a perfect world, Gardai are not perfect human beings. How does a small percentage of them losing the head when dealing with retards equate to "they are all thugs" ??

I never said they were all thugs, but at least one of these two was, and based upon the report of the case in todays Irish Times both of them decided to commit perjury in order to convict a man that one of them had assaulted. I for one do not want a police force where such actions are deemed acceptable or the norm. Nor is this case case unusual, I also gave a link to case where two Gardai in Dublin were convicted of assaulting a passerby who filmed them, then there was the case in Waterford where three gardai visciously assaluted a man while a collegue perverted the course of Justice by turning the CCTV away while they did it, oh and have I mentioned Donegal yet?

Scioch

SocSocPol wrote: »

I never said they were all thugs, but at least one of these two was, and based upon the report of the case in todays Irish Times both of them decided to commit perjury in order to convict a man that one of them had assaulted. I for one do not want a police force where such actions are deemed acceptable or the norm. Nor is this case case unusual, I also gave a link to case where two Gardai in Dublin were convicted of assaulting a passerby who filmed them, then there was the case in Waterford where three gardai visciously assaluted a man while a collegue perverted the course of Justice by turning the CCTV away while they did it, oh and have I mentioned Donegal yet?

Yet you opened the thread with "They just cant help themselves, can they?"

Those actions are not acceptable, you have no proof they are the norm. You are taking the actions of a few individuals and using it to have a pop at an entire service of people sent out to deal with arseholes and idiots on a regular basis and DO manage to keep their heads and do a good job.

Wow whats that 3 instances out of the how many times the Gardai manages to do their jobs ? Hundreds of thousands ? Well the whole damn thing is corrupt so !!! Nobody is perfect. Some Gardai are going to be scum. Some firemen are going to be scum. Some Doctors, nurses, accountants, primary school teachers are going to be scum. Thats just the way it is. Stop looking for excuses to attack the Gardai for whatever childish notions of rebellion that is clouding your mind. Just grow up ffs.

Triangla

syklops wrote: »

Great, so you can shed some light on why the gardai were called then?

Are the Gardai not trained in arrest procedures in Templemore?

If there is a need to arrest someone, do it for an actual reason and with a duty of care.

Don't make up a reason and break his arm just because he's drunk.

Gardai like that give the rest of them a bad name. Sticking up for a Garda's actions when wrong doesn't do anyone any favours.

If there was no video evidence, that Garda may have been believed and the guy could have ended up with a criminal record.

oddman2

LordSmeg wrote: »

Yet you opened the thread with "They just cant help themselves, can they?"

Those actions are not acceptable, you have no proof they are the norm. You are taking the actions of a few individuals and using it to have a pop at an entire service of people sent out to deal with arseholes and idiots on a regular basis and DO manage to keep their heads and do a good job.

Wow whats that 3 instances out of the how many times the Gardai manages to do their jobs ? Hundreds of thousands ? Well the whole damn thing is corrupt so !!! Nobody is perfect. Some Gardai are going to be scum. Some firemen are going to be scum. Some Doctors, nurses, accountants, primary school teachers are going to be scum. Thats just the way it is. Stop looking for excuses to attack the Gardai for whatever childish notions of rebellion that is clouding your mind. Just grow up ffs.

That doesn't mean that we shouldn't condemn stuff like this when it happens.

RobbieTheRobber

LordSmeg wrote: »

Yet you opened the thread with "They just cant help themselves, can they?"

Those actions are not acceptable, you have no proof they are the norm. You are taking the actions of a few individuals and using it to have a pop at an entire service of people sent out to deal with arseholes and idiots on a regular basis and DO manage to keep their heads and do a good job.
Wow whats that 3 instances out of the how many times the Gardai manages to do their jobs ? Hundreds of thousands ? Well the whole damn thing is corrupt so !!! Nobody is perfect. Some Gardai are going to be scum. Some firemen are going to be scum. Some Doctors, nurses, accountants, primary school teachers are going to be scum. Thats just the way it is. Stop looking for excuses to attack the Gardai for whatever childish notions of rebellion that is clouding your mind. Just grow up ffs.

