Anglo Tapes

Godge

NORTH1 wrote: »

We are going around in circles here.

Do we agree something illegal was committed?
If so, someone either government or company must be held responsible.

The fact that senior civil servants can be seen trying to cover up information, can only be a bad sign.

What illegality?

The Government did nothing illegal - just something really stupid and short-sighted, a typical FF stroke attempt that went disastorously wrong.

Anglo, in attempting to desperately save itself, played up to the reality that Cowen, Lenihan and the boys (including McWilliams the adviser) didn't have a clue. Nobody has yet to find anything concretely illegal that they did other than the occasional speculation on blogs and internet boards that this or that law might have been broken.

Illegality and political incompetence are not the same thing.

Bits_n_Bobs

It was financial not political incompetence.

By coincidence we have a whole department called 'The Department of Finance'.

I'm pretty sure Colm McCarthy speculated that if the Dept of Finance opened it's records to scrutiny we would know exactly what was known on the night of the guarantee, and how and why decisions were reached.

The continuing deafening silence from the dept and collusion in this silence by Fine Gael is paradoxically a damning incitement of political incompetence.

Cody Pomeray

Godge wrote: »

Anglo, in attempting to desperately save itself, played up to the reality that Cowen, Lenihan and the boys (including McWilliams the adviser) didn't have a clue. Nobody has yet to find anything concretely illegal that they did other than the occasional speculation on blogs and internet boards that this or that law might have been broken.

...says the internet poster, on a message board, denying illegality.

It is impossible for anyone here to make some definitive pronouncement on whether or not an offence was committed by Anglo executives. However, as has been set out at length in this thread, there are substantial grounds for indicating that this may be the case.

Presumably, an ongoing Garda investigation is itself an indication of the the possibility of criminal charges.

donegal_road

the Anglo board of directors took billions of Euro from the Central Bank on the pretense that it was a loan, while behind closed doors conspiring never to pay it back.

Sounds illegal to me

Worztron

The Anglo Irish Tapes - Quotes:
http://thejournal.ie/the-anglo-tapes-9-jaw-dropping-quotes-from-before-the-bailout-964097-Jun2013/
http://thejournal.ie/the-anglo-tapes-drumm-moolah-968476-Jun2013/

foxcoverteddy

Perhaps a stupid post but please tell me what we are achieving, the posts are in the main brilliant and well thought out, but we need some sort of action to go much further, so far it is words and more words.
For a start the then financial regulator should be locked up and his pension revoked, equally Cowan seems to be getting away with any comments on his conduct.
The fact that there are unanswered questions can really not be tolerated much longer.
Also the fact that someone can apply for bankruptcy in another jurisdiction should and must be addressed, if you are a debtor in this country surely Irish law must prevail.
Would appreciate some clarification to what happens next.

Cody Pomeray

Interesting cover on Village magazine at the moment.

It's an open letter to the DPP indicating that if the DPP doesn't prosecute some of the most vilified individuals in Irish society, Village will itself launch the (criminal) proceedings, which of course any private person has the capacity to do.

Of course the proceedings might not get anywhere, but it's a welcome criticism (public shaming?) of a long tradition of Irish prosecutorial lethargy.

Dan_Solo

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

It's an open letter to the DPP indicating that if the DPP doesn't prosecute some of the most vilified individuals in Irish society, Village will itself launch the (criminal) proceedings, which of course any private person has the capacity to do.

Could they prosecute the useless DPP while they're at it for criminal negligence?

Cody Pomeray

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Could they prosecute the useless DPP while they're at it for criminal negligence?

As things are, the DPP has more court actions taken against her office than any other public body (she is beaten only by the Minister for Justice).

However, these actions relate to reviewing procedures undertaken by the DPP. The DPP is immune from liability in tort - more clearly, the public have no right to sue the DPP for work done (or not done) in good faith.

This is a form of 'immunity' called the 'public policy exception'. It's common internationally... however reassuring that is...

In any case, Village do not intend to institute proceedings against the DPP. Only the named 'baddies'. You could do this yourself; it's a publicity stunt, but as publicity stunts go, it's a worthwhile one.

Worztron

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/anglo-executive-given-immunity-deal-by-the-dpp-1.1521627

:mad:

Worztron

Worztron wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/anglo-executive-given-immunity-deal-by-the-dpp-1.1521627

:mad:

I might be wrong, but isn't this a good thing? As galling as it might be to see someone who was presumably complicit in what was going on at the top in anglo given a get out of Jail free card, it's most likely in return for his co-operation in the investigation. We need an inside man on our side, even to point us to "where the bodies are buried" so that we know where to start digging.

