Richard Boyd Barrett spared conviction despite admitting second speeding offence

Sully

Richie was caught speeding again, gave an out-of-date address to which the fine went to, was summoned to attend court, pleaded guilty but explained he never got the original notice as it went to an old address. Judge strikes it out and Richie walks away without a conviction.

More Info: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/td-spared-conviction-despite-admitting-second-speeding-offence-593779.html

I assume Richie forgot he gave an old address when the Gardai fixed penalty notice didn't arrive. But he appears not to have forgotten to tell the Judge that he never got the original notice, ensuring his case would be thrown out. Would have been four penalty points if he was convicted on the day.

Left wing TDs seem to be in the awl spotlight recently, with Ming & Daily also under the watchful eye of the law in the past few months.

TINA1984

What a misleading OP. Barrett got fined so its not like he got away with it as you insinuate.

Likewise I wouldn't consider Ming to be left wing, and Daly was stitiched up by the Gardai Siochana, so one wonders why you're trying to draw a connection between 'left wing' TDs and traffic offences.

Sully

TINA1984 wrote: »

What a misleading OP. Barrett got fined so its not like he got away with it as you insinuate.

Here you go darling

People Before Profit TD Richard Boyd Barrett was spared a conviction, fine and penalty points today despite admitting a speeding offence and giving a garda an out-of-date address.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/td-spared-conviction-despite-admitting-second-speeding-offence-593779.html

Likewise I wouldn't consider Ming to be left wing, and Daly was stitiched up by the Gardai Siochana, so one wonders why you're trying to draw a connection between 'left wing' TDs and traffic offences.

Stitched up? Did she or did she not perform an illegal U-Turn? Did she or did she not drive with alcohol on her, even if she was under the limit? Did she or did she not attract the attention of the Gardai due to her driving?

Mr.Micro

Sully wrote: »

Richie was caught speeding again, gave an out-of-date address to which the fine went to, was summoned to attend court, pleaded guilty but explained he never got the original notice as it went to an old address. Judge strikes it out and Richie walks away without a conviction.

More Info: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/td-spared-conviction-despite-admitting-second-speeding-offence-593779.html

I assume Richie forgot he gave an old address when the Gardai fixed penalty notice didn't arrive. But he appears not to have forgotten to tell the Judge that he never got the original notice, ensuring his case would be thrown out. Would have been four penalty points if he was convicted on the day.

Left wing TDs seem to be in the awl spotlight recently, with Ming & Daily also under the watchful eye of the law in the past few months.

So the moral high ground and principles are just for the talking in the Dail and on TV? On a personal level they do not count?

TINA1984

Sully wrote: »

Here you go darling



http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/td-spared-conviction-despite-admitting-second-speeding-offence-593779.html

Oops mea cupla.

However i'm still not seeing the issue here, Barrett didn't try to deny his culpability.

No ''I was on my way to a Dail meeting" or "I'll have you transferred to another station Garda down the country", Y'know the kind of excuses the politicians from gombeen parties like to use when caught?

Sully wrote: »

Stitched up? Did she or did she not perform an illegal U-Turn? Did she or did she not drive with alcohol on her, even if she was under the limit? Did she or did she not attract the attention of the Gardai due to her driving?

An iilegal U-turn you say? outrageous!!?!! off with her head!

Of course the story being leaked early to the press literally minutes after it happened, with the insinuation that Daly was going to be done for drink driving, had nothing to do with the fact that Daly had a few short months previously launched a campaign on the Garda Siochana rescinding penalty points for the great and the good.

Oh no.

Definitely not.

Boulevardier

I'm finding it odd that small-party and independent TDs are having all the trouble with the law. So far we have had Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Ming and now Boyd-Barrett.

We have no TDs at all from the main parties being hauled up by the police or courts in this way.

Are the small-party TDs less law abiding than the big party ones, or could there be something else going on?

mikehammer67

Clare Daly

you mean the DD thing ?

i thought she was the victim there

mikehammer67

Boulevardier wrote: »

I'm finding it odd that small-party and independent TDs are having all the trouble with the law. So far we have had Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Ming and now Boyd-Barrett.

