Ming and the quashed penalty points

recedite

So Ming Flanagan is trying to have his cake and eat it.
He got his penalty points quashed, twice, for talking on the phone while driving, and now wants to blame the people who quashed them.
The first time he was covered under the rule in relation to travelling to the Dáil

A few days later he met a garda sergeant who said he had heard what happened, and told Flanagan he was covered under a rule regarding travelling to the Dáil.

My question is; Why is it necessary to absolve any TD from an offence in which he/she was endangering other road users? Isn't it just an abuse of power?
I can understand the principle of "Dail privilege" where they are allowed to speak their mind without fear of being sued while in the chamber, but what public benefit is there in allowing them to get away with petty crimes outside the Dail?

Senna

Nothing was cover by a "rule", the only "rule" that may have been applicable was he cant be arrested on his way to the dail. He got the points correctly and the they should not have been removed.
He knew it was coming out so he pre-empted it to take the moral higher ground, but I would hope people are smart enough to see this/him for what it is.

recedite

Nobody gets arrested for using a mobile phone. They get penalty points and/or a fine. If there is no "rule"making TD's exempt just because they happen to be en route to the Dail, then the Garda sergeant who allegedly removed the points on that basis was breaking the law.

claptrap

No doubt Ming has made a very stupid mistake and has badly damaged whatever credibility he had. However it's clear that a lot of people have been waiting for him to slip up and have actively being digging for any dirt they could find on him. He made a lot of enemies in the Dail and the Gardai through being outspoken. He has made a lot of people nervous because he was speaking out against corruption which anyone with a bit of sense will tell you is rampant in Irish politics and the police force. Yes these new revelations and his admissions have exposed hypocrisy, however his crimes are extremely minor compared to those of others, many of which are never exposed. Yes his crimes as minor and they ruin his credibility as a politician but if we were to take this stance with everyone (maybe we should) then there would be no one left in the Dail. You dig for long enough and you will find dirt on everyone. Ming is new to the fat cat game of Irish politics and his naive nature has probably cost him his job. He messed with some seasoned pro's with connections who have been waiting to destroy him and he gave them a great chance to do it through his own stupidity and weak mindedness. All this aside I find it sick that people will get up in arms about this until he resigns and yet the likes of O' Reilly and Noonan are spared. Ask yourself, who damages our nation more? Naive Ming or the pro's who have all the tricks for avoiding getting caught, avoiding delivering on promises, avoiding answering questions and generally avoiding standing up for Irish citizens. Bertie et al. get a pension for ruining our country while Ming (who forfeits half his salary to charity) will be ruined by this because he didn't know how to play the game (keep his mouth shut) Of course all the prude anti weed folks are going to jump on this as they always do ( I don't smoke but I have tried it unlike those that dismiss it and I realise its harmless. I lived in Holland for a number of years and I have seen first hand how it is harmless. Never got attacked by a stoner but have been set upon randomly by a number of drunks in the past in Ireland) Any way my point is yes he's made a very stupid mistake but his intentions were honourable which is far more than can be said for the rest of the crooks in the Dail.

recedite

Nobody is perfect, and Ming is someone who is well capable of breaking the law when it suits himself.
But if he exposes a corrupt system and causes it to be changed, then he will have "done the State some service."

Park Royal

Its no good being good or great some of the time.....most people have a good

side......many have a bad side.........no point for me giving examples in Dail

Eireann or the priesthood......"colluding" in instances of criminality may have a

price.....everybody makes their decisions and some take chances......

sometimes you get away with it , sometimes you don't.....Ming didn't get away

in this particular case.....time to pay the price.....like everybody else.....

( but trying to hangout to dry somebody who he understood was going out of their way to pervert the course of justice on his behalf ... is in a league of its own IMHO, hard to find words to describe his behaviour! losing the plot comes to mind )

K-9

Moved from Political Theory.

salmocab

regards your actual question OP its an old law from the start of the state when FF came into power the garda were seen as a FG 'free state' organization and it was thought probably correctly then that the politicians might need protection. Obviously this is no longer needed but turkeys christmas and voting. I might get corrected on some of the facts on this but thats the nub of this law

todolist

recedite wrote: »

Nobody is perfect, and Ming is someone who is well capable of breaking the law when it suits himself.
But if he exposes a corrupt system and causes it to be changed, then he will have "done the State some service."

