Public enquiry needed?

joe swanson

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/garda-who-took-his-own-life-didnt-know-he-had-been-cleared-by-gsoc-31271280.html


Absolutely shocking stuff by gsoc by the looks of it. A wife has lost her husband. Three children are without a father. And the only thing happening is an internal review? It appears to be a huge case of possible malpractice.

A man is dead. I think a public enquiry should be held into alleged gsoc inaction in this case.

fizzypish

Weren't GSOC just investigating the incident as they should? Unless GSOC were actively harassing him I don't think you can lay blame their way? I have sympathy for the man and know that myself, I would have a hard time shouldering the burden of taking a life (And he was cleared of wrong doing so he probably wasn't in the wrong) in an accident but I hardly think GSOC can be blamed for this. Better support structures for Gardai who suffer trauma's would be a nice outcome from this but where's that money going to come from....

Roger_007

Maybe it's an inquiry we need.

LDN_Irish

Done get me wrong, I have a lot of sympathy here and he should have been issued a registered letter on the day he was cleared. They never phone, text or email that kind of thing so I'm not surprised they didn't like the Indo commenter is. It's a bit of an extreme reaction though, isn't it? Not something that occurs in a vacuum I wouldn't think. My partner was summoned to court with an incorrect charge after being stopped at a checkpoint. We didn't really understand the jargon on the summons, we felt it was incorrect but assumed they must have it right. She turned up in court in the morning and approached the guard shod issued the case and he goes "you can go home. I made a mistake and only realised after the summons had been issued." Now, if a bad mental health problems and had harmed herself through failing to cope with the stress of being summoned, you can be damn sure the Garda wouldn't be accepting any responsibility for that at all. I get that what he was being investigated for was worse than traffic offences, but it's the same kind of principle.

BattleCorp

I feel sorry for the Garda who took his own life but you can hardly blame GSOC for that.

This is a teribly sad case.
And unfortunately that is the way gsoc do things. If it changes the way that they deal with members of the gardai, then that's a good thing.

I don't believe we can blame them for a man taking his own life though. There could be any number of issues at play here.
I don't believe this is something that should be discussed on an internet forum either. There could be any member of his family or friends reading this speculation as to why he did what he did.

AudreyHepburn

Suicide is a horrible lonely way to die and I feel so sorry for anyone who feels that it is the only option left to them.

That being said you can't lay blame on the GSOC just for doing their job. Calling it malpractice is going completely overboard in my opinion. Of course they should have called him or issued a registered letter but there is still no reason for public inquiry....it was a mistake, they happen.

There was a suspicion of serious wrong doing, should GSOC have just let it go? Because I can guarantee those getting on their high horses in the case would be among the first to call for the investigating Gardai's heads on a platter if they did.

There could have been any one of hundreds of reasons why this poor man took his own life....laying it all GSOC's door is totally unfair and unreasonable.

Menas

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

There could have been one of hundreds of reasons why this poor man took his own....laying it all GSOC's door is totally unfair and unreasonable.

Completely agree with this. The rush by the tabloids to find someone to blame is a bit sickening.
Mickey was a year behind me at school and was a very well known, and liked, character...
His family will be going thru enough at the moment without the lynch mob looking to find someone one to blame based on what little about Mickey and his life is in the public domain.

FluffyAngel

Maybe the feelings of familly should be put to the fore here ,instead of media who dont care about feelings and are looking to whip up a storm using tragic circumstances to futher conflict

joe swanson

FluffyAngel wrote: »

Maybe the feelings of familly should be put to the fore here ,instead of media who dont care about feelings and are looking to whip up a storm using tragic circumstances to futher conflict

If you read the article, his wife specifically mentions gsoc at the funeral .

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

joe swanson wrote: »

If you read the article, his wife specifically mentions gsoc at the funeral .

Yes, mentioned. Along with how many other things the Indo didn't report on.
Leave them be at this time!

joe swanson

joe swanson wrote: »

If you read the article, his wife specifically mentions gsoc at the funeral .

Because she is angry, she needs to find a reason for her own peace of mind. Maybe it will help her to blame GSOC.

