Salthill Incident

Eeden

I don't know who named him, but they shouldn't have put up the photo. I remember some years ago, a garage wanted to put up a photo of a shoplifter, I think they were advised by the Gardaí to take it down.

elefant

Eeden wrote: »

It hasn't been proven that he stole money. It hasn't been proven that he did anything. They basically decided to accuse him in public along with a photograph. That could be called defamation.

Well, only if it's false it would be.

dilallio

One of the business's had multiple posts with a still image in one post, a video of the guy in another, and another post remarking on how many views the previous post had (over 5000).

They also remarked that he drank in Salthill, and had a drink problem. In the comments, the man was named, and along with the usual 'hang the scum' comments typical of this type of post, a few comments were asking the page administrator to remove any comments naming him.
These were left up there, but at some stage last night or early this morning, all the posts were deleted.

Hindsight is a great thing. One other business owner alledged that the Gardai did not take her seriously when she complained and they told her that they had no other complaints. Within 2 days of the photos & videos going up, it was obvious that at least 5 other business had been scammed. The attention that this business has gotten from this incident and the previous one where the tip-jar was stolen (and culprit caught), rightly or wrongly will discourage others to scam them, and will raise their profile on facebook.

It's strange though that many businesses handed over 50 euro without calling the doctors surgery whose number they would have gotten from the receipt that the scammer had.

Well done to the gardai who managed to talk him down safely and to the fire crew who attended also.

Shady Tady

GastroBoy wrote: »

True. But whatever about the people who stopped to look, I thought the guy there with the large flash camera was disgusting (journalist perhaps??)
Surprised that the gaurds didnt put a stop to him. :mad:

He was probably passing on his way to photo illegally parked cars in salthill!!!!!

Laviski

griffin's bakery have a lot to answer for and legal action should be taken In light of the events.

posting photos and naming of the individual shouldn't be tolerated as it just caused incitement against the individual and casting prejudgment. Anyone remember the case of the student that apparently ran from a taxi? the person named was in Asia at the time. Needless to say the damage was done before it could have being stopped.

Guards should be called and let the prosecutions follow.

shame on griffin's bakery.

snubbleste

Thread should be closed imo

smalls90

Could all have been a ploy to get off the hook. This guy is a scam artist who got caught. No sympathy for him whatsoever.

Laviski

smalls90 wrote: »

Could all have been a ploy to get off the hook. This guy is a scam artist who got caught. No sympathy for him whatsoever.

again thats a matter for the guards and the affected establishments to take to court.

innocent until proven guilty. Although your mind is made up with thanks to the social media circus that the bakery generated. lynch mob mentality etc

shot2go

FouxDaFaFa wrote: »

Was it actually the business that named him or people in the comments?

All I saw was a cctv still of a man.

griffins bakery named him and his address, where he drinks and also that he had a drink problem.
If he did scam those businesses its a matter for the guards and courts not to be publicly named and shamed.

irishdude11

Imo this chancer probably couldn't believe his luck when he saw the business were posting about his scamming on the net...why settle for €50 when you can take them to the cleaners in court over posting his details.

Everyone thought he was a scumbag a few days ago...now he pulls some attention seeking stunt, that will guarantee him a nice pay day in court, and it's the businesses that he fleeced that are getting the grief...gimme a break.

WallyGUFC

Scum like this have to be named and shamed so businesses know what's coming. I'm sure Griffin's didn't completely fabricate the story. I'm also sure the other scammed businesses didn't either. This guy is clearly a scam artist, and yet his victims are made out as the evil ones. Christ above.

Redhairedguy

Guys. Ye're talking as if this is all common knowledge now. Do we have any links or official release stating that the man who ran the scam was the same one involved in the incident in Salthill? Down the pub, or around the water cooler type of confirmation is still tenuous at best.

Also, less of the scumbag comments, please. T'aint nice, and again, a family member could be reading this thread.