We have no TDs at all from the main parties being hauled up by the police or courts in this way.

Are the small-party TDs less law abiding than the big party ones, or could there be something else going on?

and you've never heard of FF?

a rather large party and have a lot of trouble with laws and ethics

Cody Pomeray

Boulevardier wrote: »

I'm finding it odd that small-party and independent TDs are having all the trouble with the law. So far we have had Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Ming and now Boyd-Barrett.

Claire Daly did not have trouble with the law.

It's actually something of an occupational hazard, it just doesn't grab media headlines when it happens to others
http://beta.newstalk.ie/tds-more-likely-to-have-penalty-points

G Power

TINA1984 wrote: »

What a misleading OP. Barrett got fined so its not like he got away with it as you insinuate.

Likewise I wouldn't consider Ming to be left wing, and Daly was stitiched up by the Gardai Siochana, so one wonders why you're trying to draw a connection between 'left wing' TDs and traffic offences.

so in your opinion it was only Daly that was setup for the fall is it? it's not only garda in marked cars that can sieze the opportunity to have something over ya or try screw ya

mikehammer67

G Power wrote: »

so in your opinion it was only Daly that was setup for the fall is it? it's not only garda in marked cars that can sieze the opportunity to have something over ya or try screw ya

this forum is not AFTER HOURS in case you didn't know

G Power

Boulevardier wrote: »

I'm finding it odd that small-party and independent TDs are having all the trouble with the law. So far we have had Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Ming and now Boyd-Barrett.

We have no TDs at all from the main parties being hauled up by the police or courts in this way.

Are the small-party TDs less law abiding than the big party ones, or could there be something else going on?

it's highly suspicious alright, NOT!! anybody with half a brain can see what's happening here ffs!! there is an agenda goin on and the people still sit back hoping the same people running this agenda now decide someday to look after the people instead of their crony friends and associates

G Power

mikehammer67 wrote: »

this forum is not AFTER HOURS in case you didn't know

what exactly do you mean by that?

VinLieger

Boulevardier wrote: »

I'm finding it odd that small-party and independent TDs are having all the trouble with the law. So far we have had Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Ming and now Boyd-Barrett.

We have no TDs at all from the main parties being hauled up by the police or courts in this way.

Are the small-party TDs less law abiding than the big party ones, or could there be something else going on?

Think you meant to post here..... http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=576

bmaxi

Sully wrote: »

Here you go darling



http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/td-spared-conviction-despite-admitting-second-speeding-offence-593779.html



Stitched up? Did she or did she not perform an illegal U-Turn? Did she or did she not drive with alcohol on her, even if she was under the limit? Did she or did she not attract the attention of the Gardai due to her driving?

To be fair, at the best of times Gardai are less than attentive to such infringements of the rules of the road , otherwise most of the taxi drivers in Dublin would be off the road by now. I suspect Daly's interest in the quashing of penalty points for senior figures in the establishment just might have had a bearing on it, too coincidental for my liking

Padraig Mor

LOL, first Daly scrapes under the drink drive limit after a series of what could uncharitably be referred to as delaying tactics. Now, RBB pulls the ol' "didn't get the notice" routine used by chancers in the district courts up and down the country every day to 'get off' traffic offences. The left wing high horse is looking pretty hobbled these days......

zl1whqvjs75cdy

There was a friend of mine caught speeding in the Kildare area. He knew he was done and was waiting for the fine. No sign of it for months. A court summons then arrives for non payment of the speeding fine. He goes to court and pleads his case. The judge, who is known around here for being draconian, slaps him with 4 penalty points (fair enough) and a 1000 euro fine! Outrageous that "normal" citizens can be treated like this and yet Richie can walk away with nothing,

Cody Pomeray

Odin Proud Loft wrote: »

There was a friend of mine caught speeding in the Kildare area. He knew he was done and was waiting for the fine. No sign of it for months. A court summons then arrives for non payment of the speeding fine. He goes to court and pleads his case. The judge, who is known around here for being draconian, slaps him with 4 penalty points (fair enough) and a 1000 euro fine! Outrageous that "normal" citizens can be treated like this and yet Richie can walk away with nothing,

Sounds like what you're complaining about is an uneven enforcement by district court judges. Some people get off, some people don't

Not sure how much things have changed, but:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/the-great-escape-25972704.html

Only one-in-seven of those who did not pay initially ultimately paid a fine or had four penalty points attached to their licence.