I don't think the rest of us can though.

expectationlost

Sgt Galvin was being investigated as a result of a fatal road traffic incident in Ballyshannon in the early hours of New Year's day this year.

Sheena Stewart (33), from Letterkenny, died when she was struck by a minibus taxi in the town.

Sgt Galvin had driven past Ms Stewart earlier that morning on his way to investigate a hit-and-run incident outside the south Donegal town.

When asked if he had seen Ms Stewart, he had told Ombudsman investigators that he believed he had seen her standing on a footpath in Ballyshannon.

CCTV footage however showed she had been standing at the edge of the road when the garda patrol car passed her.

Friends say Sgt Galvin was then interviewed under caution. He later told them that he may face a criminal charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.

I dont' even get what the problem was? so he drove past her earlier and couldn't say exactly the point she was standing? why would he be in trouble for that? http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/garda-who-took-his-own-life-didnt-know-he-had-been-cleared-by-gsoc-31271280.html

joe swanson

Exactly. It appears gsoc had him so worried that it ended in tragedy. The fact that he had been cleared almost a week previously and had not been informed is disgraceful

Maybe if he had been told in a prompt manner, we wouldn't be discussing it. I think maybe a senior judge should be appointed to examine the circumstances of this instead of an internal review.

snubbleste

No.

All we know is whatever the media chose to disclose.
for example, people have allegedly killed themselves over exam stress in the past. Does that mean we should have a public inquiry into exam regulations and exam questions?

Heckler

expectationlost wrote: »

I dont' even get what the problem was? so he drove past her earlier and couldn't say exactly the point she was standing? why would he be in trouble for that? http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/garda-who-took-his-own-life-didnt-know-he-had-been-cleared-by-gsoc-31271280.html

This.

Am I missing something ? He may have been incorrect in where he remembered her standing and a possible perversion of justice charge is threatened ? Wha' ?

RIP.

The Dark Side

joe swanson wrote: »

It appears gsoc had him so worried that it ended in tragedy.

No it doesn't.

joe swanson

The Dark Side wrote: »

No it doesn't.

Maybe you could expand on that insightful post?

expectationlost

Heckler wrote: »

This.

Am I missing something ? He may have been incorrect in where he remembered her standing and a possible perversion of justice charge is threatened ? Wha' ?

RIP.

he seems so incidentaly connected to the death but its now standard practice GSOC to investigate every death where a garda is involved (no matter how incidentaly) and maybe its also standard practice to interview somebody under caution when there is a discrepancy? (when it involves a death)

Sgt Galvin was interviewed twice by GSOC, the second time under caution - which the Ombudsman says is procedure - seven days before his death.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0602/705313-gsoc/

The Dark Side

joe swanson wrote: »

Maybe you could expand on that insightful post?

It doesn't appear gsoc had him so worried that it ended in tragedy.



Maybe you should go work for a tabloid newspaper?

Chloris

It reminds me of the Tickel Suicide in The Thick of It.

joe swanson

The Dark Side wrote: »

It doesn't appear gsoc had him so worried that it ended in tragedy.



Maybe you should go work for a tabloid newspaper?

Maybe when you make a point you could perhaps make an argument or explanation as to how you arrived at this conclusion?

darkpagandeath

Tragic yes.

What should the grounds of the Public Enquiry be ? Can any organisation be held responsible for normal procedure leading to Suicide ?

joe swanson

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Tragic yes.

What should the grounds of the Public Enquiry be ? Can any organisation be held responsible for normal procedure leading to Suicide ?

So its "normal procedure" for gsoc not to tell someone that they have been cleared? This tragedy could have been averted.

darkpagandeath

joe swanson wrote: »

So its "normal procedure" for gsoc not to tell someone that they have been cleared? This tragedy could have been averted.

We have no idea that's true at all.

fizzypish

joe swanson wrote: »

So its "normal procedure" for gsoc not to tell someone that they have been cleared? This tragedy could have been averted.

It also could have been averted with counseling and support services. Should we nail the HSE to the wall too so?

Menas

joe swanson wrote: »

So its "normal procedure" for gsoc not to tell someone that they have been cleared? This tragedy could have been averted.

