breaking: Gerry Adams Arrested in connection to McConville - MOD WARNING First Post

Maphisto

Seaneh wrote: »

If he chose to leave then they could have arrested him, and at least said it was because he was refusing to cooperate with proceedings and they wanted ask specific questions.

Well, to my knowledge, that is not a courtesy afforded to any other Joe Soap.

If they had have done it that way Police and Criminal Evidence Act provides that the person, at that point of arrest, then has to do all the usual custody stuff (property, Drugs, Medical, Legal Advice, etc.) you have disrupted the flow of the interview by 2+hours and for what good reason?

If they were going to interview him for 30 hours + in any case, he was bound to say Fvck it at some point in that time. Arresting him straight off the bat leeps them honest too.

maccored

Yamanoto wrote: »

When is a good time?

If they'd held off 'til after the Euro & Local elections, you'd then have had the DUP and creepy wee Jim Allister bleating on about the timing of big Gerry's arrest.

PSNI are damned if they do......

or they could have done it some time in the past 5 weeks. Let the DUP bleat. If it ends up the man is released without charge then the DUP will have nothing to complain about anyway.

bumper234

maccored wrote: »

they were incorrect to suspect me as a criminal, so even if Adams is a 'suspected criminal', what odds does that make? They can suspect all they want. Suspicions dont work in a court room though.

Yeah you're right, lets not arrest the suspected criminals lads lets just arrest innocent people for questioning :rolleyes:

maccored

Im sorry. Im just not seeing the relevance to this thread. Oh hang on ... you were being funny. My apologies!

alaimacerc wrote: »

Orwell wrote some excellent other stuff too, you know. Perhaps you might want to branch out a little in your literary references.

bumper234

crusher000 wrote: »

Apologies I'll type slowly and more clearly. PSNI have anti-terrorism laws at their disposals brought in during the troubles that are still in law to day and they can use to detain a person without a reasonable cause but if they suspect someone of a crime. this is a good enough reason to detain someone.

ps please read the above again before typing so you understand fully the point I am trying to make in regard to the point you made concerning the PSNI not being able to detain someone without a good reason.

Anti terrorism.laws? In a part of the country that is rife with terrorists....colour me surprised:eek:

maccored

they arrested him after he presented himself. Thats even worse as thats just sneaky. Dont have enough evidence to go out and arrest him - but since he's presented himself voluntarily then they can arrest him as he surely wont disagree - not after volunteering to be there.

bumper234 wrote: »

Yeah you're right, lets not arrest the suspected criminals lads lets just arrest innocent people for questioning :rolleyes:

Maphisto

maccored wrote: »

or they could have done it some time in the past 5 weeks. Let the DUP bleat. If it ends up the man is released without charge then the DUP will have nothing to complain about anyway.

Has Gerr presented himself to PSNI at other times then?

maccored

bumper234 wrote: »

Anti terrorism.laws? In a part of the country that is rife with terrorists....colour me surprised:eek:

another one liner that says nothing? ... colour me surprised:eek:

maccored

I dont know - I never asked him. Do you regularly present yourself to the police? I know I dont so Im not too sure why you think gerry adams should be doing it regularly

Maphisto wrote: »

Has Gerr presented himself to PSNI at other times then?

crusher000

bumper234 wrote: »

Anti terrorism.laws? In a part of the country that is rife with terrorists....colour me surprised:eek:

Now your just coming back with random crap. Can't even stick to your own side of the argument. I leave you be as I couldn't be bothered talking to a child they'res laws against that over the internet as well but sure they're in every country and you know that already.

William F

bumper234 wrote: »

Yeah you're right, lets not arrest the suspected criminals lads lets just arrest innocent people for questioning :rolleyes:

WHat's your point?

alaimacerc

Karl Stein wrote: »

You have a poor understanding of the term 'whataboutery'.

Or more likely, perhaps, you evince poor levels of selfconsciousness about what you yourself are saying.