Sully

TINA1984 wrote: »

Oops mea cupla.

However i'm still not seeing the issue here, Barrett didn't try to deny his culpability.

No ''I was on my way to a Dail meeting" or "I'll have you transferred to another station Garda down the country", Y'know the kind of excuses the politicians from gombeen parties like to use when caught?

No, he used a different 'get out of jail free card' with the "Oh I didn't get the notice, it went to an old address!". Surely Barrett remembered he was pulled over and a fine was on-route? Surely he noticed he gave an old address and should immediately have tried to get the notice re-sent to his correct address?

An iilegal U-turn you say? outrageous!!?!! off with her head!

Of course the story being leaked early to the press literally minutes after it happened, with the insinuation that Daly was going to be done for drink driving, had nothing to do with the fact that Daly had a few short months previously launched a campaign on the Garda Siochana rescinding penalty points for the great and the good.

Oh no.

Definitely not.

Minor or significant, she was hardly 'stitched up'. She was caught breaking road traffic laws and wouldn't give a breath sample on site for the Gardai to clear her there and then, so she was brought back to the station for further testing to see if she was over the limit. She wasn't, but she wasn't 'Zero' either and she fully admitted drink driving (driving with drink, and again, I stress she was below the limit and I am not suggesting otherwise).

Now the way she accuses the Gardai of handling her and the way it was leaked out to the press so soon, is something I can't condone of course. But when you make enemies, I guess they come down on you like a ton of bricks and if this was any other TD on government level she would likely have berated them.

TINA1984

Sully wrote: »

No, he used a different 'get out of jail free card' with the "Oh I didn't get the notice, it went to an old address!". Surely Barrett remembered he was pulled over and a fine was on-route? Surely he noticed he gave an old address and should immediately have tried to get the notice re-sent to his correct address?

Of course, dodging the law on motoring offences isn't just a 'left wing' thing as you might imply....

A FINE Gael councillor who sped away from a Garda checkpoint before abandoning his car and hiding in a bush behind a churchyard was convicted of drink driving.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/fine-gael-councillor-who-sped-away-from-garda-checkpoint-convicted-of-drink-driving-29133456.html

And a few more links to concentrate the mind....

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055012967

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/youll-get-nothing-when-were-in-power-fine-gael-td-tells-garda-26682045.html

No doubt If I dig through your posting history Sully I'll find a thread decrying 'right wing' TDs who are in the spotlight an ''awful'' lot lately, right Sully? Its not like you're just trying to score cheap shots against your political rivals is it?...

Sully wrote: »

Now the way she accuses the Gardai of handling her and the way it was leaked out to the press so soon, is something I can't condone of course. But when you make enemies, I guess they come down on you like a ton of bricks and if this was any other TD on government level she would likely have berated them.

So its ok then for the Gardai Siochana to consider Clare Daly an "enemy" is it? Just because she had the temerity to stand up to the GS's penchant for letting off the great and the good from trivial motoring offences? Here was me thinking the GS should be fair and impartial in their dealings with the general public...

strandroad

Sully wrote: »

Minor or significant, she was hardly 'stitched up'. She was caught breaking road traffic laws and wouldn't give a breath sample on site for the Gardai to clear her there and then, so she was brought back to the station for further testing to see if she was over the limit. She wasn't, but she wasn't 'Zero' either and she fully admitted drink

AFAIK she did give a sample on the side of the road but the equipment did not register the reading and so she was taken to the station. I don't think it was ever stated why the equipment did not work. In the light of what happened later one could always speculate whether it was in anyone's interest to bring her to the station as opposed to an immediate reading on the side of the road.

