Judge appalled at video of Gardai

SocSocPol

MagicSean wrote: »

Did you read what I was responding to? The poster asked how he would not know he had a broken arm.

I referring to the fact that you appear unable to simply and unequivocably condemn serious wrongdoing when it being done by Gardai, always equivocation, always some excuse.
I accept that most Gardai are as honest as the rest of the population, but when they, who are charged with upholding the law, see the law as a chance to bully, harass, intimidate, and assault the citizenry that they are cgarged to protect, I condem it, full stop. In the same way I would condem anyone who attacked a Garda. Pity you cant see your way to accepting that the Gardai should be held to the same standard as the rest of us.

MagicSean

SocSocPol wrote: »

I referring to the fact that you appear unable to simply and unequivocably condemn serious wrongdoing when it being done by Gardai, always equivocation, always some excuse.
I accept that most Gardai are as honest as the rest of the population, but when they, who are charged with upholding the law, see the law as a chance to bully, harass, intimidate, and assault the citizenry that they are cgarged to protect, I condem it, full stop. In the same way I would condem anyone who attacked a Garda. Pity you cant see your way to accepting that the Gardai should be held to the same standard as the rest of us.

I think you'll find I have not defended the Garda in question in any way.

And as to your claim that you accept most Gardaí are honest, this is in your opening post.

SocSocPol wrote: »

They Just can't help themselves can they,

That seems like one big tar brush to me.

SocSocPol

MagicSean wrote: »

I think you'll find I have not defended the Garda in question in any way.

And as to your claim that you accept most Gardaí are honest, this is in your opening post.



That seems like one big tar brush to me.

I never claimed that that most Gardai were honest, I claimed that most were as AS honest as the rest of society, we already know, and you have defended the practice, that they routine steal confiscated goods.
As for the thread title, well ,sometimes it seems that the Gardai as an institution just cant help themselves, despite rapegate,the Waterford assault and attempted cover up, The cat n cage incident (Linked in an earlier post),Donegal, indeed all the way back to the Fairbrother assault they give the appearance of being unable or unwilling to learn from their mistakes. Thats a pity, because society needs a police force that it can have confidence in, especially when that police force is also the prosecuting authority in the District Court and it's members evidence should be trustworthy (unlike this case in which two Gardai appear to have perjured themselves to obtain a conviction as part of their attempts to cover up a viscious assault by one of them).

MagicSean

SocSocPol wrote: »

I never claimed that that most Gardai were honest, I claimed that most were as AS honest as the rest of society, we already know, and you have defended the practice, that they routine steal confiscated goods.
As for the thread title, well ,sometimes it seems that the Gardai as an institution just cant help themselves, despite rapegate,the Waterford assault and attempted cover up, The cat n cage incident (Linked in an earlier post),Donegal, indeed all the way back to the Fairbrother assault they give the appearance of being unable or unwilling to learn from their mistakes. Thats a pity, because society needs a police force that it can have confidence in, especially when that police force is also the prosecuting authority in the District Court and it's members evidence should be trustworthy (unlike this case in which two Gardai appear to have perjured themselves to obtain a conviction as part of their attempts to cover up a viscious assault by one of them).

I'll take that as an apology for claiming i defended them so.

SocSocPol

MagicSean wrote: »

I'll take that as an apology for claiming i defended them so.

Only if you have a limited grasp of the English language!

yore

MagicSean wrote: »

The title Garda is used in both Irish and English, like many job titles in Ireland. Do you refer to the taoiseach as prime minister?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vernacular
A new word for you as you didn't seem to understand my last post. Perhaps your training finished at "veh-hick-kill" :-P . Look at Mr. Lah-de-fu$king-dah getting annoyed with someone getting his "title" wrong. It's not a title, it's a job. And it's a Guard's job to be a servant of the people. Not the other way around. Think of it as being a glorified traffic warden. A decent job, but not one that you need to be getting your knickers in a twist over your "title".