Plus, the fact that the DPP is now doing deals (and would appear to be doing so in a fairly public fashion) is only going to encourage more people from the top who had some material knowledge of what was going on in anglo to break ranks to save their own skin. That's good, because getting to the truth of it all would be a lot harder if the banker's boy's club decided to stick together and stonewall the investigation as a single unit.

tayto lover

Maybe he threatened to spill the beans on some of our politicians and their financial dealings. He seems to have got a good deal and much better than some of the poor mortgage holders.

Worztron

Deleted User wrote: »

I might be wrong, but isn't this a good thing? As galling as it might be to see someone who was presumably complicit...

"presumably complicit" :rolleyes:

Listen back to the tapes.

Hootanany

Worztron wrote: »

"presumably complicit" :rolleyes:

Listen back to the tapes.

Which one?

Worztron

Hootanany wrote: »

Which one?

The top guys were all complicit, to think otherwise is extremely naive.

Cody Pomeray

Worztron wrote: »

The top guys were all complicit, to think otherwise is extremely naive.

What does that attempt to demonstrate?

_Kaiser_

tayto lover wrote: »

Maybe he threatened to spill the beans on some of our politicians and their financial dealings. He seems to have got a good deal and much better than some of the poor mortgage holders.

or....

Mr Moran helped set up meetings between Anglo and Fine Gael’s Enda Kenny, then leader of the opposition, in late 2008 to push the bank’s interests within political circles. This followed the introduction of the State bank guarantee as the financial crisis deepened the government’s involvement in the banking sector.

Note Enda's predicable response to this report:

Asked this afternoon how he interpreted the decision to grant immunity to Mr Moran, Taoiseach Enda Kenny said: “I can’t comment on a decision of the DPP. That office is entirely independent. They make their own decisions.”

And who appoints the DPP? Yep, the government - In fact one of her first actions (having been appointed late in 2011) then must have been to arrange this - from the IT article:

Matt Moran, Anglo’s chief financial officer when the bank was nationalised in 2009, received the immunity agreement from the Director of Public Prosecutions about two years ago.

Hmmm........

NORTH1

Nice work there Kaiser.

LostBoy101

I really have serious doubts that DPP is an independent body.

Godge

LostBoy101 wrote: »

I really have serious doubts that DPP is an independent body.

Based on what?

Your intuition?

LostBoy101

Godge wrote: »

Based on what?

Your intuition?

It's appointed by the government which means they may have influence in it's decisions behind closed doors.

oscarBravo

LostBoy101 wrote: »

It's appointed by the government which means they may have influence in it's decisions behind closed doors.

...and the alternative is...?

LostBoy101

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and the alternative is...?

Nothing sadly as we just have to play it as it is.

_Kaiser_

LostBoy101 wrote: »

Nothing sadly as we just have to play it as it is.

And therein lies the real problem with the Irish political system - the inability of the electorate to truly force change

"So vote for someone else in the next election" you say.. well that'd be grand, except:

- There's no real difference between the main 2 parties

- Smaller parties are there to act as mudguards for the big two (and are in fact frequently just FF/FG in disguise such as the PD's), ignored by the majority (such as SF or DDI) or comprised of a mashing of "Independents" (also mainly used FF/FG members or quality candidates like the Healy Rae's)

- As the current shower (and pretty much every Irish government has demonstrated), election promises and manifestos will be ignored or outright shredded as soon as they get into power

- Most TD's are there to make up the numbers thanks to the whip system and the centralisation of power around the cabinet table

- Accountability isn't something the Irish system (political, banking or otherwise) bothers itself about too much .. unless you're one of the "little people" in which case the full force of the law will be used to keep you in line

- Those TD's you do "pin down" at their constituency offices will just walk out if you're not there to heap praise upon them (as demonstrated in the mandate thread here). Letters, emails or phone calls go unanswered or passed between Departments with no real answers returned

- As a result, most of the Irish electorate is so jaded or apathetic that the status quo is maintained regardless of the outrages our "leaders" commit or which party has their turn at the wheel

Conclusion: The Irish flirtation with Independence/"Democracy" has been a utter failure and alternative options now need to be considered.