Laviski

Redhairedguy wrote: »

Guys. Ye're talking as if this is all common knowledge now. Do we have any links or official release stating that the man who ran the scam was the same one involved in the incident in Salthill? Down the pub, or around the water cooler type of confirmation is still tenuous at best.

Also, less of the scumbag comments, please. T'aint nice, and again, a family member could be reading this thread.

Well said!

JONJO THE MISER

Laviski wrote: »

griffin's bakery have a lot to answer for and legal action should be taken In light of the events.

posting photos and naming of the individual shouldn't be tolerated as it just caused incitement against the individual and casting prejudgment. Anyone remember the case of the student that apparently ran from a taxi? the person named was in Asia at the time. Needless to say the damage was done before it could have being stopped.

Guards should be called and let the prosecutions follow.

shame on griffin's bakery.

I hope there taking to the cleaners.

Das Kitty

Mob justice is no justice.

Chewabacca

Is it not more than likely that the man would never have been caught if it wasn't for social media? Other restaurants wouldn't have heard it was a scam if it wasn't for social media. The restaurants that believed him wouldn't have wanted people knowing that someone found glass in their food so nothing would have spread by word of mouth. In a few months if people found out that he had scammed so many people everyone would be going mad about how horrible this man is. Not to mention that most restaurants he scammed are probably struggling to stay open as it is.

Now that he was exposed and he had his outburst everyone's saying that it's awful. It wasn't the best way to handle it but if it hadn't been done he'd probably still be fleecing restaurants.

If you heard that someone was collecting for a fake charity and making hundreds and you were sure that releasing his pictures on facebook were the only way to catch him, would you really just let him get away with it incase he decides to do something silly? It's easy to criticise now, if it was your restaurant that had been fleeced it would be a different matter.

Mrs OBumble

WallyGUFC wrote: »

Scum like this have to be named and shamed so businesses know what's coming. I'm sure Griffin's didn't completely fabricate the story. I'm also sure the other scammed businesses didn't either. This guy is clearly a scam artist, and yet his victims are made out as the evil ones. Christ above.

I couldn't agree more.

And the court process is about:

1) Being certain that the accused did the stuff they are accused of doing,
2) Naming and shaming them for doing so, and
3) Applying whatever other penalties the law sees fit.


Naming-and-shaming without step 1 makes an mockery of the whole thing.

thesandeman

The shop owner did seem to go overboard with the Social Media/Publicity stuff recently.


I wonder if a certain couple of Kerry hotel owners have heard about this?

Unrealistic

Laviski wrote: »

griffin's bakery have a lot to answer for and legal action should be taken In light of the events.

What legally action do you think could possibly be taken in this case against Griffin's, on what basis and by whom?

irishdude11 wrote: »

now he pulls some attention seeking stunt, that will guarantee him a nice pay day in court

How exactly is he guaranteed a "nice pay day in court"? Who could he possibly sue and on what basis?

gordongekko

Unrealistic wrote: »

What legally action do you think could possibly be taken in this case against Griffin's, on what basis and by whom?

slander,defamation of character and data protection breaches to name 3 potential issues they might face. The man is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law not by the court of griffins fb page.

zarquon

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I couldn't agree more.

And the court process is about:

1) Being certain that the accused did the stuff they are accused of doing,
2) Naming and shaming them for doing so, and
3) Applying whatever other penalties the law sees fit.


Naming-and-shaming without step 1 makes an mockery of the whole thing.

Completely agree, but the point 1 is already verified by dozens of people. If a group of people witness someone stab someone to death in the street, is the stabber still completely innocent until the court finds him guilty? In legal terms the answer is yes, but in practical terms that argument is complete nonsense. I know griffins posted the information solely but other businesses then verified this. I know staff from one other cafe in particular (That i will not mention here) that verified they were scammed recently too and the person in question verified his name which was also revealed on griffins FB. This cafe did not pay up though and called the gardai as they didn't beleive him and he then did a runner after making various threats towards the staff.

I know the courts need to prove this also, but be under no illusion, they apologists that are supporting the perpretator in this case does not realise how wide spread this scam actually was.