MagicSean wrote: »

It's called a custody record. Anyone with basic legal training could tell you about it. There is a section on medical complaints. There is also a notice of rights you receive giving you the right to request medical attention. Here's a little bit about it from citizens information.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/arrests/treatment_in_custody.html

Anyone with basic legal training? How many people have that? And anyway, you didn't answer the question that I asked. You just provided a link to random generic facts that most people know. You sh1tty link says

Custody Record A custody record must be kept in respect of every person in custody. If you are transferred to another Garda station, the member in charge of the station from which you were transferred must send the custody record with you.

And that's it. Nothing more about custody record. And nothing to answer my statement that you seemed to think showed ignorance

I'm not sure if it's a standard thing to put on a release form whether the person being released is injured.

So either you know the answer to that, or you don't. If you don't know the answer, then just admit it. Don't send me a link to some random article on wikipedia. Just because you know how to copy and paste irrelevant links, it does not make you smart. Maybe relatively, among your own peer group in the Guards , but not compared to the general populace.

MagicSean

SocSocPol wrote: »

Only if you have a limited grasp of the English language!

I'm just used to dealing with stubborn people who can't accept when they are wrong. The only way they show they were wrong is by ignoring the part of the post which they couldn't argue.

MagicSean

yore wrote: »

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vernacular
A new word for you as you didn't seem to understand my last post. Perhaps your training finished at "veh-hick-kill" :-P . Look at Mr. Lah-de-fu$king-dah getting annoyed with someone getting his "title" wrong. It's not a title, it's a job. And it's a Guard's job to be a servant of the people. Not the other way around. Think of it as being a glorified traffic warden. A decent job, but not one that you need to be getting your knickers in a twist over your "title".

That's the best you can do? Insulting my intelligence? I'd happily compare my third level qualifications against yours any day.

yore wrote: »

Anyone with basic legal training? How many people have that? And anyway, you didn't answer the question that I asked. You just provided a link to random generic facts that most people know. You sh1tty link says

Lots of people have basic legal training. But the fact remains, if you have no knowledge of a subject you shouldn't rant about it because you end up looking like an idiot.

yore wrote: »

And that's it. Nothing more about custody record. And nothing to answer my statement that you seemed to think showed ignorance

It does show ignorance of the topic you are ranting about.

yore wrote: »

So either you know the answer to that, or you don't. If you don't know the answer, then just admit it. Don't send me a link to some random article on wikipedia. Just because you know how to copy and paste irrelevant links, it does not make you smart. Maybe relatively, among your own peer group in the Guards , but not compared to the general populace.

That's not my quote. That was from another poster. But it is a moot question because there is no such thing as a release form. All their is is a custody record. And there are two seperate places on a custody record where a persons injuries are noted. One is for the gardas observations and the other is for the prisoners injury complaints.

If you would like me to teach you anything else please don't hesitate to ask. Although I would request you try your best to refrain from the bad insults.

hondasam

yore wrote: »

[URL]
A new word for you as you didn't seem to understand my last post. Perhaps your training finished at "veh-hick-kill" :-P . Look at Mr. Lah-de-fu$king-dah getting annoyed with someone getting his "title" wrong. It's not a title, it's a job. And it's a Guard's job to be a servant of the people. Not the other way around. Think of it as being a glorified traffic warden. A decent job, but not one that you need to be getting your knickers in a twist over your "title".

[/url]

Were you refused entry to Templemore?
It's not a title btw.

yore

MagicSean wrote: »

That's the best you can do? Insulting my intelligence? I'd happily compare my third level qualifications against yours any day.

Wooo. What are "third level qualifications" supposed to prove definitively anyway? Don't get into that argument, because you'll only lose. At best you will draw but unless you have a Habilitation, you ain't gonna win that particular mickey-sizing contest baby.

MagicSean wrote: »

Lots of people have basic legal training. But the fact remains, if you have no knowledge of a subject you shouldn't rant about it because you end up looking like an idiot.



It does show ignorance of the topic you are ranting about.

Kind of like the way you answered my question, quoted here

Yore wrote:

So can you enlighten us there as to the standard procedure involved in releasing an arrested person? Is there a standard form to fill in? Does it have a large detailed section where the releasing Guard has to give his expert medical opinion as to the health of the person being released?

with a link that didn't provide the answer.

MagicSean wrote: »

That's not my quote. That was from another poster. But it is a moot question because there is no such thing as a release form. All their is is a custody record. And there are two seperate places on a custody record where a persons injuries are noted. One is for the gardas observations and the other is for the prisoners injury complaints.

