Should another Garda Commissioner resign?

Water John

The Jack and Jill foundation must have got lucky, with their used phone collection.

tayto lover

Nettle Soup wrote: »

It beggars belief how Callinan got to any kind of a leadership position in any organisation never mind one as large as the Gardaí.

It reflects how dysfunctional the whole Garda force is that he was their commissioner. O'Sullivan was no better.

The man should be prosecuted. But no, he will completely get away it.

He was appointed by the Government so there you go.
Same as Judges and head of the army

hatrickpatrick

Nettle Soup wrote: »

Have the Gardaí had time to find any of the mobile phones that went missing?

11 Missing Phones
The tribunal heard that of 15 phones used by Taylor, Callinan and current Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan during the period in question, only four had been received by the tribunal.

See this is the kind of thing I'm talking about - this should be a criminal offense, whether intentional (conspiracy to pervert the course of justice) or accidental (criminal negligence in the handling of evidence pertaining to potential crimes). Somebody should literally be being arrested, handcuffed, and hauled up in front of a judge to be held responsible for the fact that this has happened.

That's the kind of zero tolerance we need to this type of bullsh!t.

Odhinn

Nettle Soup wrote: »

It beggars belief how Callinan got to any kind of a leadership position in any organisation never mind one as large as the Gardaí.

It reflects how dysfunctional the whole Garda force is that he was their commissioner. O'Sullivan was no better.

The man should be prosecuted. But no, he will completely get away it.

Unless others come forward, he probably will.

hatrickpatrick

Just to offset the inevitable comments that criminal accountability in cases like this would be "unworkable", it would really be extremely simple to implement. If such evidence was collected during an investigation, it should be put on record, both on the physical locker containing that evidence and on the Pulse computer system, that Sgt Hatrickpatrick of the Dun Laoghaire Garda Station is personally responsible for ensuring the integrity and safety of this piece of evidence, and that he is personally responsible for guaranteeing that it be neither lost, destroyed, nor tampered with.

Then, if something does happen to the evidence, Sgt Hatrickpatrick should be charged with either criminal negligence or, if it can be proven, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. And if convicted, he should be immediately relieved of his duties on the grounds of gross misconduct, and subject to a jail sentence.

This is the sort of unforgiving, uncompromising, bludgeoning attitude we need to fixing the Garda accountability problem in this country. If sh!t gets f*cked up on your watch either because you were negligent or complicit, you're getting a criminal record and all the unpleasantness which accompanies that for the average man or woman on the street. No exceptions, bye bye, the end.

Until Ireland starts treating wrongdoing and incompetence in this manner, our culture of "whatever you did, you can get away with it" is literally never going to change.

Captain Obvious

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Just to offset the inevitable comments that criminal accountability in cases like this would be "unworkable", it would really be extremely simple to implement. If such evidence was collected during an investigation, it should be put on record, both on the physical locker containing that evidence and on the Pulse computer system, that Sgt Hatrickpatrick of the Dun Laoghaire Garda Station is personally responsible for ensuring the integrity and safety of this piece of evidence, and that he is personally responsible for guaranteeing that it be neither lost, destroyed, nor tampered with.

Then, if something does happen to the evidence, Sgt Hatrickpatrick should be charged with either criminal negligence or, if it can be proven, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. And if convicted, he should be immediately relieved of his duties on the grounds of gross misconduct, and subject to a jail sentence.

This is the sort of unforgiving, uncompromising, bludgeoning attitude we need to fixing the Garda accountability problem in this country. If sh!t gets f*cked up on your watch either because you were negligent or complicit, you're getting a criminal record and all the unpleasantness which accompanies that for the average man or woman on the street. No exceptions, bye bye, the end.

Until Ireland starts treating wrongdoing and incompetence in this manner, our culture of "whatever you did, you can get away with it" is literally never going to change.