But because Paddy hates change (something to be feared and derided) and cherishes his fantasies of "reunification" such a thought will never be entertained. And so the cycle continues with those who have the opportunity (or no other choice) getting out of Dodge - and who can blame them really?

But sure such is (Irish) life I guess!

golfwallah

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

And therein lies the real problem with the Irish political system - the inability of the electorate to truly force change

"So vote for someone else in the next election" you say.. well that'd be grand, except:

- There's no real difference between the main 2 parties

........

But sure such is (Irish) life I guess!

I think, perhaps, your points about the Irish electorate apply a lot more broadly and not just to Ireland.

Winston Churchill summarised it quite succinctly: "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."

But then he also said that: “Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”.

Arguments about direct V representative democracy aside, I guess the most apt quote on politics / democracy, as we know them, can be attributed to Plato: “One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics, is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.”

Good loser

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

And therein lies the real problem with the Irish political system - the inability of the electorate to truly force change

"So vote for someone else in the next election" you say.. well that'd be grand, except:

- There's no real difference between the main 2 parties

- Smaller parties are there to act as mudguards for the big two (and are in fact frequently just FF/FG in disguise such as the PD's), ignored by the majority (such as SF or DDI) or comprised of a mashing of "Independents" (also mainly used FF/FG members or quality candidates like the Healy Rae's)

- As the current shower (and pretty much every Irish government has demonstrated), election promises and manifestos will be ignored or outright shredded as soon as they get into power

- Most TD's are there to make up the numbers thanks to the whip system and the centralisation of power around the cabinet table

- Accountability isn't something the Irish system (political, banking or otherwise) bothers itself about too much .. unless you're one of the "little people" in which case the full force of the law will be used to keep you in line

- Those TD's you do "pin down" at their constituency offices will just walk out if you're not there to heap praise upon them (as demonstrated in the mandate thread here). Letters, emails or phone calls go unanswered or passed between Departments with no real answers returned

- As a result, most of the Irish electorate is so jaded or apathetic that the status quo is maintained regardless of the outrages our "leaders" commit or which party has their turn at the wheel

Conclusion: The Irish flirtation with Independence/"Democracy" has been a utter failure and alternative options now need to be considered.

But because Paddy hates change (something to be feared and derided) and cherishes his fantasies of "reunification" such a thought will never be entertained. And so the cycle continues with those who have the opportunity (or no other choice) getting out of Dodge - and who can blame them really?

But sure such is (Irish) life I guess!

Re the sentence I've bolded this is what Sean Lemass said every government should do as soon as it acquires office.

Seems to me to be a lot more sensible than trying to implement all election promises.

Hootanany

Good loser wrote: »

Re the sentence I've bolded this is what Sean Lemass said every government should do as soon as it acquires office.

Seems to me to be a lot more sensible than trying to implement all election promises.

.com?

Worztron

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

What does that attempt to demonstrate?

That they are crooks.

More here: http://www.independent.ie/blog/new-anglo-tapes-listen-to-them-all-here-29580761.html

Cody Pomeray

Worztron wrote: »

That they are crooks.

More here: http://www.independent.ie/blog/new-anglo-tapes-listen-to-them-all-here-29580761.html

I've listened to all the tapes, I'm asking about the one with Matt Moran. The context were that people were being outraged by his immunity from prosecution, but it isn't clear what people think he's done wrong.

I am not on the side of those who insist there was no criminality at Anglo. I think there is strong basis for suspicion of criminality. However I just want to know why people are outraged at this guy Matt Moran's immunity. What exactly do we think he did?

NORTH1

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I've listened to all the tapes, I'm asking about the one with Matt Moran. The context were that people were being outraged by his immunity from prosecution, but it isn't clear what people think he's done wrong.

I am not on the side of those who insist there was no criminality at Anglo. I think there is strong basis for suspicion of criminality. However I just want to know why people are outraged at this guy Matt Moran's immunity. What exactly do we think he did?

The fact that he needs immunity could be a clue to crimes committed and a fact that someone has evidence that criminality as occurred. Don't you think?

Cody Pomeray

NORTH1 wrote: »

The fact that he needs immunity could be a clue to crimes committed and a fact that someone has evidence that criminality as occurred. Don't you think?

No, immunity is not synonymous with guilt. For example, if you hire a Barrister and he does a really awful job, you can't sue him for negligence, he is immune. You can't sue a Garda for not solving a crime. Why do these immunities exist? Because these professionals are required to act fearlessly in the public interest.