It's not whataboutery to point out that, despite the evidence, not one British soldier involved in the Bloody Sunday massacre has been been brought before the courts while Adams has been arrested in spite of little evidence.

See, that's just pointing out double standards ✔ rather than engaging in whataboutery ✗.

Bollix. Every whatabouter imagines themself to be "exposing double standards" -- or at least, uses essentially that claim as cover for doing so. The people endlessly and tediously whatabouting and baiting Adams in the Dáil would say exactly the same thing.

We've had similar "because Bloody Sunday!" whatabouts on threads as diverse as this, the stupid bleedin' royal/presidential visits. The ultimate purpose is similar: silence comment you find not to your liking by tagging it as "treacherous to the cause", or failing which, bog it down in endless debate where people, rather than actually confining themselves to the given topic, back-and-forth about whether this case and that case are actually meaningfully comparable or not, and if so, to what consequence.

Maphisto

maccored wrote: »

I dont know - I never asked him. Do you regularly present yourself to the police? I know I dont so Im not too sure why you think gerry adams should be doing it regularly

Well (correct me there are so many posts flying sometimes I lose the plot) but did you not say they should have arrested him in the previous 5 weeks?

maccored

you do realise that you answered a post about whataboutery with more whataboutery?

alaimacerc wrote: »

Or more likely, perhaps, you evince poor levels of selfconsciousness about what you yourself are saying.



Bollix. Every whatabouter imagines themself to be "exposing double standards" -- or at least, uses essentially that claim as cover for doing so. The people endlessly and tediously whatabouting and baiting Adams in the Dáil would say exactly the same thing.

We've had similar "because Bloody Sunday!" whatabouts on threads as diverse as this, the stupid bleedin' royal/presidential visits. The ultimate purpose is similar: silence comment you find not to your liking by tagging it as "treacherous to the cause", or failing which, bog it down in endless debate where people, rather than actually confining themselves to the given topic, back-and-forth about whether this case and that case are actually meaningfully comparable or not, and if so, to what consequence.

maccored

5 weeks ago he wrote to the PSNI and offered to talk to them, mainly due to the amount of buill**** going around. I think he said on telly during the week that he had enough of the untrue talking and decided to make himself available to the PSNI. They had those 5 weeks to do it, and more time after the elections. Im just saying that choosing now - after the elections campaigns have started both north and south - is a bit suspicious.

Maphisto wrote: »

Well (correct me there are so many posts flying sometimes I lose the plot) but did you not say they should have arrested him in the previous 5 weeks?

Holsten

PSNI wasting their time and his.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Jawgap

William F wrote: »

Then how would you know this? Were you in a similar position as Gerry Adams before?

No, I was just offering a semi-informed opinion on why there was a delay between him offering to come in for interview and him being arrested. I know it doesn't fit the conspiracy theories, but there you go.......

Maphisto

maccored wrote: »

5 weeks ago he wrote to the PSNI and offered to talk to them, mainly due to the amount of buill**** going around. I think he said on telly during the week that he had enough of the untrue talking and decided to make himself available to the PSNI. They had those 5 weeks to do it, and more time after the elections. Im just saying that choosing now - after the elections campaigns have started both north and south - is a bit suspicious.

Fair enough but he chose to present himself to PSNI 2 days ago. Why did he not either present himself 5 weeks ago or keep out of the way until after the elections. For all the stick against the PSNI (which may or may not be true) - he chose the time. He has been around the block enough times to know exactly what would happen.

alaimacerc

maccored wrote: »

they arrested him after he presented himself. Thats even worse as thats just sneaky. Dont have enough evidence to go out and arrest him - but since he's presented himself voluntarily then they can arrest him as he surely wont disagree - not after volunteering to be there.

That's unmitigated drivel. If they have grounds to arrest him, they have grounds to arrest him. Whether he's "sneakily" been tricked into being in a police station at the time -- by, uh, letters saying he's going to turn up at a police station -- is immaterial. Are you confusing yourself with whether extradition would be necessary (or even possible)? Or saying the PSNI are too lazy to nab Adams on one of his trips across the border?