Cody Pomeray

Sully wrote: »

But when you make enemies, I guess they come down on you like a ton of bricks

Except, this is a police force charged with an even application of the law and its processes, fairly and without prejudice.

mikehammer67

mhge wrote: »

AFAIK she did give a sample on the side of the road but the equipment did not register the reading and so she was taken to the station. I don't think it was ever stated why the equipment did not work. In the light of what happened later one could always speculate whether it was in anyone's interest to bring her to the station as opposed to an immediate reading on the side of the road.

what would she gain refusing to do the breath test?

she's gonna be brought to station and doctor called for sample-prob in double quick time?

Padraig Mor

No one ever said the breathalyser didn't work. It was Daly herself (hardly an unbiased source) who said it didn't register a reading, implying it was broken, but even she didn't actually state that it was. By far the most common reason for not registering a reading is that the person hasn't blown into it enough, usually deliberately.

mikehammer67 wrote: »

what would she gain refusing to do the breath test?

she's gonna be brought to station and doctor called for sample-prob in double quick time?

It can be hours before a doctor gets there so people who know or suspect they are over the limit sometimes pretend they cannot blow a breath sample in the hope they will drop below the limit by the time a doctor gets to the station.

It has never been established how long elapsed between Daly being stopped and her urine sample being taken. I have also seen no mention of whether she have/didn't give a breath sample on the 'proper' breathalyser at the station, which would be standard practice.

Sully

TINA1984 wrote: »

Of course, dodging the law on motoring offences isn't just a 'left wing' thing as you might imply....


http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/fine-gael-councillor-who-sped-away-from-garda-checkpoint-convicted-of-drink-driving-29133456.html

And a few more links to concentrate the mind....

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055012967

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/youll-get-nothing-when-were-in-power-fine-gael-td-tells-garda-26682045.html

This is the second time you have missed a line when reading text online, which is a bit disappointing. I suggest you take another look at my original post as I clearly stated that it was only recently I was referring to and not in general. I think we can all point to examples of other TDs stepping into hot water with the Gardai.

No doubt If I dig through your posting history Sully I'll find a thread decrying 'right wing' TDs who are in the spotlight an ''awful'' lot lately, right Sully? Its not like you're just trying to score cheap shots against your political rivals is it?...

Can't say I can recall any string of right wing TDs being in the spotlight due to a Garda investigation in the space of a few months since I took active interest in politics. So no, its likely you wont find such posts. As for them being my 'political rivals' - I don't see any of the named TDs as a threat. There effectively Independents that are pretty much guaranteed a seat in the Dail regardless.

[quite]So its ok then for the Gardai Siochana to consider Clare Daly an "enemy" is it? Just because she had the temerity to stand up to the GS's penchant for letting off the great and the good from trivial motoring offences? Here was me thinking the GS should be fair and impartial in their dealings with the general public...[/QUOTE]

My my, you probably need to head over to Specsavers because your after missing out on another part of my post. Selective eyesight or should we be genuinely concerned for your sight? Because, if you read my post, you will see that I said their behaviour was something I couldn't condone.

Though, it does smack of her being completely hypocritical considering she wanted to release the name of people who had penalty points 'wiped' on appeal to their local Super. Its okay she releases their names, but not when it comes to her breaking the law and being at 45 milligrammes of a legal limit of 67 milligrammes plus the U-Turn.

mhge wrote: »

AFAIK she did give a sample on the side of the road but the equipment did not register the reading and so she was taken to the station. I don't think it was ever stated why the equipment did not work. In the light of what happened later one could always speculate whether it was in anyone's interest to bring her to the station as opposed to an immediate reading on the side of the road.

Think there was a mix of reports at the time about whether she did or didn't, and her statement was contradicted by the media at the time.

Cody Pomeray

Padraig Mor wrote: »

No one ever said the breathalyser didn't work. It was Daly herself (hardly an unbiased source) who said it didn't register a reading

The Gardaí can't make a statement on the details Claire Daly's case, so your position is about as valuable as any other attempt to prove a negative: a complete waste of time.

mikehammer67

Padraig Mor wrote: »

No one ever said the breathalyser didn't work. It was Daly herself (hardly an unbiased source) who said it didn't register a reading, implying it was broken, but even she didn't actually state that it was. By far the most common reason for not registering a reading is that the person hasn't blown into it enough, usually deliberately.