Some of the people they deal with not all! :rolleyes:
They would do well to remember that.
You are turning this into a Garda V's the People war while you accuse the OP of doing the same.

SocSocPol

kincsem

staker wrote: »

I wouldn't like to be a guard in this country.
If only the judicial system stood behind the law enforcers a lot of this kinda stuff would be wiped out.

Its the force that the enforcers illegally use when there is no need to use force when someone is acting legally that the judges don't like.
What kinda stuff would be wiped out? People acting legally.

TheChizler

syklops wrote: »

Great, so you can shed some light on why the gardai were called then?

But we don't even know for sure that they were "called". They could have been standing across the road for all we know, and came over when they heard the lads protesting. We don't know that the lads were being belligerent at the door. Anything that those particular Guards have said about the situation can't be taken at face value.

MarkHitide

"Mr Twomey made his laptop available to the judge and the prosecution to view footage he had secured from the pub and this told a tale that was “at odds” with the evidence of gardaí."

Presumably the Guardai were unaware of video footage that might be used to dispute their no-doubt mis-membered recollection of the of events. Luckily, the defence were able to clarify everything to the satisfaction of all involved. If only the guard involved had allowed the defendant to continue with his personal recording this mis-understanding would not have occurred in the first place-

croker1

bluewolf wrote: »

I'm a group that insists people read an article properly before mouthing off

Yes i did read the article before i posted???
I asked the question why were the guards called in the first place and judging by everyones responses you would swear the guards were called for someone petting a puppy too hard!

Stop being so nieve. I have been to mollies on numerous occasions, I have also been fcuked out of mollies. I have also gotten mad at the bouncers for doing so. But I have never got the guards called on me

RustyNut

croker1 wrote: »

Yes i did read the article before i posted???
I asked the question why were the guards called in the first place and judging by everyones responses you would swear the guards were called for someone petting a puppy too hard!

Stop being so nieve. I have been to mollies on numerous occasions, I have also been fcuked out of mollies. I have also gotten mad at the bouncers for doing so. But I have never got the guards called on me

What difference does it make why they were called?

yore

croker1 wrote: »

Yes i did read the article before i posted???
I asked the question why were the guards called in the first place and judging by everyones responses you would swear the guards were called for someone petting a puppy too hard!

Stop being so nieve. I have been to mollies on numerous occasions, I have also been fcuked out of mollies. I have also gotten mad at the bouncers for doing so. But I have never got the guards called on me

Garda Paul Bentley said he and Garda O’Connor had responded to a call from security staff that four males were creating a disturbance having been refused entry. He had instructed Gary Daly to leave the area “at least four times” but, under cross-examination by solicitor Jerry Twomey, conceded the men had been told to leave the area collectively rather than individually. Mr Daly had been abusive and drunk on the night, was unsteady on his feet and slurring his speech, Garda Bentley said.

We know at least that the second part of that claim is untrue. We also know that there was "no interaction" between the guards and the fella who got his arm broken. I see nothing in the story to suggest that the broken arm fella was a reason that the Guards were called.

The presented evidence is:
1) Guards called to a disturbance
2) Nearby drunk lad starts filming the guards on his phone without interacting with the guards at all
3) Guard asks him for ID, and when it is produced, assaults him

Some more quotes from that article,

1) about the video, directed towards the guard:

“It shows that over the course of 100 seconds, you pushed, slapped or dragged people on nine separate occasions and that the only person who was agitated was you; that you arrived and the violence started. And when my client did something small like take video footage, you broke his arm, although I accept probably not deliberately,” Mr Twomey said.

2) A far more sinister statement

While the gardai had initially indicated the matter could be dealt with by way of adult caution, it was Mr Daly’s “decision to make a complaint to the Garda Ombudsman that his arm had been broken without reason” that led to him being charged with the offence. Gareth Howard had never been charged, Mr Twomey added.

