Jobstown water protesters to be charged

BattleCorp

I don't have a transcript of what Paul Murphy said, but if he didn't say something along the lines of "Surround her car, don't let her out", then what can he be in trouble for?

Little CuChulainn

BattleCorp wrote: »

I don't have a transcript of what Paul Murphy said, but if he didn't say something along the lines of "Surround her car, don't let her out", then what can he be in trouble for?

I believe it was "Should we let her out?"

Flatzie_poo

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

if he goes to jail his seat is gone

...For 6 months or more

Son Of A Vidic

paulbok wrote: »

She was a TD, stands to reason there was a good chance she would be going to the Dáil.

And like a lot of our hard working TD's, she probably had an urgent appointment with the Dáil bar.

ohnonotgmail

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

And like a lot of our hard working TD's, she probably had an urgent appointment with the Dáil bar.

whether she was going to the dail or not is irrelevant.

Teyla Emmagan

Delighted for them. The right to protest does not give you the right to act like an utter scumbag.

Hopefully there will be convictions out of this.

Uncle Ben

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

if he goes to jail his seat is gone

Will make for an interesting election so.

Jawgap

Jawgap wrote: »

Farmer fined €5k for obstructing work of department vet

Longford pig farmer on trial for false imprisonment of man

yes well done. Two criminal cases involving farmers, neither anything to do with protests / blocking traffic etc.

What exactly do they have to do with this thread?

darkpagandeath

Political policing at it's finest. Whether you agree or disagree at people's ability to protest that's not really the issue here. By any European standard this was an extremely ordered and peaceful protest, Blocking has been used everywhere. I think the problem is People are not used to protests, Protests for legitimate reasons. The political elite consider themselves untouchable and beyond the people they “SERVE”. I would hardly call a person in their car on their smart phone smiling terrified for their lives. The Garda presence was huge, This was a calculated move. At any time the area could have been cleared and the car let on it's way.

I was going to link some protests in Europe but why bother, A water balloon and a bit of car shaking is the destruction of Irish society and anarchy on the streets. Ironically if this was Labours protest They would not be using terrified and detained all that emotive language. I do not condone the actions.

ohnonotgmail

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Political policing at it's finest. Whether you agree or disagree at people's ability to protest that's not really the issue here. By any European standard this was an extremely ordered and peaceful protest, Blocking has been used everywhere. I think the problem is People are not used to protests, Protests for legitimate reasons. The political elite consider themselves untouchable and beyond the people they “SERVE”. I would hardly call a person in their car on their smart phone smiling terrified for their lives. The Garda presence was huge, This was a calculated move. At any time the area could have been cleared and the car let on it's way.

I was going to link some protests in Europe but why bother, A water balloon and a bit of car shaking is the destruction of Irish society and anarchy on the streets. Ironically if this was Labours protest They would not be using terrified and detained all that emotive language. I do not condone the actions.

so what do you think the gardai should have done about it? leave them at it? sure its not as bad as what happens in europe so its grand?

darkpagandeath

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so what do you think the gardai should have done about it? leave them at it? sure its not as bad as what happens in europe so its grand?

I think the Garda should have moved them on if there was any breaches of the peace, And not be pawns in a photo op and political jockeying.

Graham

Deleted User wrote: »

yes well done. Two criminal cases involving farmers, neither anything to do with protests / blocking traffic etc.

What exactly do they have to do with this thread?

Was a response to this:

Specialun wrote: »

Farmers have blocked in factories and other protests have blocked in groups and nobody was ever charged.

K4t

seamus wrote: »

Because baton charging an already tense mob when they have an innocent civilian's vehicle trapped and surrounded is a stupid idea.

Fairly massive assumption to say that baton charging would have been required - clear sign that the whole situation has been blown completely out of proportion and rewritten to allow the Gardaí on the day to retain its integrity. The charge of false imprisonment is as farcical now as it was at the time, and I'm pretty sure a court will see it that way.

ihavenoname3

gandalf wrote: »

If they charge Murphy it would be a very big mistake. It would guarantee him getting re-elected next year. I would love if they charged everyone but him. Leave him without a cross to jump on to

ya do what they did to Elmo on love/hate, implying Murphy informed on the other protesters.

seamus

K4t wrote: »

Fairly massive assumption to say that baton charging would have been required

Not really. Force was going to be required, we even saw video footage of scuffles between Gardai and protestors.

How do you think the Gardai were going to clear them - "Ah come on now lads, stand up there ouhta the way"?
Once they used force, the mob would have all leapt in and the batons would have come out.

To think otherwise shows naivety in the extreme about what kind of thugs were "protesting" that day.

ohnonotgmail

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I think the Garda should have moved them on if there was any breaches of the peace, And not be pawns in a photo op and political jockeying.

so move them on physically? Because i dont think a polite request would have cut it.

BattleCorp

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I believe it was "Should we let her out?"

If that's what he said, what in the name of Jaysus evidence have they against him?

ohnonotgmail

BattleCorp wrote: »

If that's what he said, what in the name of Jaysus evidence have they against him?

"should we let here out." does that not imply he was part of the mob who were preventing her from leaving?

K4t

seamus wrote: »

How do you think the Gardai were going to clear them - "Ah come on now lads, stand up there ouhta the way"?
Once they used force, the mob would have all leapt in and the batons would have come out.