It can be hours before a doctor gets there so people who know or suspect they are over the limit sometimes pretend they cannot blow a breath sample in the hope they will drop below the limit by the time a doctor gets to the station.

It has never been established how long elapsed between Daly being stopped and her urine sample being taken. I have also seen no mention of whether she have/didn't give a breath sample on the 'proper' breathalyser at the station, which would be standard practice.

but what difference does it make?

if you fail breathalzyzer or don't blow

you get brought to station for doctor

TINA1984

Sully wrote: »

This is the second time you have missed a line when reading text online, which is a bit disappointing. I suggest you take another look at my original post as I clearly stated that it was only recently I was referring to and not in general. I think we can all point to examples of other TDs stepping into hot water with the Gardai.

Well thats convenient then, let's see if we've got this straight; we can talk about politicians from other parties and their scrapes with the law because they happened recently, but we can't talk about politicians from your party and their scrapes because they happened not as recently? Even though the first post I linked to was dated March 15th 2013?

Sully wrote: »

Can't say I can recall any string of right wing TDs being in the spotlight due to a Garda investigation in the space of a few months since I took active interest in politics. So no, its likely you wont find such posts. As for them being my 'political rivals' - I don't see any of the named TDs as a threat. There effectively Independents that are pretty much guaranteed a seat in the Dail regardless.

I like how you're drawing a veil over your parties numerous scandals involving its elected members - both recent and not so recent - by mentioning you're only politicall active for a few months.

That must make it ok so for you to draw attention to other parties politicians scrape's with the law whilst ignoring your parties own bad eggs as it suits.

Sully wrote: »

My my, you probably need to head over to Specsavers because your after missing out on another part of my post. Selective eyesight or should we be genuinely concerned for your sight? Because, if you read my post, you will see that I said their behaviour was something I couldn't condone.

Though, it does smack of her being completely hypocritical considering she wanted to release the name of people who had penalty points 'wiped' on appeal to their local Super. Its okay she releases their names, but not when it comes to her breaking the law and being at 45 milligrammes of a legal limit of 67 milligrammes plus the U-Turn.

So just to clarify then, you think its acceptable and condone the Gardai Siochana for selectively leaking information, in the hope of discrediting an "enemy" as you put it? By the way you're making it out in the quote, you're implying that she got whats coming to her?

Sully

TINA1984 wrote: »

Well thats convenient then, let's see if we've got this straight; we can talk about politicians from other parties and their scrapes with the law because they happened recently, but we can't talk about politicians from your party and their scrapes because they happened not as recently? Even though the first post I linked to was dated March 15th 2013?

This smacks awfully like you trying to deflect attention away from Richie and stand behind him like he did nothing wrong. This topic is about Richie managing to ensure he got away without another conviction and not any other TD. That's why I created it as it was 'in the news' and a worthy political discussion at this time. The other links have TDs who didn't use a 'get out of jail free' card and were 'in the line of fire' and is older news.

I like how you're drawing a veil over your parties numerous scandals involving its elected members - both recent and not so recent - by mentioning you're only politicall active for a few months.

Seriously time you went to specsavers, I never gave a timeframe.

That must make it ok so for you to draw attention to other parties politicians scrape's with the law whilst ignoring your parties own bad eggs as it suits.

I'm not ignoring my own parties 'bad eggs' and I have in the past (and as recent as a few hours ago) discussed such both on a local scale (Waterford has its bad eggs to) and on forums such as Boards. This isn't about them though, because they weren't in the media yesterday for wriggling their way out of a conviction. This topic is about Richie doing so.

Your trying to deflect attention from Barret by accusing me of such and linking articles of other TDs from other parties who actually got their knuckles wrapped. Your accusations are without foundation, but you must do something to deflect and I understand that.