This happened in Limerick. Isn't it nice to see all the really brave guards down there. They are well able to act as judge and jury and administer their own justice to drunk onlookers playing with camera phones.... Funny that they don't seem to be as brave, or as quick to dish out summary justice when they enter Ballinacurra Weston or similar!

To anyone supporting the guard, that fella with the phone could have been anyone. There was no interaction with the guards. So as far as they knew, he could have been friends with the fellas causing trouble, or he could have been a random passer by. So the same could happen to you if you are walking by some trouble and take out your phone. You see some trouble, take out your phone to record it, get assaulted and your arm broken and taken to court with a realistic threat of getting a bogus criminal conviction

croker1

RustyNut wrote: »

What difference does it make why they were called?

Because my point was that the man in question was not set upon by the guards for no reason. He was causing enough trouble for the bouncers to call the guards in the first place. The way people were talking about him in this thread you would think the guards spotted him across the road and thought "He looks like the perfect lad to kick the **** out of"

TheChizler

croker1 wrote: »

Because my point was that the man in question was not set upon by the guards for no reason. He was causing enough trouble for the bouncers to call the guards in the first place. The way people were talking about him in this thread you would think the guards spotted him across the road and thought "He looks like the perfect lad to kick the **** out of"

We don't know that that's not exactly what happened.

croker1

TheChizler wrote: »

We don't know that that's not exactly what happened.

If the broken arm guy had nothing to do with the guards being called then fair enough I take back everything I said. If he was the guy that caused the guards to be called then I stand by it. Simple as

Rango555

kevmol88 wrote: »

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/local/judge-appalled-by-video-footage-after-man-says-garda-broke-his-arm-1-4036016

...he was released from custody at 1.20am - 30 minutes after his arrest.
Mr Twomey produced medical reports from the following day that showed he had fractured his arm. He also said the station record described Mr Daly as being sober upon his release from custody.
“In the space of 30 minutes, he (Mr Daly) had gone from being highly intoxicated according to the evidence of two gardai, to being sober, according to the record of a very experienced sergeant,” the judge said.

According to the EVIDENCE he was not a "drunken scumbag" as those who are doing their best to defend this particular Garda are doing their upmost to imply...

SocSocPol

croker1 wrote: »

Because my point was that the man in question was not set upon by the guards for no reason. He was causing enough trouble for the bouncers to call the guards in the first place. The way people were talking about him in this thread you would think the guards spotted him across the road and thought "He looks like the perfect lad to kick the **** out of"

He was set upon and seriously assaulted for no good or lawful reason, that has been clearly shown in court.
No evidence was presented in court to indicated as you claim " He was causing enough trouble for the bouncers to call the guards in the first place", if you do have proof the the injured party was the reason the guards were called please do link it to us.

MagicSean

There will eventually be some laws brough in regarding phone recording in public imo. Whatever about recording the Gardaí on duty, the privacy of the person being arrested should be considered. The same goes for people recording at the aftermath of car crashes or other tragedies.

invinciblePRSTV

LordSmeg wrote: »

croker1 wrote: »

My point exactly!
There will always be the group that insist the guards are always wrong.

Like the OP, absolutely delighted at finding this out so he could declare "They just cant help themselves".

What I'd like to know though is all these people who despise the gardai and think a police force should be made up of people with unerring knowledge of the law, unwavering professionalism in the face of anything and incorruptible integrity to place them above everyone else in the country as the epitome of all that is good about mankind.

Where do we find these people ? This isnt a perfect world, Gardai are not perfect human beings. How does a small percentage of them losing the head when dealing with retards equate to "they are all thugs" ??

For such a small police force in terms of numbers, there does appear to be an alarming number of 'incidents' - such as down in Wafurd, this case, the lad getting the shyte kicked out of him in Dublin - which show the old 'heavy gang' spirit us still alive and well in sections of the GS.