If people at the top disregard laws then petty criminals can hardly be punished.Why charge me when members of the parliament have no respect for the rules.This is why southern Ireland is a gloryfied bananna republic.In the UK Ming would be in jail now.

yore

claptrap wrote: »

No doubt Ming has made a very stupid mistake and has badly damaged whatever credibility he had. However it's clear that a lot of people have been waiting for him to slip up and have actively being digging for any dirt they could find on him. He made a lot of enemies in the Dail and the Gardai through being outspoken. He has made a lot of people nervous because he was speaking out against corruption which anyone with a bit of sense will tell you is rampant in Irish politics and the police force. Yes these new revelations and his admissions have exposed hypocrisy, however his crimes are extremely minor compared to those of others, many of which are never exposed. Yes his crimes as minor and they ruin his credibility as a politician but if we were to take this stance with everyone (maybe we should) then there would be no one left in the Dail. You dig for long enough and you will find dirt on everyone. Ming is new to the fat cat game of Irish politics and his naive nature has probably cost him his job. He messed with some seasoned pro's with connections who have been waiting to destroy him and he gave them a great chance to do it through his own stupidity and weak mindedness. All this aside I find it sick that people will get up in arms about this until he resigns and yet the likes of O' Reilly and Noonan are spared. Ask yourself, who damages our nation more? Naive Ming or the pro's who have all the tricks for avoiding getting caught, avoiding delivering on promises, avoiding answering questions and generally avoiding standing up for Irish citizens. Bertie et al. get a pension for ruining our country while Ming (who forfeits half his salary to charity) will be ruined by this because he didn't know how to play the game (keep his mouth shut) Of course all the prude anti weed folks are going to jump on this as they always do ( I don't smoke but I have tried it unlike those that dismiss it and I realise its harmless. I lived in Holland for a number of years and I have seen first hand how it is harmless. Never got attacked by a stoner but have been set upon randomly by a number of drunks in the past in Ireland) Any way my point is yes he's made a very stupid mistake but his intentions were honourable which is far more than can be said for the rest of the crooks in the Dail.

Your conspiracy theory might hold water had people actually been waiting for him to slip up, not come across the hypocritical, 2 year old news, that he was happy to use his status to wiggle out of paying a fine and getting 4 penalty points. Ironically after the man himself man such a song and dance about other people doing it.


He's another "do as I say" not "do as I do" chancer. Smoke/promote drug use, "yeah it's illegal but sure the laws don't apply to me". Pay household tax? "Only for the little people, not for me". Use connections to get out of penalty points and fines? "It's a disgrace when others do it, but not me".

It's crazy how you seem to know that his intentions were "honourable"! ...Yes....of course they were. Sure wasn't he just thinking of the poor person in the office having to process his fixed penalty notice.


BTW, just being honest, It is really difficult to read your huge monolothic "paragraph".

walshb

I'm a firm believer in the phrase to lead by example. Our elected TDs should be doing this. Yes, they are only human, and can make errors of judgment. But, Ming has been found out twice now. Twice he engaged in a dangerous and illegal act. Add this to the hypocrisy, and it's just not good.

gizmo555

salmocab wrote: »

regards your actual question OP its an old law from the start of the state when FF came into power the garda were seen as a FG 'free state' organization and it was thought probably correctly then that the politicians might need protection. Obviously this is no longer needed but turkeys christmas and voting. I might get corrected on some of the facts on this but thats the nub of this law

I wouldn't say it's not needed. Consider what another Roscommon TD and Minister did in 1982 in the Dowra affair.

You wouldn't need to be paranoid to believe that in a tight Dáil vote, someone might want to arrange for a convenient delay in a TD's travel arrangements.

JustinDee

claptrap wrote: »

No doubt Ming has made a very stupid mistake and has badly damaged whatever credibility he had. However it's clear that a lot of people have been waiting for him to slip up and have actively being digging for any dirt they could find on him

No conspiracy. If you're going to preach as perfect then you'd better behave as perfect unlike his other colleagues, Wallace (stole pension fund money, defrauded revenue commissioner, welched on high-bumped loans) or Boyd-Barrett (took the fuel expenses for a ride).
All these folk have proven is that they're no different to the others they castigate and decry. Its easy to be in opposition. Just take a polemic stance to anything the government does. If by some bizarre occurrence, this lot ever got near cabinet positions, they'd be truly stumped as their alleged policies offer nothing of substance but a whine.