So just to clarify then, you think its acceptable and condone the Gardai Siochana for selectively leaking information, in the hope of discrediting an "enemy" as you put it? By the way you're making it out in the quote, you're implying that she got whats coming to her?

Again, I suggest you reread my posts.

TINA1984

Sully wrote: »

This smacks awfully like you trying to deflect attention away from Richie and stand behind him like he did nothing wrong. This topic is about Richie managing to ensure he got away without another conviction and not any other TD. That's why I created it as it was 'in the news' and a worthy political discussion at this time. The other links have TDs who didn't use a 'get out of jail free' card and were 'in the line of fire' and is older news.

But how did RBB "get away with it" exactly? What exactly was his "get out of jail free card"? It seems to me from reading the article he went to court and I'm sure would have been more then willing to pay any fine he received?

It was the judge who decided not to impose any kind of conviction, is it your contention that RBB has some kind of sway over this judge?

Sully wrote: »

Seriously time you went to specsavers, I never gave a timeframe.

Sully wrote: »

Can't say I can recall any string of right wing TDs being in the spotlight due to a Garda investigation in the space of a few months since I took active interest in politics.

How long exactly have you had an active interest in politics? Must be extremely recent, as in like the past few weeks if you haven't noted elected members fromyour own party and sister parties being investigated by the GS by the courts.

Sully wrote: »

I'm not ignoring my own parties 'bad eggs' and I have in the past (and as recent as a few hours ago) discussed such both on a local scale (Waterford has its bad eggs to) and on forums such as Boards. This isn't about them though, because they weren't in the media yesterday for wriggling their way out of a conviction. This topic is about Richie doing so.

So tell me then which is worse? A Politician from your party driving away from a Garda Checkpoint under the influence and eventually been caught, or RBB getting to court and facing justice after a clerical error?

Sully wrote: »

Your trying to deflect attention from Barret by accusing me of such and linking articles of other TDs from other parties who actually got their knuckles wrapped. Your accusations are without foundation, but you must do something to deflect and I understand that.

Care to provide links to threads you've started about members of your own party being in trouble with the Garda Siochana?

Sully wrote: »

Again, I suggest you reread my posts.

Yes I've read your posts and they basically go like this....

Yes the Garda Siochana were wrong to leak info but Clare Daly had it coming to her, that'll show her for daring to highlight an issue of national importance. She deserved it.

Yes the Garda Siochana were wrong to leak info but Clare Daly committed the heinous crime of making an illegal U-turn. She had it coming to her.

Yes the Garda Siochana were wrong to leak info but Clare Daly had drink taken and contrived to delay proceedings. She deserved it.

So forgive me if I take your hollow sounding condemnations of the GS with a pinch of salt.

Scofflaw

Sully and TINA1984, there's no point in reporting each other simply because you disagree. Both of you are currently just within the borders of toleration in terms of incivility, so I would suggest taking it down a notch rather than up. Otherwise, please carry on and thrash out your political differences by discussion. It's what the forum's for.

moderately,
Scofflaw

expectationlost

don't understand how he avoided getting penalty points?

Sully

expectationlost wrote: »

don't understand how he avoided getting penalty points?

He didn't receive a fixed penalty notice because the address he gave the Guard was out of date. As a result, it was thrown out by the judge. Common enough.

hatrickpatrick

Sully wrote: »

Did she or did she not drive with alcohol on her, even if she was under the limit?

So what if she did? If she wasn't over the limit, she wasn't over the limit.

Sully

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

So what if she did? If she wasn't over the limit, she wasn't over the limit.

As we are regularly told, 'Never ever drink & drive'. It doesn't say 'Never ever drink & drive over the limit'.

Just because she didn't break the law and was under the limit, doesn't mean it was right to drink & drive in the first place. Its commonly suggested that one drink can impair someones driving.

But, its her own personal choice and the point I was making was that the Guards suspected she had alcohol taken, she failed to give an adequate sample on site for whatever reason and was brought back to the station for a nurse/doctor to attend and take a urine sample. She wasn't 'stitched up' - their suspicions were proven and the guards were correct in their actions up until the point they released the news to the media in what can only be described as their way of screwing her to the wall which cannot be condoned.