Yes that was my original post saying that I didn't know whether it would be a standard procedure for the releasing Guard to document explicitly whether the person being released had any medical complaints at the time of being released. Not ever having being arrested, and also having been unfortunately born with too much intelligence to get into the Guards, I have never seen or filled out such a form. You implied that I was ignorant for not knowing yet still haven't furnished us with an answer.

MagicSean wrote: »

If you would like me to teach you anything else please don't hesitate to ask. Although I would request you try your best to refrain from the bad insults.

Yes please. Just answer the simple question you were asked at the start..... If you can.

yore

hondasam wrote: »

Were you refused entry to Templemore?
It's not a title btw.

No I wasn't. I would never have had much respect for the Guards or ever considered it as a job.
I never said it was a title. I was just responding to the person who claimed it was.

MagicSean

yore wrote: »

Wooo. What are "third level qualifications" supposed to prove definitively anyway? Don't get into that argument, because you'll only lose. At best you will draw but unless you have a Habilitation, you ain't gonna win that particular mickey-sizing contest baby.

You shouldn't have aimed so high. I might have believed you had a masters in some arts related subject.

yore wrote: »

Kind of like the way you answered my question, quoted here with a link that didn't provide the answer.

It's been answered.

yore wrote: »

Yes that was my original post saying that I didn't know whether it would be a standard procedure for the releasing Guard to document explicitly whether the person being released had any medical complaints at the time of being released. Not ever having being arrested, and also having been unfortunately born with too much intelligence to get into the Guards, I have never seen or filled out such a form. You implied that I was ignorant for not knowing yet still haven't furnished us with an answer.

To be honest, I doubt you'd have passed the interview stage. I have answered your question.

yore wrote: »

Yes please. Just answer the simple question you were asked at the start..... If you can.

Can you be more specific?

yore

MagicSean wrote: »

You shouldn't have aimed so high. I might have believed you had a masters in some arts related subject.

It's always hard to beat a good keyboard warrior like yourself. The fact that you had to google the term Habilitiation means you didn't have one baby. I never said I did have one, just that you'd need one to beat me if you wanted to play degree trumps!

MagicSean wrote: »

It's been answered.

Eh, no it hasn't.

MagicSean wrote: »

To be honest, I doubt you'd have passed the interview stage. I have answered your question.

I guess we'll never know. I never would have applied in the first place. Did you pass it yourself Mr. Smartry pants? If so, why the need to get your fantastic third level degree beforehand? Was your oul' fella not a Guard as well?

MagicSean wrote: »

Can you be more specific?

Do I really have to quote it again?

So can you enlighten us there as to the standard procedure involved in releasing an arrested person? Is there a standard form to fill in? Does it have a large detailed section where the releasing Guard has to give his expert medical opinion as to the health of the person being released?

Which was a follow on to my initial post that you took issue with

I'm not sure if it's a standard thing to put on a release form whether the person being released is injured.

The reason I asked this in the first place (Just spelling it out as logic might not be your strong point) is that this is a thread about Guards assaulting a young fella and manufacturing evidence to falsely convict him criminally. The report from the court case said that:

Insp Reidy said Mr Daly had not complained of any injury and the custody record kept by Sgt John Cleary at Henry Street Garda Station recorded he was not injured when he was released from custody at 1.20am - 30 minutes after his arrest.

"Recorded that he was not injured" is not the same as "did not record that he was injured". Think about it for a while if you can't get your head around it. It is a legitimate question then to ask whether this is a standard thing that they must fill out, or whether that Guard, for some reason, felt the need to have an official bit of paper "proving" that the arrested man was not injured on leaving the station. If you cannot understand that, I will try to break it down into smaller words for you.

Nodin

MagicSean wrote: »

.................



That seems like one big tar brush to me.

Indeed. And you would know one if you saw one.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79619930&postcount=289

MagicSean

yore wrote: »

It's always hard to beat a good keyboard warrior like yourself. The fact that you had to google the term Habilitiation means you didn't have one baby. I never said I did have one, just that you'd need one to beat me if you wanted to play degree trumps!