No conspiracy. Flanagan has been proven as hypocritical in the highest order and not to be trusted.

Godge

gizmo555 wrote: »

I wouldn't say it's not needed. Consider what another Roscommon TD and Minister did in 1982 in the Dowra affair.

You wouldn't need to be paranoid to believe that in a tight Dáil vote, someone might want to arrange for a convenient delay in a TD's travel arrangements.

It was a Friday, no Dail vote, end of. When is he going?

ArthurG

claptrap wrote: »

....Naive Ming ...

2 words that should never be put together

Happyman42

Ming needs to reveal all names and everything he knows about these incidents, then resign.
If we are consistent, then he also needs to be charged if he has broken the law, but I suspect that won't happen because of what might come out.

jmayo

Did anyone else find it laughable and somewhat hypocritical of wallace to start commenting on ming ?

ming had numerous pops at the Gardaí and yes some are probably deserved.
That is all well and good if one has nothing to hide themselves, but ming has been found out and nows looks like a bit of a smartar**.

Someone somewhere has decided to put him back in his box.

ming complains about the Gardaí and civil authoritie of the state quashing fines and penalty points, yet he availed and thus tacitly approved of this exact thing himself.

Isn't that more than a bit hypocritical ?

ming has been found out and shows he is a lot more of a politican than many ever thought, what with his twisting, turning and trying to obfuscate the happenings.

Park Royal

Ming was caught so a way out is to "whistleblow" on others.......

claiming immunity under the Whistleblowers Charter.......

possible entrapment by devious County Council official and Garda.

Poor man was set up.....

So in true "caught in the act " situation , spread as much muck , red herrings

as one can to dilute your part in the matter and divert attention onto others.

Roscommon County Manager apparently not involved.....but had to abort his

trip to America for Paddys Day so thats the seriousness of the muck Ming is

flinging around.

Death and Taxes

claptrap wrote: »

No doubt Ming has made a very stupid mistake and has badly damaged whatever credibility he had. However it's clear that a lot of people have been waiting for him to slip up and have actively being digging for any dirt they could find on him. He made a lot of enemies in the Dail and the Gardai through being outspoken. He has made a lot of people nervous because he was speaking out against corruption which anyone with a bit of sense will tell you is rampant in Irish politics and the police force. Yes these new revelations and his admissions have exposed hypocrisy, however his crimes are extremely minor compared to those of others, many of which are never exposed. Yes his crimes as minor and they ruin his credibility as a politician but if we were to take this stance with everyone (maybe we should) then there would be no one left in the Dail. You dig for long enough and you will find dirt on everyone. Ming is new to the fat cat game of Irish politics and his naive nature has probably cost him his job. He messed with some seasoned pro's with connections who have been waiting to destroy him and he gave them a great chance to do it through his own stupidity and weak mindedness. All this aside I find it sick that people will get up in arms about this until he resigns and yet the likes of O' Reilly and Noonan are spared. Ask yourself, who damages our nation more? Naive Ming or the pro's who have all the tricks for avoiding getting caught, avoiding delivering on promises, avoiding answering questions and generally avoiding standing up for Irish citizens. Bertie et al. get a pension for ruining our country while Ming (who forfeits half his salary to charity) will be ruined by this because he didn't know how to play the game (keep his mouth shut) Of course all the prude anti weed folks are going to jump on this as they always do ( I don't smoke but I have tried it unlike those that dismiss it and I realise its harmless. I lived in Holland for a number of years and I have seen first hand how it is harmless. Never got attacked by a stoner but have been set upon randomly by a number of drunks in the past in Ireland) Any way my point is yes he's made a very stupid mistake but his intentions were honourable which is far more than can be said for the rest of the crooks in the Dail.

Utter claptrap.
Ming has admitted being corrupt but says that he doesn't see his corruption as a resigning issue.
He is just another example of the type of backward, self serving stroke politican that gets elected in this country.

G Power

Park Royal wrote: »

Roscommon County Manager apparently not involved.....but had to abort his

trip to America for Paddys Day so thats the seriousness of the muck Ming is

flinging around.

Roscommon county manager doesn't get to swan off to "merica on an all expenses paid junket at our expense!! Of course nobody will admit they were involved with this case until there's nowhere left to hide. Watch this get even more interesting as time goes by

raymon

Ming , Ming, Ming......what a disappointment you have been.