RATM

Sully wrote: »

As we are regularly told, 'Never ever drink & drive'. It doesn't say 'Never ever drink & drive over the limit'.

Just because she didn't break the law and was under the limit, doesn't mean it was right to drink & drive in the first place. Its commonly suggested that one drink can impair someones driving.

But, its her own personal choice and the point I was making was that the Guards suspected she had alcohol taken, she failed to give an adequate sample on site for whatever reason and was brought back to the station for a nurse/doctor to attend and take a urine sample. She wasn't 'stitched up' - their suspicions were proven and the guards were correct in their actions up until the point they released the news to the media in what can only be described as their way of screwing her to the wall which cannot be condoned.

Is it not the case though that the roadside test isn't actually the offical test that you would get convicted of drink driving on ? It's my understanding that the roadside test is to determine if you might be in or around or over the limit and it informs the Gardai decision on what to do next. But it is the test back at the station which is more accurate and is the one that is used in evidence to actually convict you. That's just my understanding of it, I might be wrong or things could have changed. But if they haven't then AFAIK regardless of the results of the roadside test the Gardai have to conduct another test in the station as the equipment based there is more accurate.

Also does a nurse/doctor have to be called out to give a urine sample ? Or is it only for blood alone ?

expectationlost

Sully wrote: »

He didn't receive a fixed penalty notice because the address he gave the Guard was out of date. As a result, it was thrown out by the judge. Common enough.

so why he get a fine?

coldcake

Boulevardier wrote: »

I'm finding it odd that small-party and independent TDs are having all the trouble with the law. So far we have had Mick Wallace, Clare Daly, Ming and now Boyd-Barrett.

We have no TDs at all from the main parties being hauled up by the police or courts in this way.

Are the small-party TDs less law abiding than the big party ones, or could there be something else going on?

Deputy Robert Troy

http://www.midlandsradio.fm/news/13penaltypoints-local-vcr-cw

Cody Pomeray

Sully wrote: »

She wasn't 'stitched up' - their suspicions were proven

You arrest an individual on suspicion of being over the defined alcohol limit - not on suspicion of having consumed any alcohol at all.

Their suspicions were not proven.

Sully

RATM wrote: »

Is it not the case though that the roadside test isn't actually the offical test that you would get convicted of drink driving on ? It's my understanding that the roadside test is to determine if you might be in or around or over the limit and it informs the Gardai decision on what to do next. But it is the test back at the station which is more accurate and is the one that is used in evidence to actually convict you. That's just my understanding of it, I might be wrong or things could have changed. But if they haven't then AFAIK regardless of the results of the roadside test the Gardai have to conduct another test in the station as the equipment based there is more accurate.

Also does a nurse/doctor have to be called out to give a urine sample ? Or is it only for blood alone ?

I believe the roadside test isn't that far off the mark and a very good indicator. But yeah, your bang on. You get brought back to blow into another machine usually, I think, or if you can't than its urine or blood are the next options IIRC.

Not sure if nurse/doctor has to attend for a urine sample. Probably not, but its not a big deal tbh as she was able to give some sort of proper sample for them to test back at the station seeing as she couldn't on the street.

expectationlost wrote: »

so why he get a fine?

He didn't.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

You arrest an individual on suspicion of being over the defined alcohol limit - not on suspicion of having consumed any alcohol at all.

Their suspicions were not proven.

Their suspicion she had alcohol was proven. Not that she was over the limit, you are correct.

expectationlost

Judge Leonard then proceeded to make her order and said: “€100 fine, three months to pay, one day in default of payment”.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/td-spared-conviction-despite-admitting-second-speeding-offence-593779.html

Sully

expectationlost wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/td-spared-conviction-despite-admitting-second-speeding-offence-593779.html

That was before he explained he never got the notice. You need to re-read the article in full as just after your quote..

The outspoken politician, who represented himself, then told Judge Leonard: “I am fully accepting responsibility” but then added: “I did not get the original fixed penalty notice”.