While proper due course was not followed the point is that if his information was not revealed he would still be perpretating his scam across the city.

I know people are very critical of the mob mentality but there is a massive hypocrisy in Irish society. I don't see people crying out for innocence until proven guilty for banker, politicians, etc involved in corruption and scandal. So why is there a double standard that people with high social standing should be subject to the so called "trial by internet" but the working class man who perpetrates corruption on a smaller scale enjoys the support of the very same keyboard warriors.

The hypocracy in play actually sickens me more than the crime in question.

Welcome to Ireland where we bay for the blood of bankers and politicians but we fully standby and support lower class criminals and paint such criminals as victims!!!

Laviski

Don't drag other topics into this thread
the bankers that are in the media for the stunts they pulled of course everyone wants their blood. this was in 2008 and previously and not 1 person has being sentenced yet (2014 in case you don't realize what year is it now). we have heard the tapes and the information from the "mainstream" media has presented in newspapers. These guys are living the high life with money kept beyond the reach of being reclaimed of course a lot of people their blood as the the majority of ireland are suffering because of their actions and most of them have got away with it. Now enough about the bankers and lets the courts deal with the proceeding currently in progress.

This person here was prejudged and sentenced before even a guard could fill out the paperwork to press any charges if they were any. There is no mention of anything in the mainstream media what was posted on the bakery's website for the reasons already mentioned.

you sir are not comparing like for like basis, completely different situations and circumstances.

antoobrien

Laviski wrote: »

Don't drag other topics into this thread
the bankers that are in the media for the stunts they pulled of course everyone wants their blood. this was in 2008 and previously and not 1 person has being sentenced yet (2014 in case you don't realize what year is it now). we have heard the tapes and the information from the "mainstream" media has presented in newspapers.

....
This person here was prejudged and sentenced before even a guard could fill out the paperwork to press any charges if they were any. There is no mention of anything in the mainstream media what was posted on the bakery's website for the reasons already mentioned.

you sir are not comparing like for like basis, completely different situations and circumstances.

You realise that scale of the alleged crimes aside they are exactly the same situation - neither of them have been convicted of anything in a court of law but the court of public opinion has them both found guilty?

zarquon

antoobrien wrote: »

You realise that scale of the alleged crimes aside they are exactly the same situation - neither of them have been convicted of anything in a court of law but the court of public opinion has them both found guilty?

Spot on, except some hypocrits in the court of public opinion have judged the bankers and politicians to be guilty and these same hypocrits then speak out against those who have judged the individual in question to be guilty, in the same court of public opinion.

The crimes are on a much different scale to one another but the rationale is the very same and people are not being consistent. You either apply the innocent until proven guilty stance to everyone on all levels or you do not. People who pick and choose who to apply this rationale to are hypocrits of the highest order and cannot be taken seriously in any formal debate.

What is most disgusting here is the underlying tones of anti-establishmentism. Businesses perpetrate crimes against people and everyone wants blood which is fair enough but working class people perpetrate crimes against business and the anti-establishmentism cohort try to paint such a criminal as a victim and even more outrageously try to paint the businesses as the real criminals for having the audacity to identify the criminal.

So according to some buffoons it is a greater crime to identify a criminal that it is to commit the crime in question. Logic and reason are not a prominent part of the personnae of these individuals.

antoobrien

gordongekko wrote: »

slander,defamation of character and data protection breaches to name 3 potential issues they might face. The man is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law not by the court of griffins fb page.

Slander & defamation - wasn't there a complaint made to the the gardaí over this? If so and it's false it's wasting garda time and making false statements. Slander & defamation would be the least of their worries.

Data protection - don't make me laugh, there is no right to privacy for things that occur in public. If a person was to take their clothes off and run down shop street in the nip, they'd have no right not to be identified and couldn't exactly complain about the publication of any pictures/videos. So if the business wants to know who one is after one enters their premises, then the business has every right to find out the person is regardless of whether is taking the tip/charity jar or leaving a €50 note in it.