Of course :rolleyes:

yore wrote: »

Eh, no it hasn't.

Do I really have to quote it again? Which was a follow on to my initial post that you took issue with The reason I asked this in the first place (Just spelling it out as logic might not be your strong point) is that this is a thread about Guards assaulting a young fella and manufacturing evidence to falsely convict him criminally. The report from the court case said that: "Recorded that he was not injured" is not the same as "did not record that he was injured". Think about it for a while if you can't get your head around it. It is a legitimate question then to ask whether this is a standard thing that they must fill out, or whether that Guard, for some reason, felt the need to have an official bit of paper "proving" that the arrested man was not injured on leaving the station. If you cannot understand that, I will try to break it down into smaller words for you.

MagicSean wrote: »

there is no such thing as a release form. All there is is a custody record. And there are two seperate places on a custody record where a persons injuries are noted. One is for the Gardas observations and the other is for the prisoners injury complaints.

Seems pretty clear, especially for someone who thinks they are as smart as you do.

MagicSean

Nodin wrote: »

Indeed. And you would know one if you saw one.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79619930&postcount=289

Exactly.

yore

MagicSean wrote: »

Of course :rolleyes:

We both know it baby!

MagicSean wrote: »

Seems pretty clear, especially for someone who thinks they are as smart as you do.

Fair enough. If you want to play it that way, he are some completely different and new question that you might understand.
1) Is it a mandatory and standard part of a custody record to explicitly state for every person being released that that person is not injured (assuming they are not)?
2) If so, what sort of examination is needed to determine same?
.
Or is there just a place to write down injuries and that space may or may not be left blank?

MagicSean

yore wrote: »

We both know it baby!

Fair enough. If you want to play it that way, he are some completely different and new question that you might understand.
1) Is it a mandatory and standard part of a custody record to explicitly state for every person being released that that person is not injured (assuming they are not)?
2) If so, what sort of examination is needed to determine same?
.
Or is there just a place to write down injuries and that space may or may not be left blank?

1) No. This is done on their entry to the station.

There are two parts which deal with it. One part is for the Garda to note if the prisoner has any visible injury. It must be filled in. The second part is to note wether the prisoner complains of any injury. This also must be filled in.

If during the course of his stay the prisoner requests any kind of medical attention there is also a part which must be filled in. Does that answer your question?

yore

MagicSean wrote: »

1) No. This is done on their entry to the station.

There are two parts which deal with it. One part is for the Garda to note if the prisoner has any visible injury. It must be filled in. The second part is to note wether the prisoner complains of any injury. This also must be filled in.

If during the course of his stay the prisoner requests any kind of medical attention there is also a part which must be filled in. Does that answer your question?

Somewhat. Thanks for the response.
Is it then just bad reporting that the article says that

Insp Reidy said Mr Daly had not complained of any injury and the custody record kept by Sgt John Cleary at Henry Street Garda Station recorded he was not injured when he was released from custody at 1.20am - 30 minutes after his arrest.

To me, "recorded he was not injured" implies there was a note explicitly saying "man not injured when released". Which could be a lot more sinister than just a case of a half-filled out form not recording everything. That is why I was asking.

SocSocPol

This thread has just become a game of insult tennis between magic and Yore, I'm outta here.

limklad

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 Swedish House Mafia gig to do with this incidence in Limerick? Absolutely Nothing!!! Just some members of the Gardai abusing his power who bring the good members of the gardai names through the mud by their unsavoury actions. I have many friends who are gardai and have no doubt they too would be disgusted by these unsavoury members of the force.

But in this case unlike Dublin (of speculations of the causes of violence in the Phoenix Park and stabbings) the individual was not drunk nor was he at the Swedish House Mafia gig in Dublin and he was not violence nor di he have any weapons nor was he abusive as proven by the CCTV, while he was standing here in Limerick approx 105 miles away and he did not hear the Music that led or influence him to record the gardai arresting his friend. Also this so called allegations/charges, now proven non-offence did not happen during the same time of the Swedish House Mafia gig were playing in Dublin. The incidence happened 1am last July 28 in the year of our Lord 2011.

Irish Times wrote:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0710/1224319721336.html
Mr Daly denied failing to comply with Garda directions outside Molly’s Bar on Ellen Street shortly before 1am last July 28.