I see no reason to believe Matt Moran is a criminal. However, he should be able to honestly and fearlessly discharge his duties as a witness without being subject to some possibly populist, possibly even obscure criminal liability for a regulatory offence he may have had no intention to commit.

Possibly the biggest danger with fraud charges are the complexity of the charges and the duration of the corresponding trials. If the DPP can simplify the process by having clear testimony from a fairly benign insider, then thats good case management imo.

Gloomtastic!

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

No, immunity is not synonymous with guilt. For example, if you hire a Barrister and he does a really awful job, you can't sue him for negligence, he is immune. You can't sue a Garda for not solving a crime. Why do these immunities exist? Because these professionals are required to act fearlessly in the public interest.

I see no reason to believe Matt Moran is a criminal. However, he should be able to honestly and fearlessly discharge his duties as a witness without being subject to some possibly populist, possibly even obscure criminal liability for a regulatory offence he may have had no intention to commit.

Possibly the biggest danger with fraud charges are the complexity of the charges and the duration of the corresponding trials. If the DPP can simplify the process by having clear testimony from a fairly benign insider, then thats good case management imo.

How many others have been issued with immunity?

tayto lover

LostBoy101 wrote: »

I really have serious doubts that DPP is an independent body.

All the important people like those high up in DPP's office, Garda Commissioners, Judges etc are Government appointees so are at their beck and call. "Never bite the hand that feeds you" kind of thing.

LostBoy101

tayto lover wrote: »

All the important people like those high up in DPP's office, Garda Commissioners, Judges etc are Government appointees so are at their beck and call. "Never bite the hand that feeds you" kind of thing.

Agree and I would put it like "if you scratch my back I scratch yours"

NORTH1

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

No, immunity is not synonymous with guilt. For example, if you hire a Barrister and he does a really awful job, you can't sue him for negligence, he is immune. You can't sue a Garda for not solving a crime. Why do these immunities exist? Because these professionals are required to act fearlessly in the public interest.

Most people don't have criminal charges laid against them for doing a terrible job, we loose our jobs and don't get fat pensions.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I see no reason to believe Matt Moran is a criminal. However, he should be able to honestly and fearlessly discharge his duties as a witness without being subject to some possibly populist, possibly even obscure criminal liability for a regulatory offence he may have had no intention to commit.

Again getting treatment the rest of us normal people would not expect to get in this two tier system.

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Possibly the biggest danger with fraud charges are the complexity of the charges and the duration of the corresponding trials. If the DPP can simplify the process by having clear testimony from a fairly benign insider, then thats good case management imo.

And I see the biggest danger for the government is that someone may face fraud charges and bring up names in the government. Benign bring a fine geal insider? Just how I feel on it....

Cody Pomeray

The Central Bank has indicated that it will not be seeking that the contents of the Anglo Tapes (or those Anglo tapes that have been released) lead to a criminal investigation or prosecution, nor will the Bank commence any prosecution in relation to the tapes itself.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/financial-services/central-bank-says-no-new-criminal-issues-in-anglo-tapes-1.1538363

I await a few regular wagon jumpers who insist that they knew this all along, when in fact I don't see that anybody could have predicted this decision with certainty. It seems the bank have taken the decision in light of their contemporaneous and un-published correspondence with Anglo executives during the period of the recordings.

Does this, therefore, suggest that Anglo Irish Bank, as it was then, had - quite contrary to what is indicated on the tapes - been quite honest with the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator about Anglo's precarious financial position? That is a strong possibility. And if so, doesn't this raise serious questions about the Central Bank's policy with pushing ahead in upholding Anglo Irish Bank as a 'viable' institution, funded by taxpayers?

In short, if the Central Bank is happy it wasn't being codded, were the Central Bank doing the codding?

tayto lover

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The Central Bank has indicated that it will not be seeking that the contents of the Anglo Tapes (or those Anglo tapes that have been released) lead to a criminal investigation or prosecution, nor will the Bank commence any prosecution in relation to the tapes itself.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/financial-services/central-bank-says-no-new-criminal-issues-in-anglo-tapes-1.1538363

I await a few regular wagon jumpers who insist that they knew this all along, when in fact I don't see that anybody could have predicted this decision with certainty. It seems the bank have taken the decision in light of their contemporaneous and un-published correspondence with Anglo executives during the period of the recordings.