Why dont you explain to us how you know that there was nothing else going on in this mans life, apart from this GSCO inquiry, that could have led him to take his own life?

Kev W

Roger_007 wrote: »

Maybe it's an inquiry we need.

I think what's truly needed at a time like this is pedantry.

Thank you for your service.

expectationlost

joe swanson wrote: »

So its "normal procedure" for gsoc not to tell someone that they have been cleared? This tragedy could have been averted.

it might be GSOC says its up to the DPP http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0602/705313-gsoc/

there always going to period of time between his 2nd interview and the final end of the investigation

expectationlost

the last time that was suicide by a gardai in the station the gardai gave out about GSOC investigating it

kerry4sam

Condolences to the family of the deceased. No-one but those really close to the deceased would know of any other issues that led to him taking his own life. Tabloid Headlines are real catchy though.

Thanks,
kerry4sam

/Oh the irony of a complaint about lack of communication from an organisation representative which has members who badly need a course on communication themselves.

I heard a call was put out for our Taoiseach to call an Independent Inquiry. Time will tell just how naive & ill-informed he actually is now.

joe swanson

Its about accountability. I wonder would those defending gsoc on this thread be defending Guards in a similar way?

In order that the organisation is transparent and accountable, its essential this is investigated properly. It says quite clearly in the article that gsoc had cleared him up to 10 days previously and had not informed him. Would he be alive I they had? Its not a minor matter.

Roger_007

I think the ASGI are being totally irresponsible in this matter. Nobody ever knows for sure what causes anyone to commit suicide. They are laying all the blame on GSOC. They are just being opportunistic in getting in a kick at GSOC by using this tragic event. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

LDN_Irish

joe swanson wrote: »

Its about accountability. I wonder would those defending gsoc on this thread be defending Guards in a similar way?

In order that the organisation is transparent and accountable, its essential this is investigated properly. It says quite clearly in the article that gsoc had cleared him up to 10 days previously and had not informed him. Would he be alive I they had? Its not a minor matter.

Would I defend the Guards if they'd questioned but not charged someone who killed themself after being cleared but not informed? Yes, I'd say something like "deepest sympathies to the family. Seems like there's more to the story though. People thinking reasonably don't shoot themselves because they've been questioned for something, regardless of whether they've been informed that they've been cleared or not." If an organisation that has shown time and time again that they resent having to be accountable to the Guards then used the incident to have a dig at the Guards I'd probably echo the previous poster who said they should be ashamed of themselves.

You've eaten this story so fast you've practically inhaled it by the way. Have you some connection that gives you some inside knowledge or is there another reason why you've decided that the Indos account of the story contains all the pertinent info?

seamus

expectationlost wrote: »

he seems so incidentaly connected to the death but its now standard practice GSOC to investigate every death where a garda is involved (no matter how incidentaly)

and maybe its also standard practice to interview somebody under caution when there is a discrepancy? (when it involves a death)

It would be required practice to caution anyone when being questioned that if they are charged, the information given in the course of that questioning could be used against them.

If you are involved in a crash, whether or not there are any injuries and a Garda attends, he will warn you at the roadside, before he starts asking you questions, that you may be charged under the road traffic act and the information can be used against you.

Failure to do so can render questioning useless and so must be done beforehand. What probably makes it consequential in this case is that he became aware that the possibility of being charged existed.

While I agree that GSOC should have released the information sooner, on the basis of what's being discussed, if he was charged it is highly unlikely that he would be jailed and given his job may possibly have not even received a criminal conviction. It does sound to me like he had exaggerated this a lot in his own mind and coupled with whatever else was going on, was just too much for him.

The media and AGSI are being very irresponsible here by providing an outlet for the family to direct and amplify their pain.

joe swanson

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Would I defend the Guards if they'd questioned but not charged someone who killed themself after being cleared but not informed? Yes, I'd say something like "deepest sympathies to the family. Seems like there's more to the story though. People thinking reasonably don't shoot themselves because they've been questioned for something, regardless of whether they've been informed that they've been cleared or not." If an organisation that has shown time and time again that they resent having to be accountable to the Guards then used the incident to have a dig at the Guards I'd probably echo the previous poster who said they should be ashamed of themselves.