Laviski

Laviski wrote: »

This person here was prejudged and sentenced before even a guard could fill out the paperwork to press any charges if they were any. There is no mention of anything in the mainstream media what was posted on the bakery's website for the reasons already mentioned.

hate repeating myself but obviously you guys just read what you want to see.

until its printed in the media by all means continue your line of thought, at least they have some standards to go by than the mob mentality here. If Griffen's bakery believe there was nothing wrong what they did - why did they pull down the posts?

zarquon

antoobrien wrote: »

Slander & defamation - wasn't there a complaint made to the the gardaí over this? If so and it's false it's wasting garda time and making false statements. Slander & defamation would be the least of their worries.

.

Correct, it is slander and defamation only if the allegations are proven as untrue. As i have stated earlier i know staff from another unrelated cafe that reported the individual in question to the Gardai last week for the same scam. This was before everything that transpired on FB and twitter. I know griffins also reported it and i assume other businesses did too. So how can it be defamation and slander if multiple businesses and some with CCTV evidence report the same crime?

Unrealistic

gordongekko wrote: »

Unrealistic wrote: »

Laviski wrote: »

griffin's bakery have a lot to answer for and legal action should be taken In light of the events.

What legally action do you think could possibly be taken in this case against Griffin's, on what basis and by whom?

slander,defamation of character and data protection breaches to name 3 potential issues they might face. The man is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law not by the court of griffins fb page.

A) Slander isn't the issue here I believe. I'm pretty sure that publication in written form on a web page is libel rather than slander.
Defamation of character is a catch all description for libel and slander so those are not actually two separate issues. So we're down to 2 potential issues in total rather than 3.
C) That the information posted was 'the truth' is all the defence that is required in a libel case. If, using this case as an example, Griffin's were sued for libel and they brought in witnesses who confirmed the incdident did occur in their premises and similar incidents in other premises then they would have no case to answer. The suggestion that nothing can be published until a perpetrator is "proven guilty by a court of law" is completely off the mark. Presuming Griffins didn't post what they did unless they were very sure of their facts (and they deserve to be taken to the cleaners if they are wrong) then we are down to only 1 potential issue rather than 3.
D) Publishing the picture could be a data protection breach but it is a grey area as to whether Griffins would be responsible for information posted by others on their FB page. Either way any exposure would depend on the willingness of the Data Protection Commissioner to get involved.

Laviski

zarquon wrote: »

Correct, it is slander and defamation only if the allegations are proven as untrue. As i have stated earlier i know staff from another unrelated cafe that reported the individual in question to the Gardai last week for the same scam. This was before everything that transpired on FB and twitter. I know griffins also reported it and i assume other businesses did too. So how can it be defamation and slander if multiple businesses and some with CCTV evidence report the same crime?

and that is a matter for the gardai if the allegations are true.
naming him is one thing but posting his location and where he drinks is just not on. even before if any prosecutions can come before the courts. He's being treated like a pedophile. Like i said you don't know the circumstances.

zarquon

Exactly, it can only be libel if untrue. Regardless of whether griffin's have witnesses (i do not know this) there are other cafes that experienced this and have withnesses that i know of so at the end of the day there will be enough supporting evidence and witness testimony for a conviction and to have any potential libel case thrown out.

It's all hypothesis anyway as the person in question will not bring any libel case against anyone as there is enough testimony and witness evidence from various businesses that an innocent plea would be laughed out of court.

Laviski wrote: »

He's being treated like a pedophile. Like i said you don't know the circumstances.

Do you know the circumstances, because you are jumping on the bandwagon supporting the person in question as if you are very closely connected and fully aware of the circumstances.

I happen to know the circumstances because i know staff from another cafe who experienced this first hand and reported him to the gardai last week before griffins made this public knowledge.

If you do not know anyone directly involved with any of the businesses or the person who is "alleged" to have commited the crime then you don't know anything and are just provocating a baseless argument.