He (the victim) only true offence (in the mind of the unruly garda) that he was just recording the arrest of his friend with his phone. This unsavoury member of the Gardai (Garda O’Connor) who breach his Oath to uphold the rule of Law. Who lied (Cough) rewrote the timing and actual events, Who brought himself above the Law with his unnecessary violence. The Judge appropriately put him back under it after viewing the third party non-lying digital recorded evidence CCTV footage which did not have feeling to hurt or care nor feel entitled to be above or below the Law of the land, as it (CCTV footage) does not have a brain to have an opinion.

Limerick Leader wrote:

Recording a video was “not an offence”, said Judge O’Kelly.

He (Garda O' Connor) was the only one who was violence and agitated as stated by the Mr Twomey who showed the CCTV footage to the Court.

Limerick Leader wrote:

Mr Twomey then made his own 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 gardai.
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”.

“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.

Judge Eugene O’Kelly was Appalled at the video and compared the incidence to the Police Actions in LA against Rodney King in 1991.

Judge Eugene O’Kelly said he was “appalled” at video footage he had seen of the incident, which showed Garda Niall O’Connor “make a lunge” at Gary Daly and “drag him in a violent manner to the squad car” after the accused started recording the arrest of his friend on his phone.
Gardai said their decision to apprehend Mr Daly - of Shannonvale, Old Cratloe Road - had “nothing whatsoever” to do with the fact he had started shooting the video.
Recording a video was “not an offence”, said Judge O’Kelly, who added that he found it “extraordinary” that the case should follow so soon after the death of Rodney King, whose beating at the hands of the Los Angeles police in 1991 might never have come to light had it not been recorded by a third party.


Judge O’Kelly said he had “no hesitation” in accepting Mr Twomey’s application to dismiss the charge.
“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.
"He was very disturbed by the video footage and the manner of the accused’s apprehension”.
“He appears to be standing by recording the apprehension of a third party and that in itself is not an offence. I find it extraordinary this comes in the week Rodney King died, somebody who was the victim of an extraordinary injustice by another police force and which would not have come to light had it not been recorded.”
The video appeared to show Mr Daly standing “steadily” on his feet and the judge said he was “appalled by the footage I have seen”.

According the the Gardai Testimony, Mr Daly was in the wrong and was drunk who also claimed that too had the CCTV footage.
Members of the Gardai written evidence contradict each other about the drunkenness of Mr Daly. The Senior experience Sargent and the Ordinary Garda O'Connor and Garda Bentley.

Limerick Leader wrote:

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

Mr Daly had been abusive and drunk on the night, was unsteady on his feet and slurring his speech, Garda Bentley said.Garda O’Connor also insisted the four men had been told to leave the area “on numerous occasions”. Two had done so while the others - Gary Daly and Gareth Howard - had remained, Garda O’Connor said.

Mr Daly had been left “wincing in pain” and had to sign his name to an adult caution form with his right hand, when he was left-handed.
Insp Reidy said Mr Daly had not complained of any injury and the custody record kept by Sgt John Cleary at Henry Street Garda Station recorded he was not injured when he was released from custody at 1.20am - 30 minutes after his arrest.

What was also convenient that the Video system in the Court Room was not working. The DPP and Inspector O'Reily need to answer why they did not view the footage of the CCTV before wasting Taxer payers money. If they did it would be Garda O' Connor who be answering the charges laid against him unless they approve of violence by member of the Gardai on non-violence individuals recording evidence of an arrest.

The solicitor says he obtain the CCTV from the premises (I presume is Molly’s Bar on Ellen Street) and he did not get it from the Gardai nor the DPP.

Limerick leader wrote:

Mr Twomey said he had on an earlier date informed the court CCTV footage would be crucial to the defence. Insp Paul Reidy said the state had made footage available to the defence but that the video system in the courtroom was not in working order.

Mr Twomey then made his own 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 gardai.

Here is the real reason for the Garda O'Connor pressing charges against Mr Daly.

Limerick leader wrote:

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.

biko

biko wrote: »

Apparently it is in some states in the "land of the free" though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1e9Htc6FMY

limklad

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.