You've eaten this story so fast you've practically inhaled it by the way. Have you some connection that gives you some inside knowledge or is there another reason why you've decided that the Indos account of the story contains all the pertinent info?

Nope, but iv family and close friends in the job and I know how badly decent hardworking guards are being treated by gsoc. Do you work for gsoc?

crusier

kerry4sam wrote: »

Condolences to the family of the deceased. No-one but those really close to the deceased would know of any other issues that led to him taking his own life. Tabloid Headlines are real catchy though.

Thanks,
kerry4sam

/Oh the irony of a complaint about lack of communication from an organisation representative which has members who badly need a course on communication themselves.

I heard a call was put out for our Taoiseach to call an Independent Inquiry. Time will tell just how naive & ill-informed he actually is now.

I think the sergeants family deserve answers, his colleagues are right to seek answers and they are right to seek an independent person to investigate the matter. You seem to be off the opinion that garda members have lesser rights than civilians, well his family are civilians and they should not be denied the fairness his family and colleagues feel he was not shown. You have a clear grievence against AGS and Agsi from your time as a garda reserve but surely you can put that aside and allow them a voice at least!

LDN_Irish

joe swanson wrote: »

Nope, but iv family and close friends in the job and I know how badly decent hardworking guards are being treated by gsoc. Do you work for gsoc?

Fair cop Guv, you got me. I thought I played it safe with only 2 previous posts on the thread but I must have been too obvious.

So, you've no reason to swallow this story whole, but you have because it confirms what your family and friends feel about GCOS. Grand.

joe swanson

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Fair cop Guv, you got me. I thought I played it safe with only 2 previous posts on the thread but I must have been too obvious.

So, you've no reason to swallow this story whole, but you have because it confirms what your family and friends feel about GCOS. Grand.

Is it wrong that this poor mans family want answers or do you think it should be swept away under the carpet?

LDN_Irish

joe swanson wrote: »

Is it wrong that this poor mans family want answers or do you think it should be swept away under the carpet?

Answers to what? Tell me what questions you think need to be asked of the GSOC here. So far I can think of one, "why didn't you tell him he wouldn't be asked any more questions?" Do you think that will give them closure? I don't. If I was them I'd want to know how a minor investigation could drive someone to suicide, they won't be able to get those answers though.

The tragedy here is people with either undiagnosed or inadequately treated mental health problems eventually giving in to pressure, not the GSOC not sending out registered letters until a couple of weeks after a file has been closed. This case is reminiscent of the nurse who committed suicide after the Australian radio show pranked the hospital she worked at pretending to be the queen of England. The tabloids printed that in the same 1D fashion they've printed this and those with an axe to grind and the gullible lapped it up. Like they always do.

joe swanson

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Answers to what? Tell me what questions you think need to be asked of the GSOC here. So far I can think of one, "why didn't you tell him he wouldn't be asked any more questions?" Do you think that will give them closure? I don't. If I was them I'd want to know how a minor investigation could drive someone to suicide, they won't be able to get those answers though.

The tragedy here is people with either undiagnosed or inadequately treated mental health problems eventually giving in to pressure, not the GSOC not sending out registered letters until a couple of weeks after a file has been closed. This case is reminiscent of the nurse who committed suicide after the Australian radio show pranked the hospital she worked at pretending to be the queen of England. The tabloids printed that in the same 1D fashion they've printed this and those with an axe to grind and the gullible lapped it up. Like they always do.

Well it appears you know more than most here about this case, you seem to know exactly what happened. Why don't you enlighten us?

LDN_Irish

joe swanson wrote: »

Well it appears you know more than most here about this case, you seem to know exactly what happened. Why don't you enlighten us?

Why won't you answer what questions you'd like GSOC asked?

joe swanson

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Why won't you answer what questions you'd like GSOC asked?

What? No offence but that sentence makes no sense.

LDN_Irish

joe swanson wrote: »

What? No offence but that sentence makes no sense.

None taken, it's a very simple question though. I asked you in my second to last post what questions you'd like the GSOC asked.