You may as well join Fianna Fail. Your gombeen traits have been exposed. Id be surprised if Michael Martin doesn't have an application form in the post already

Sunnyisland

Yes I am very disappointed in ming, had good hopes for him,thought he was a straight talker, and different.As for Senior wallace speaking for him...My little heart just gets more saddened at the the way our politics and politicians keep going, and the crazy thing is that they most likely will be relected next time.

InchicoreDude

realies wrote: »

Yes I am very disappointed in ming, had good hopes for him,thought he was a straight talker, and different.As for Senior wallace speaking for him...My little heart just gets more saddened at the the way our politics and politicians keep going, and the crazy thing is that they most likely will be relected next time.

Yeah, I feel the same as this.

Very disappointed with him. But dont think it is serious enough to resign. However, I hope he doesnt get a seat next time now.

bmaxi

Ming's behaviour is unforgivable but is only the latest of the offences which our "representatives" commit which are then quietly brushed under the carpet. In terms of hypocrisy though, Ming's offence pales into insignificance in the light of James Mc Daid, a FF minister who led the crackdown on drink driving, including TV appearances and newspaper interviews, saying there should be no hiding place for drunk drivers. The same Mc Daid was later "arrested" by a truck driver after driving for five miles down the wrong side of a dual carriageway while pissed out of his skull. He was considered by FF as a fit person to hold office as a TD for a further six or seven years and one wonders if the incident would ever have come to light had not the arrest been made by a member of the public.
I don't doubt the integrity of most the individual Gardaí on the beat but I have serious misgivings as to the malleability of the political appointees at the top. TDs, Councillors, senior Civil and Public Servants tend to be immune to the laws that govern the rest of us.

gizmo555

Godge wrote: »

It was a Friday, no Dail vote, end of. When is he going?

I'm in no way justifying Flanagan's conduct which was 100% out of order.

I'm just saying the rule expressed in the constitution that TDs and senators be immune from arrest going to and from the Oireachtas (and even at that it isn't an absolute immunity) is a good one. It would be naive to think that it's an archaic rule which has no relevance in modern times. It's also - rightly - very limited in scope, compared for example with the very broad immunity from arrest and prosecution which parliamentarians controversially enjoy in France.

recedite

This one ?

Article 15 part13. wrote:

The members of each House of the Oireachtas shall, except in case of treason as defined in this Constitution,
felony or breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest in going to and returning from, and while within the precincts of, either House, and shall not, in respect of any utterance in either House, be amenable to any court or any authority other than the House itself.

That's fine as far as it goes; all it says is that a TD can't be arrested for a trivial matter en route to the Dail. Felonies or breaches of the peace are considered serious.

Two important points here;
1. Ming was not on his way to the Dail, and still got his points wiped.
2. Ming was not arrested. He was given his points and sent on his way. Nothing strange there. All the pulling of strings happens later.

Therefore that Article 15 has no relevance to this kind of thing. Yet it seems the Gardai and the politicians have an "arrangement" whereby they scratch each others backs, and if anyone asks, its "because of The Constitution".

yore

bmaxi wrote: »

Ming's behaviour is unforgivable but is only the latest of the offences which our "representatives" commit which are then quietly brushed under the carpet. In terms of hypocrisy though, Ming's offence pales into insignificance in the light of James Mc Daid, a FF minister who led the crackdown on drink driving, including TV appearances and newspaper interviews, saying there should be no hiding place for drunk drivers. The same Mc Daid was later "arrested" by a truck driver after driving for five miles down the wrong side of a dual carriageway while pissed out of his skull. He was considered by FF as a fit person to hold office as a TD for a further six or seven years and one wonders if the incident would ever have come to light had not the arrest been made by a member of the public.
I don't doubt the integrity of most the individual Gardaí on the beat but I have serious misgivings as to the malleability of the political appointees at the top. TDs, Councillors, senior Civil and Public Servants tend to be immune to the laws that govern the rest of us.

What is your point? --> Someone else did worse before. Ergo Ming does not have to abide by the laws meant only for the "little people"?