They are many Countries who Police who abuse their powers who do more damage than Thugs, Thiefs, & violence rebels.

You just have Legal thugs running the country. Like the various Dictators who allow their Police forces to run amok around the world.

For example the police in Egypt who shooting at random against innocent people just to control them. Unnecessary Beating and shootings. In somes cases Torture. Even all this you have even more violence.
http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/university-students-egypt-protest-against-police-brutality
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+brutality&oq=Police+&gs_l=youtube-reduced.3.0.0l4.35186.39067.0.43238.7.6.0.0.0.0.87.413.6.6.0...0.0.0Vq2ezZVK2Y
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+violence&oq=police+violence&gs_l=youtube.3..0l10.29181.30525.0.31273.8.5.0.3.3.0.92.380.5.5.0...0.0.ZiPrtpEmIpo

http://www.top-criminal-justice-schools.net/10-most-brutal-police-forces-on-earth

It is less violence from our Police Forces we need and more action in proper unedited evidence for true offence against the State we need in Court. we need the People that can trust them. Without Trust Police forces cannot do their Job effectively. Beating the crap out of people does the opposite. Unfortunately with egos and power hungry individuals in which out Gardai are not immune from within their ranks which caused them self inflicted own goals while blaming for their own problems on others. It easy to blame , working out issues that the hard part, in which we all have to to do to get on with the

Now Staker, now try to Justify this actions by Egyptian Police Force by beating people who are lying on the ground who do not have weapons and peacefully protesting before the violence was introduce by the police. How effective is this in controlling the Population.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa2Cm9dqUqY

Here more examples of poor policing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xyaoLT3kU0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbqtb1dSbR8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3poLLGZm70A

Potential-Monke

Just had to reply to this, threads like this are why i love AH.

Anyway, first off the reason the Gardai were called. It's unknown exactly why, but that it was something to do with males causing a disturbance at the pub. If the male who was arrested was involved, it is not clear, and it may add to the whole story, but we can't comment as we don't know the facts.

Next, when the Gardai arrived, they spoke to the doorman and then to other people, the arrested male was apparently not one of these men. Now, CCTV can show that there was no physical interaction between the Gardai and the arrested male, but that doesn't mean the male just stood there recording, he may have been hurling abuse. Body language is only one form of interaction. God knows what he was saying, if anything at all.

Anyway, the arrest. The reason for the arrest is not clear, but definitely something to do with the recording (referring to the previous paragraph, possibly to do with verbal communication, but that's speculative). If someone resists arrest, even when being arrested in accordance with the regulations, there is no 100% guarantee that something won't break/fracture. As someone said above, a hairline fracture can happen easily. The barrister even states in evidence that he believes that the Garda did not intend to break/fracture the mans arm, so this in itself is proof enough of no assault occurring (the wording of Section 2 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act defines assault as recklessly or intentionally, neither of which relate to the Garda if the arrest was performed as per procedure).

Asult Caution: If the person denies accecpting the adult caution, then the only other course is summons/charge. I'm not saying that the decision to do either was right, i'm just explaining how the adult caution scheme works in proper circumstances.

As for the perjury, there is no excuse. A Garda is in court to give, and i quote the oath, "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". It wouldn't surprise me if there is more coming from it, but that is a decision for Garda Management and/or the Ombudsman if a complaint is lodged.

As for the treatment in custody, the member in charge reads over and explains to you your rights and you are handed the same notice, a C72, a copy of which i cannot find online. In that, there is a section about medical care, and that if requested the member will get a doctor if you request one. There is also a seperate section on the custody record specifically for injuries on arrival.

And finally, as for people saying that there is a lot of Garda corruption/brutality, i would like to provide the following: GSOC complaint received in 2010: 2258. Now, lets look at the cso statistics year ending Q1 2011: 273,616 incidents responded to in roughly the same period. So that means that if there were 2258 allegations of Garda wrongdoing, that's 1.21% of all calls responded to. Granted, maybe not all cases are reported GSOC, but also to note that the cso stats do not include traffic related calls which would produce a few complaints also.

I'm not defending the actions of the Gardai in this case, but i wanted to give my view, a bit of fact and some stats! They're not all bad apples. Actually, 98.79% are not if the facts are to be believed.