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Answers to what? Tell me what questions you think need to be asked of the GSOC here.

You evaded with a sarcastic answer about how I have it all figured out, (irony!) so I asked why you won't answer it. You can ignore the second question and just answer the first to speed things up a little bit if you like.

If he'd killed himself while GSOC still had his file open, would you still want an inquiry?

archer22

A bit bloody rich the Gardai blaming the GSOC for this when they the Gardai are the ones who allowed a suicidal individual access to firearms and its not the first time an incident such as this has happened if I remember correctly.
The Gardai are always pushing for "gun control "gun control" gun control" for the general public.So hey Guards how about some of this gun control in your own stations where it seems anybody can arm themselves to the teeth if they want to.
Ok so far its been misfortunate individuals who want to commit suicide but who knows in the future it may well be somebody with far deeper problems who wants to go postal on the general public.And there is apparently sweet bugger all procedures in place to prevent that!!.

crusier

archer22 wrote: »

A bit bloody rich the Gardai blaming the GSOC for this when they the Gardai are the ones who allowed a suicidal individual access to firearms and its not the first time an incident such as this has happened if I remember correctly.
The Gardai are always pushing for "gun control "gun control" gun control" for the general public.So hey Guards how about some of this gun control in your own stations where it seems anybody can arm themselves to the teeth if they want to.
Ok so far its been misfortunate individuals who want to commit suicide but who knows in the future it may well be somebody with far deeper problems who wants to go postal on the general public.And there is apparently sweet bugger all procedures in place to prevent that!!.

LOL, what a load of horse****e!

BattleCorp

Sgt Galvin was interviewed twice by GSOC, the second time under caution - which the Ombudsman says is procedure - seven days before his death.

GSOC could hardly let him know he was cleared if he was interviewed 7 days before his death.

7 days = 5 working days.

So, in that 5 days GSOC would have to wrap up the investigation, make conclusions, type up a report and then write out to the Garda to tell him he was cleared?

I don't think so. It's a bit much to expect that.

And was the investigation was 100% concluded? Maybe there were more witnesses to be interviewed etc?

I'm not saying the Garda did anything wrong, I most definately am not saying that.

I'm just saying that it's a bit unreasonable to blame GSOC for this suicide because they didn't let him know that he had been cleared.

As investigations go, no organisation would be expected to have wrapped up an investigation and inform everyone of its findings less than 7 days after interviewing a witness.

AudreyHepburn

joe swanson wrote: »

Is it wrong that this poor mans family want answers or do you think it should be swept away under the carpet?

Of course not, it's completely understandable.

The issue is, why are they and everyone else so eager to believe that those answers will come from GSOC who by the sounds did nothing except follow procedure?

Who's to say there weren't other things going on in the poor man's life and this was just the tipping point?

AudreyHepburn

Its about accountability. I wonder would those defending gsoc on this thread be defending Guards in a similar way?

Of course we would. Unless it could be proven that this man was harassed or bullied or in any way forced into the tragic decision he made then there is absolutely no reason not defend them.

At the end of the day the choice was his and his alone.

Would he be alive I they had?

Would he have been alive but for this inquiry? The truth is no-one knows and trying to pretend otherwise is naive.

crusier

But of course keyboard warriors know more than family friends and colleagues and can dismiss the impact this had on him. The more decent you are the more of an impact an investigation like this can have on a person. He was good decent hardworking garda sergeant who took pride in his job and was now being treated like a criminal by an organisation that everyone in the force knows are looking to get convictions and sackings and feathers in their caps. Garda members are human as well and the potential loss of a career and good name can push some people over the edge in all walks of life. This was heavy handed as usual with the usual arrogance of gsoc and now a family are torn apart!

lakesider

First off condolences to this guys family, it was a terrible tragedy.

One thing that I see wrong in this is why was a member of the garda who was under investigation still on duty, shouldnt there be a protocol in place that demands that anyone uner investigation be stood down on full pay off course till the matter is settled?

To lay the blame for this mans death at GSOCs door is wrong imo, any police force needs to be able to stand up to scrutiny ..

The thing that bothers me in all is why did he feel the need to shoot himself if he was on the side of truth and justice?