Or are you saying that Ming is as bad as the rest of them?

walshb

Can someone clear something up for me: I heard that Ming's defence to the mobile phone use was that he was on official Dail business? How is this a defence? Answering a mobile phone whilst driving is a motoring offence? What are the exemptions, if any?

bmaxi

yore wrote: »

What is your point? --> Someone else did worse before. Ergo Ming does not have to abide by the laws meant only for the "little people"?

Or are you saying that Ming is as bad as the rest of them?

You must have missed the first sentence in my post.
My point is, Ming has been branded a hypocrite for saying his offence was not a resigning matter although he sought to have the cases of other who did the same thing investigated. I say he has a point and cited a reason why I think that. Mc Daid, was a minister in the Dept. of Justice, a spearhead of the anti drink driving campaign and an advocate of zero tolerance for drink drivers.
I believe, that such is the level of corruption in our administration that, had not a member of the general public been involved in his apprehension, the full extent of his crime might not have come out. I also believe that Ming's sudden "outing" in the press was evidence that somebody didn't want the whole wiping of penalty points issue to be too closely scrutinised.
The real problem as I see it regarding the Mc Daid affair, was not only that Mc Daid did not see his crime as a resigning matter but that FF viewed it so lightly, they considered him a suitable candidate to represent the people of Donegal NE in the next GE, worst of all though, the people of Donegal NE agreed.
So you see the moral is, the standards that politicians follow are the standards we have deemed to be acceptable. The Irish electorate, time and again, have decided that thieves, liars, drunks and every other form of low life organism are suitable candidates to represent them, so why single Ming out?
Would Haughey, Lowry, Burke, Callelly, Flynn, Cooper-Flynn, Ahern, Lawlor and God knows how many more, not also fit the bill, but we consistently overlooked their sins because they were "our man".
I'll practise a bit of hypocrisy myself now by quoting the New Testament, "let him among you who is without sin, cast the first stone"

JustinDee

walshb wrote: »

Can someone clear something up for me: I heard that Ming's defence to the mobile phone use was that he was on official Dail business? How is this a defence? Answering a mobile phone whilst driving is a motoring offence? What are the exemptions, if any?

Apparently on Dail business this goes towards your case. He wasn't on Dail business however as the Dail was not sitting that day.

walshb

Well, if that is some sort of defence or exemption it's pathetic. Did they ever hear of hands free? I am assuming Ming was stopped because he was holding the phone and driving at the same time.

bmaxi

walshb wrote: »

Can someone clear something up for me: I heard that Ming's defence to the mobile phone use was that he was on official Dail business? How is this a defence? Answering a mobile phone whilst driving is a motoring offence? What are the exemptions, if any?

It's an archaic rule. I think it goes back to British times when devious MPs might try to have an opponent delayed, or worse, on his way to a vote. How they stretch that to using a mobile phone is beyond me but that's why we have high paid lawyers, to make sense out of nonsense, or at least to put forward the most convincing argument that what they say makes sense.

gizmo555

I agree with this

recedite wrote: »

Therefore that Article 15 has no relevance to this kind of thing.

but the point I was making was that in my view this

salmocab wrote: »

regards your actual question OP its an old law from the start of the state . . . Obviously this is no longer needed . . .

is way off the mark. Like I said, consider the comparable case where in 1982 the late Sean Doherty arranged for a witness in an assault case to be arrested and detained by the RUC, causing the prosecution to be struck out.

walshb

Seems to be confusion with being stopped by Gardai and being arrested. Ming was not arrested. Ming was stopped and found to be committing a motoring offence. Does this law cover them from being stopped as well as arrested?

Maudi

yore wrote: »

Your conspiracy theory might hold water had people actually been waiting for him to slip up, not come across the hypocritical, 2 year old news, that he was happy to use his status to wiggle out of paying a fine and getting 4 penalty points. Ironically after the man himself man such a song and dance about other people doing it.


He's another "do as I say" not "do as I do" chancer. Smoke/promote drug use, "yeah it's illegal but sure the laws don't apply to me". Pay household tax? "Only for the little people, not for me". Use connections to get out of penalty points and fines? "It's a disgrace when others do it, but not me".

It's crazy how you seem to know that his intentions were "honourable"! ...Yes....of course they were. Sure wasn't he just thinking of the poor person in the office having to process his fixed penalty notice.


BTW, just being honest, It is really difficult to read your huge monolothic "paragraph".