Does this, therefore, suggest that Anglo Irish Bank, as it was then, had - quite contrary to what is indicated on the tapes - been quite honest with the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator about Anglo's precarious financial position? That is a strong possibility. And if so, doesn't this raise serious questions about the Central Bank's policy with pushing ahead in upholding Anglo Irish Bank as a 'viable' institution, funded by taxpayers?

In short, if the Central Bank is happy it wasn't being codded, were the Central Bank doing the codding?

Well I always said that there was a cozy cartel at work.
The Banks looked after the politicians and the politicians looked after their banker friends in return. The Central Bank is just an off-shoot.
Too many political careers at stake.

Sand

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Does this, therefore, suggest that Anglo Irish Bank, as it was then, had - quite contrary to what is indicated on the tapes - been quite honest with the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator about Anglo's precarious financial position? That is a strong possibility.

Both a strong possibility and quite contrary to what is indicated on the tapes. I applaud your ability to hold a self contradicting view. Bravo.

Cody Pomeray

Sand wrote: »

Both a strong possibility and quite contrary to what is indicated on the tapes. I applaud your ability to hold a self contradicting view. Bravo.

The tapes seem to indicate that Anglo was being dishonest in its dealings with the Central Bank.

However, the Central Bank's decision not to institute proceedings nor refer the tapes to another prosecutor undermined this possibility; the CB's decision indicates that Anglo executives may not have been inducing nor conspiring to induce the Central Bank to act to act in a wrongful manner.

I don't see how this could have been any clearer. You're just not reading the sentence correctly.

Sand

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The tapes seem to indicate that Anglo was being dishonest in its dealings with the Central Bank.

However, the Central Bank's decision not to institute proceedings nor refer the tapes to another prosecutor undermined this possibility; the CB's decision indicates that Anglo executives may not have been inducing nor conspiring to induce the Central Bank to act to act in a wrongful manner.

I don't see how this could have been any clearer. You're just not reading the sentence correctly.

There is a another possibility - Anglo Irish could have been dishonest *and* the Central Bank could have chosen not to institute proceedings *because* they had been induced to act in a wrongful manner. Do you see how that might be embarrassing? To acknowledge that you made an error?

Mr.Micro

tayto lover wrote: »

Too many political careers at stake.

.... and all the careers at the central bank and dept of finance. An absolute scandal. The very people who are supposed to regulate, lol. Looks to me like regulation should start with the central bank, before it tries to regulate any body else.

Scofflaw

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The Central Bank has indicated that it will not be seeking that the contents of the Anglo Tapes (or those Anglo tapes that have been released) lead to a criminal investigation or prosecution, nor will the Bank commence any prosecution in relation to the tapes itself.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/financial-services/central-bank-says-no-new-criminal-issues-in-anglo-tapes-1.1538363

I await a few regular wagon jumpers who insist that they knew this all along, when in fact I don't see that anybody could have predicted this decision with certainty. It seems the bank have taken the decision in light of their contemporaneous and un-published correspondence with Anglo executives during the period of the recordings.

Does this, therefore, suggest that Anglo Irish Bank, as it was then, had - quite contrary to what is indicated on the tapes - been quite honest with the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator about Anglo's precarious financial position? That is a strong possibility. And if so, doesn't this raise serious questions about the Central Bank's policy with pushing ahead in upholding Anglo Irish Bank as a 'viable' institution, funded by taxpayers?

In short, if the Central Bank is happy it wasn't being codded, were the Central Bank doing the codding?

The article is actually somewhat unclear. What is definite is that the Central Bank say the tapes raise no new issues:

The Central Bank has said it will not take any further legal action arising from tapes released of conversations between former executives at Anglo Irish Bank.

In a statement, the Central Bank said the tapes raised concerns that Anglo may have deliberately misrepresented its financial position when it sought financial support from the Central Bank in 2008.

“The Central Bank has examined Anglo’s interaction with the Central Bank at the time in relation to this matter. No new issues have been identified that relate to suspected criminal offences having occurred and as a result, the Central Bank does not intend, and is not required, to make any further statutory reports of suspected criminal offences,” it said.

That doesn't explicitly state that the tapes don't cover issues where the Central Bank already felt there may have been dishonesty, although it does imply it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Cody Pomeray

Sand wrote: »

There is a another possibility - Anglo Irish could have been dishonest *and* the Central Bank could have chosen not to institute proceedings *because* they had been induced to act in a wrongful manner. Do you see how that might be embarrassing? To acknowledge that you made an error?