To think otherwise shows naivety in the extreme about what kind of thugs were "protesting" that day.

To think that the whole mob would have attacked the Gardaí shows naivety in the extreme - you might have had one or two, who could have been swiftly dealt with. Whether under instruction or own inclination, the Gardaí allowed the situation at Jobstown to occur - which is fine I suppose as nobody was hurt. But to come along after the fact and rewrite the story and say someone was falsely imprisoned is delusional in the extreme. The whole mess is only showing the Gardaí to have been wholly incompetent on the day, which I don't think they were, or are.

seamus

BattleCorp wrote: »

If that's what he said, what in the name of Jaysus evidence have they against him?

Murphy's defence here is that the Gardai asked him to put this question to the mob.

But IMHO that actually makes things worse for him because it implies at the time that he knew she was being trapped (therefore the mob had to be "asked" to move), and that Murphy believed he had sufficient authority/sway to ask this question.

If he didn't think she was trapped in the vehicle or that he had any authority he wouldn't have agreed to the Garda request.

That's my view on it.

K4t

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

"should we let here out." does that not imply he was part of the mob who were preventing her from leaving?

No - it does imply he can use a megaphone though.

seamus

K4t wrote: »

No - it does imply he can use a megaphone though.

Should we

Implies that he is part of the group.

let her out.

Implies that the group are holding her.

Your continual defence of indefensible is ridiculous. Everyone knows exactly what this was and the only people who believe otherwise are delusional Murphy and his delusional supporters.

Graham

K4t wrote: »

To think that the whole mob would have attacked the Gardaí shows naivety in the extreme

There's a cross-section of the travelling protesters (usually joined by assorted local scumbags) who have done almost everything they can to provoke the Gardai into taking a harder line at which point who knows what would happen.

Fair play to the Gardai for the restraint they've clearly demonstrated on a multitude of occasions. Rather than making a bad situation worse they can now allow the law to take its course.

conorh91

seamus wrote: »

But IMHO that actually makes things worse for him because it implies at the time that he knew she was being trapped (therefore the mob had to be "asked" to move), and that Murphy believed he had sufficient authority/sway to ask this question.

There's no need to overcomplicate it. It doesn't make it worse. You can shrug and comply with a Garda request without believing it will really help.

If PM is to be charged with false imprisonment, I am sure the DPP will have plenty of evidence for that charge. But a video recording of Murphy asking for Burton's release is very unlikely to constitute the causing of a false imprisonment under any literal, or natural and ordinary meaning of that expression.

Valetta

conorh91 wrote: »

There's no need to overcomplicate it. It doesn't make it worse. You can shrug and comply with a Garda request without believing it will really help.

If PM is to be charged with false imprisonment, I am sure the DPP will have plenty of evidence for that charge. But a video recording of Murphy asking for Burton's release is very unlikely to constitute the causing of a false imprisonment under any literal, or natural and ordinary meaning of that expression.

But he didn't ask for her release.

He asked "Should we let her out?", directly implying that

a) She was in fact being held against her will, and

b) He himself was a party to that fact, and could influence when the "holding against her will" would stop.

K4t

seamus wrote: »

Should we

Implies that he is part of the group.

let her out.

Implies that the group are holding her.

Your continual defence of indefensible is ridiculous. Everyone knows exactly what this was and the only people who believe otherwise are delusional Murphy and his delusional supporters.

While it may imply those things, it still means nothing. It could just as easily be argued that he is speaking in code or referring to the peaceful protestors only. But there is no need for any argument according to yourself - Indefensible? No need for a trial so as you've spoken. And my name isn't Paul Murphy and I'm not a supporter of his, so I suppose I'm just delusional.

Graham

K4t wrote: »

While it may imply those things, it still means nothing. It could just as easily be argued that he is speaking in code or referring to the peaceful protestors only. But there is no need for any argument according to yourself - Indefensible? No need for a trial so as you've spoken. And my name isn't Paul Murphy and I'm not a supporter of his, so I suppose I'm just delusional.

I didn't see anyone suggest there's no need for a trial.

I think a trial is a great idea, let a Court decide based on the evidence.

ohnonotgmail

K4t wrote: »

To think that the whole mob would have attacked the Gardaí shows naivety in the extreme - you might have had one or two, who could have been swiftly dealt with. Whether under instruction or own inclination, the Gardaí allowed the situation at Jobstown to occur - which is fine I suppose as nobody was hurt. But to come along after the fact and rewrite the story and say someone was falsely imprisoned is delusional in the extreme. The whole mess is only showing the Gardaí to have been wholly incompetent on the day, which I don't think they were, or are.

i totally agree. the gardai did handle it badly. they were far too lenient with this mob. they should cleared the mob immediately and arrested them all for breach of the peace if they didnt comply.

ohnonotgmail

Graham wrote: »

I didn't see anyone suggest there's no need for a trial.

I think a trial is a great idea, let a Court decide based on the evidence.

I look forward to the linguistic gymnastics Murphy partakes in to justify what he did

Graham

Graham wrote: »

Was a response to this:

Yes. Blocked in factories and other forms of protest.

Something that neither of those cases have anything to do with.