I like your point of 'who harmed our country more?noonan or flanaghan.very valid.ps very informative and to the point post.btw what ever happend to the tax dodger wallace over his crime.

recedite

JustinDee wrote: »

Apparently on Dail business this goes towards your case......

No, unless there is some other legislation apart from this Article 15, which specifically only says they can't be arrested.

walshb wrote: »

Seems to be confusion with being stopped by Gardai and being arrested. Ming was not arrested. Ming was stopped and found to be committing a motoring offence. Does this law cover them from being stopped as well as arrested?

No.

gizmo555

walshb wrote: »

Seems to be confusion with being stopped by Gardai and being arrested. Ming was not arrested. Ming was stopped and found to be committing a motoring offence. Does this law cover them from being stopped as well as arrested?

recedite wrote: »

No.

Well, indirectly, it sort of does. If a TD won't stop his car when instructed by a guard, he can't be arrested for it if he's on his way to or from the Dáil. Of course, it's still an offence with which he could presumably later be charged.

recedite

gizmo555 wrote: »

If a TD won't stop his car when instructed by a guard, he can't be arrested for it if he's on his way to or from the Dáil.

Yes, that is true, and it might be a good way for them to evade a breathalyser test. But in the cases that have been reported, the TD stops willingly, takes the penalty points, and then later has them quashed, on the sly.

SB2013

recedite wrote: »

Nobody gets arrested for using a mobile phone. They get penalty points and/or a fine. If there is no "rule"making TD's exempt just because they happen to be en route to the Dail, then the Garda sergeant who allegedly removed the points on that basis was breaking the law.

The Garda Sergeant didn't remove the points. He told Ming he may be able to get the fine cancelled if he wrote to the Superintendent and explained that the fine was issued to him while he was en route to the Dáil. Ming wrote the letter. The fine would have been cancelled by someone higher up than a sergeant, someone who obviously misunderstood the constitutional exemption in regards to TDs.

hallelujajordan

Don't have a huge issue with Ming getting his points quashed TBH . . I think many of the moral high-grounders would be willing to do the same if they knew a friendly sergeant and thought they would get away with it . .

Much bigger issue with the way he has behaved since this has come to light . . Throwing the Garda / Council official under the bus to save his own neck - now that just stinks. . sometimes Ming, you need to just hold your hands up and accept that you are wrong...

Park Royal

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Don't have a huge issue with Ming getting his points quashed TBH . . I think many of the moral high-grounders would be willing to do the same if they knew a friendly sergeant and thought they would get away with it . .

Much bigger issue with the way he has behaved since this has come to light . . Throwing the Garda / Council official under the bus to save his own neck - now that just stinks. . sometimes Ming, you need to just hold your hands up and accept that you are wrong...

For me too ....I find it very ungallant ....sniching on others.....

..............................Ming the Merciless

unfortunately terms like "Rat" comes to mind.....terms I dont like using ....

for the life of me, I cant understand why he just did not take it on the chin

"leadership qualities my axxe".......

A leader who will "Rat" on anyone as quick as look at them.....some leader....!

recedite

SB2013 wrote: »

The fine would have been cancelled by someone higher up than a sergeant....

Ah, so now we are getting to the nub of the matter. It seems the Garda superintendent had the "discretionary" power to cancel penalty points that had already been issued by a Garda on the beat, and this has nothing to do with any "archaic" constitutional law. Its a Garda superintendent helping out a politician, in a way that he would not do for you or me. At the end of the day, the top Gardai get their promotions from the politicians, as do the Judges. And all three groups seem to be immune to getting penalty points on their licences.

recedite

Park Royal wrote: »

For me too ....I find it very ungallant ....sniching on others......

Of course he is "ungallant" he is like a cornered rat. But would you prefer to go back to the status quo where this corruption is allowed to go on, with nobody saying a word against it?

daithi1970

..the funny thing is, I reckon he was the safest of the independent tds re--election wise due to Fine Gael's position as regards Roscommon Hospital..if the reaction by the locals in Castlerea are anything to go by, Ming needs to be looking over his shoulder...

daithi

SB2013

recedite wrote: »

Ah, so now we are getting to the nub of the matter. It seems the Garda superintendent had the "discretionary" power to cancel penalty points that had already been issued by a Garda on the beat, and this has nothing to do with any "archaic" constitutional law. Its a Garda superintendent helping out a politician, in a way that he would not do for you or me. At the end of the day, the top Gardai get their promotions from the politicians, as do the Judges. And all three groups seem to be immune to getting penalty points on their licences.