Eh, no, that is a possibility.

I say that the Cenral bank's position indicated that the Central Bank may not have been lied to. I described this as a strong possibility - which you have now misunderstood twice.

I am not saying that it is inevitable that the Central Bank knew that Anglo's position was as bad as the executives knew it to be, however it would be reasonable to now ask the question whether, in fact, Anglo executives ended up being quite honest about being up the creek.

You seem to assume this is letting someone off the hook, when in fact it asks serious questions of the Central Bank and the ECB. You are so determined to find errors that don't exist, or to come to your own certain, self-pleasing conclusions that you can't even read the thread properly.

Cody Pomeray

Scofflaw wrote: »

That doesn't explicitly state that the tapes don't cover issues where the Central Bank already felt there may have been dishonesty, although it does imply it.

Again I am not presenting this as a certainty, I have always said the Central Bank's position raises some fresh questions, and one of those questions must be whether Anglo was quite honest with the Central Bank about its position.

It is hard to imagine that the Central Bank is refusing to take any action where it was induced to lose money which it should not otherwise have lost, due to dishonesty, although it may be as simple as that.

However, the idea that the CB/FR knew the true scale of Anglo's problems before supporting it emerges as a stronger possibility than it was previously.

thebman

Patrick Honohan in the inquiry there saying when they talked about the tapes not containing any new criminal issues, they mean just the tapes the Sunday/Irish Independent released.

Saying that they haven't listened to any of the other tapes despite what the Sunday/Irish Independent released because basically they don't know how to listen to that much tape with the number of people they have and get anything useful out of the exercise.

Scofflaw

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Again I am not presenting this as a certainty, I have always said the Central Bank's position raises some fresh questions, and one of those questions must be whether Anglo was quite honest with the Central Bank about its position.

It is hard to imagine that the Central Bank is refusing to take any action where it was induced to lose money which it should not otherwise have lost, due to dishonesty, although it may be as simple as that.

However, the idea that the CB/FR knew the true scale of Anglo's problems before supporting it emerges as a stronger possibility than it was previously.

Sure - I think in general people want Anglo to have been dishonest, and I suspect they cannot imagine that the State would have supported Anglo unless Anglo had been dishonest.

For myself, I don't find the idea that the State could have supported Anglo even knowing the full extent of its problems (or at least as well as it knew them itself) at all unlikely. The Irish State, like other states, supports its larger banks.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hootanany

Cover up.

nesf

thebman wrote: »

Patrick Honohan in the inquiry there saying when they talked about the tapes not containing any new criminal issues, they mean just the tapes the Sunday/Irish Independent released.

Saying that they haven't listened to any of the other tapes despite what the Sunday/Irish Independent released because basically they don't know how to listen to that much tape with the number of people they have and get anything useful out of the exercise.

Shush now! Didn't you get the memo that the Central Bank specialises with investigating complex fraud cases? I mean, they're practically at the point of shutting down the whole white collar crime section of the Gardaí at this stage.

Godge

It is also possible, given the statement that

(1) Anglo lied
(2) The Central Bank didn't know about it at the time
(3) The Central Bank found out later either through the tapes or the obvious accounts of the bank
(4) While Anglo lied, there was no criminal behaviour on the part of Anglo
(5) While there might be a civil case, that would mean the Government suing itself as it is now the owner of Anglo
(6) The publication of the tapes raises no new issues as all of the above was known to the Central Bank.

Of course, that is a simple explanation, doesn't fit with the criminal conspiracy theory so won't fit the narrative of this thread.

thebman

nesf wrote: »

Shush now! Didn't you get the memo that the Central Bank specialises with investigating complex fraud cases? I mean, they're practically at the point of shutting down the whole white collar crime section of the Gardaí at this stage.

They should be investigating the tapes to ensure that the Central Bank itself behaved appropriately in all its dealings with the bank during this period.

Or is the Central Bank not responsible for the Central Bank?

I suppose you wouldn't expect Toyota to investigate an accident they thought might be caused by faulty brakes to see if they should do a recall either?

Or to see if they can improve their processes to ensure faulty brakes don't get produced with the same fault again?

Not in this country though, the whole message collectively from Politicians to the central bank to the media is lets get this property train going like the good old times, no changes required. Sure it only bankrupted the lower and middle class so no worries for them boys I suppose...