As the opening line in the article says;

People Before Profit TD Richard Boyd Barrett was spared a conviction, fine and penalty points today despite admitting a speeding offence and giving a garda an out-of-date address.

and finishes up..

“In those circumstances, I will strike it out,” Judge Leonard said as she decided to change her order and throw out the case.

hatrickpatrick

Sully wrote: »

As we are regularly told, 'Never ever drink & drive'. It doesn't say 'Never ever drink & drive over the limit'.

Just because she didn't break the law and was under the limit, doesn't mean it was right to drink & drive in the first place. Its commonly suggested that one drink can impair someones driving.

It's not a good idea, but it's not illegal and not something to judge somebody for. If you're not over the limit you're not doing anything wrong; if you think otherwise then the limit should be lowered. As it stands, she did absolutely nothing wrong.

hatrickpatrick

Sully wrote: »

Their suspicion she had alcohol was proven. Not that she was over the limit, you are correct.

Then she did nothing wrong. The Gardai can't punish you for something that isn't against the law even if people's personal opinion doesn't like you doing it.

mikehammer67

Sully wrote: »

As we are regularly told, 'Never ever drink & drive'. It doesn't say 'Never ever drink & drive over the limit'.

Just because she didn't break the law and was under the limit, doesn't mean it was right to drink & drive in the first place. Its commonly suggested that one drink can impair someones driving.

But, its her own personal choice and the point I was making was that the Guards suspected she had alcohol taken, she failed to give an adequate sample on site for whatever reason and was brought back to the station for a nurse/doctor to attend and take a urine sample. She wasn't 'stitched up' - their suspicions were proven and the guards were correct in their actions up until the point they released the news to the media in what can only be described as their way of screwing her to the wall which cannot be condoned.

dunno about all that

i thought the never never drink thing was designed to simplify the issue
as the limit is so low

dunno if it means it's wrong to have a glass of beer

bmaxi

Sully wrote: »

But, its her own personal choice and the point I was making was that the Guards suspected she had alcohol taken, she failed to give an adequate sample on site for whatever reason and was brought back to the station for a nurse/doctor to attend and take a urine sample. She wasn't 'stitched up' - their suspicions were proven and the guards were correct in their actions up until the point they released the news to the media in what can only be described as their way of screwing her to the wall which cannot be condoned.

Did she not say she had taken a hot whiskey because she had a flu or cold?
Maybe she wasn't capable of sustaining the breath for long enough. I've been breathalysed and they do ask you to blow for quite a long time, I found it difficult and I neither smoke nor drink.
I think you're clutching at straws in your attempts to justify this.

Cody Pomeray

Sully wrote: »

Their suspicion she had alcohol was proven. Not that she was over the limit, you are correct.

Their suspicion that she had any alcohol taken below the legal limit is utterly irrelevant.

Gardaí can suspect lots of inadvisable, immoral or unwise behaviours. It's their job to keep it to themselves; all that matters when they are at work is a suspicion of an offence having been committed.

In this case, Gardaí clearly suspected an offence had been committed relating to drink driving.
The Gardaí were wrong in that suspicion.

newsunglasses

He gets his conviction overturned because he gave an out of date address,is that not being evasive?

I never liked that richie boyd barret,i dont believe he even believes what he says,that and that pink shirt ''independant'' tax evader,who raided public funds..


They should be thrown out of the dail on their ear,nothing irritates me more than seeing them two..

zimmermania

Sully wrote: »

He didn't receive a fixed penalty notice because the address he gave the Guard was out of date. As a result, it was thrown out by the judge. Common enough.

How can an address be out of date? did he give a wrong address? One would imagine that a td would have mail re-directed if he moved house as it is certain they would receive a lot of mail.Sounds a bit fishy to me.

Sully

zimmermania wrote: »

How can an address be out of date? did he give a wrong address? One would imagine that a td would have mail re-directed if he moved house as it is certain they would receive a lot of mail.Sounds a bit fishy to me.

He moved.

HeidiHeidi

What I don't get is..... if the fine notice didn't get to him (as he'd inadvertently given a previous address - highly suspect IMO, but how and ever) then how did the summons get delivered?