Why did you only quote part of my post? To suit your agenda?

I'll try explain it to you again. When you get a fine you do not get points. If you pay the fine you are issued with points by the RSA. The cancellation of a fine is the same as a Garda withdrawing a prosecution before court. For example, if you were prosecuted for having no insurance but subsequently showed it to the Garda he could withdraw the prosecution. Anyone who receives a fixed charge penalty can write to the local Superintendent and request a cancellation of the ticket and outline their grounds for the request. Most people who do this do not know the Superintendent. There are a variety of reasons for which this can be done.

bmaxi

recedite wrote: »

Ah, so now we are getting to the nub of the matter. It seems the Garda superintendent had the "discretionary" power to cancel penalty points that had already been issued by a Garda on the beat, and this has nothing to do with any "archaic" constitutional law. Its a Garda superintendent helping out a politician, in a way that he would not do for you or me. At the end of the day, the top Gardai get their promotions from the politicians, as do the Judges. And all three groups seem to be immune to getting penalty points on their licences.

And if the same Superintendent stood up in court and condemned you or I as a member of an illegal organisation, leading perhaps to a lengthy spell behind bars, his testimony would be accepted without question.
It goes back to a point I've made several times, politicians and top Civil and Public servants are accountable to nobody. Once every few years the politicians have to seek approval but tis is readily given because they have rigged the system to such an extent, the people have no choice. The people you elect may come from different parties but they are the same people, who move in the same circles and court the same benefactors. Ask yourself, why is it that once a Government changes, every State board and quango has to be repopulated? It's because the new crowd want their own cronies in, to put all the goodies their way. You scratch my back etc.
No the powers that be don't want too much scrutiny Watch how the freedom of the press and now the internet is being squeezed ever tighter, it's a policy of "if they don't know, they can't tell".

recedite

SB2013 wrote: »

Why did you only quote part of my post? To suit your agenda?............
Anyone who receives a fixed charge penalty can write to the local Superintendent and request a cancellation of the ticket and outline their grounds for the request......

I'm saving space on the internet
Can you think of any valid reason for the superintendent to overrule the Garda that originally gave Ming the fixed charge penalty?

Park Royal

recedite wrote: »

Of course he is "ungallant" he is like a cornered rat. But would you prefer to go back to the status quo where this corruption is allowed to go on, with nobody saying a word against it?

I'v no problem with Ming or anybody else exposing corruption.?....

The Technical Group or part of same were taking this exposure on......and

fair play to them........no harm to have the points system reviewed .......its

my observation far too many motorists dont get hit often enough.....but thats

another issue...as for this thread and Ming......its one thing having an issue

opened up and hopefully changed for the better......but to knife your own.....

ie close associates in a personal and close up fashion.....for me is way beyond

the pale....... he should have taken it on the chin and he would have been

thought better for it.....and still raised the issue of the wiped away points

around the country.

SB2013

recedite wrote: »

I'm saving space on the internet
Can you think of any valid reason for the superintendent to overrule the Garda that originally gave Ming the fixed charge penalty?

There are lots of possible reasons that a Superintendent would do that but as to this particular case you wouldn't know what Ming put in the letter. It could have been a giant fairytale for all we know. If he did indeed try to invoke TD immunity it is very possible this was simply accepted without further looking into the extent of the immunity.

recedite

As you say, we just don't know. But its a matter of public interest IMO and I think the public are entitled to be told the reason Ming was let off.

bmaxi

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Don't have a huge issue with Ming getting his points quashed TBH . . I think many of the moral high-grounders would be willing to do the same if they knew a friendly sergeant and thought they would get away with it . .

Much bigger issue with the way he has behaved since this has come to light . . Throwing the Garda / Council official under the bus to save his own neck - now that just stinks. . sometimes Ming, you need to just hold your hands up and accept that you are wrong...

I do have a problem with it. Only the courts should have the power to mitigate an offence and then only when all the facts have come to light. It doesn't matter whether or not the' do gooders" as you term them, would do the same, nobody should be above the law.
If the Gardai were mistaken in issuing the charge because of some obscure law then that's a different matter, as technically, no offence was committed, but Gardai, at whatever level, should not have the power to just strike out an offence.