Essentially, Adams is getting kid gloves treatment, where the PSNI correspond back and forth with him and get him to "make himself available" for questioning, rather than (as they would far more commonly do) forcing the issue and making an "at large" arrest at a time and place of their choosing. SF and other Adams exceptionalists are trying to somehow portray this as "poor Gerry, getting picked on, conspiracy, timing, political interference".

Karl Stein

alaimacerc wrote: »

Or more likely, perhaps, you evince poor levels of selfconsciousness about what you yourself are saying.

That's amusing coming from a person who likes to use the term shinnerbot in a failed attempt to stigmatise people with opposing views or, in other words, those who actually speak about the real world as opposed to the Section 31 cruisermaniacal 'goodies and baddies' ladybird book view.

We've had similar "because Bloody Sunday!" whatabouts

Again I urge you to develop an understanding of the difference between whataboutery and exposing double standards, not an interpretation that you conjure to underpin your dogma.

I'm not in the mood to get out the crayons and paper to help guide you to a proper understanding.

end of the road

bumper234 wrote: »

EVERY country has anti terrorism laws in place.

which can be, and is used against any minority group that is out of favour with a particular government, irish, muslims, blacks, so on

sillyoulfool

See SF are demanding immunity from prosecution for Adams as the their price for continued support for policing in Northern Ireland.
Democrats my arse, confirms what most rational people suspected all along, that the thugs with guns were now just thugs with suits!
http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0502/614764-adams-mcconville/

"Mr McGuinness said Sinn Féin would "reflect" and "review" its support for policing in the region if Mr Adams is charged."

crusher000

end of the road wrote: »

which can be, and is used against any minority group that is out of favour with a particular government, irish, muslims, blacks, so on

Please let bumper 234 lie it's they're evening snoozie sleepie down down time. Don't encourage.

crusher000

end of the road wrote: »

which can be, and is used against any minority group that is out of favour with a particular government, irish, muslims, blacks, so on

Please let bumper 234 lie it's they're evening snoozie sleepie down down time. Don't encourage.

end of the road

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

The RUC may be gone

change of name and a few different people in charge, thats all, as a police force, its still more or less the same old same old with a couple of improvements to make it look like they have moved away from the old days

Gatling

end of the road wrote: »

which can be, and is used against any minority group that is out of favour with a particular government, irish, muslims, blacks, so on

Are suspected terrorists and and the facilitators and promotors considered minority groups now ???,

Banjo String

sillyoulfool wrote: »

See SF and demanding immunity from prosecution for Adams as the their price for continued support for policing in Northern Ireland.
Democrats my arse, confirms what most rational people suspected all along, that the thugs with guns were now just thugs with suits!
http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0502/614764-adams-mcconville/

"Mr McGuinness said Sinn Féin would "reflect" and "review" its support for policing in the region if Mr Adams is charged."

Except they didn't say that at all.

There's the statement in full on this very thread. Jesus lads. Inform yourselves.

Maphisto

sillyoulfool wrote: »

See SF and demanding immunity from prosecution for Adams as the their price for continued support for policing in Northern Ireland.
Democrats my arse, confirms what most rational people suspected all along, that the thugs with guns were now just thugs with suits!
http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0502/614764-adams-mcconville/

"Mr McGuinness said Sinn Féin would "reflect" and "review" its support for policing in the region if Mr Adams is charged."

OK but
"SF and demanding immunity from prosecution for Adams as the their price for continued support for policing"

is not the same as

Mr McGuinness said Sinn Féin would "reflect" and "review" its support for policing"

crusher000

Banjo String wrote: »

Except they didn't say that at all.

There's the statement in full on this very thread. Jesus lads. Inform yourselves.

Banjo String they don't want to inform themselves happy in their own world cause he voices in their heads told them it's true.