When GSOC were first formed they executed a search on a members locker in a station. The member had evidence in the form of a drink driving sample in there which was to be sent by registered post to the MBRS the following day. In your simple reality, should that member be prosecuted for the chain of evidence for that sample being broken? You're right in that it should be simple but it isn't. If Gardaí were given proper facilities for storing evidence in a station then it would be but that isn't the fault of the Garda. Many Garda stations simply aren't fit for purpose.

Water John

If a Garda misplaced a firearm, all hell would break loose. Any equipment eg phones along with any formally written material (not the Garda's own notes) is the property of the State. Mislaying it, should be considered a serious disciplinary issue. In effect, something one would not do.

Captain Obvious

Water John wrote: »

If a Garda misplaced a firearm, all hell would break loose. Any equipment eg phones along with any formally written material (not the Garda's own notes) is the property of the State. Mislaying it, should be considered a serious disciplinary issue. In effect, something one would not do.

Firearms are kept in a locked safe. Phones are kept on a table or shelf. Like I said above. Give secure storage for things you expect to be kept secured.

McMurphy

Mick Clifford just on Newstalk at the minute, he said that it was claimed that Callinan described the Wilson/ horse incident as:

"He said the then commissioner told him how former garda John Wilson “pulled the knacker off the horse” then rode it to a Garda barracks.

Mr McGuinness said he continued by saying: “And the other fella fiddles with kids. They’re the kinds of f**king headbangers I’m dealing with.”

If true (and given Callinans form I would tend to believe it), These are shocking and unbelievable derogatory comments for a commissioner to make about members of the public, and force.

Then we have the missing phones and claims that numerous paperwork had been shredded.

I find it hard to fathom how any past or present members of AGS could defend any of these allegations.

The force is supposed to uphold the law, not act like they're above it, or only certain aspects of it apply to them.

tayto lover

I wouldn't have much time for politicians either and would never trust what they say.
Mc Guinness is no angel and is getting it hard to explain things this morning i.e. why notes he said he didn't make at the time are now found squeezed into small spaces in a notebook or something.

Hard to know who to believe, if anyone, in all of this.

McMurphy

tayto lover wrote: »

I wouldn't have much time for politicians either and would never trust what they say.
Mc Guinness is no angel and is getting it hard to explain things this morning i.e. why notes he said he didn't make at the time are now found squeezed into small spaces in a notebook or something.

Hard to know who to believe, if anyone, in all of this.

What motive would McGuinness have to lie?

Strange claims to make if He has nothing to gain from making spurious allegations if you ask me.

Callinan, on the other hand has every reason to lie.

tayto lover

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

What motive would McGuinness have to lie?

Strange claims to make if He has nothing to gain from making spurious allegations if you ask me.

Callinan, on the other hand has every reason to lie.

To ensure re-election for one.
Politicians have never needed reasons to lie anyway. They comes naturally.

McMurphy

tayto lover wrote: »

To ensure re-election for one.
Politicians have never needed reasons to lie anyway. They comes naturally.

I'd say at this stage of his career, McGuinness is set for life (how many pensions would he have clocked up?) I think it would quite foolish to embroil himself in tribunals where claims he was making were spurious ones.

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Just to offset the inevitable comments that criminal accountability in cases like this would be "unworkable", it would really be extremely simple to implement. If such evidence was collected during an investigation, it should be put on record, both on the physical locker containing that evidence and on the Pulse computer system, that Sgt Hatrickpatrick of the Dun Laoghaire Garda Station is personally responsible for ensuring the integrity and safety of this piece of evidence, and that he is personally responsible for guaranteeing that it be neither lost, destroyed, nor tampered with.

Then, if something does happen to the evidence, Sgt Hatrickpatrick should be charged with either criminal negligence or, if it can be proven, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. And if convicted, he should be immediately relieved of his duties on the grounds of gross misconduct, and subject to a jail sentence.

This is the sort of unforgiving, uncompromising, bludgeoning attitude we need to fixing the Garda accountability problem in this country. If sh!t gets f*cked up on your watch either because you were negligent or complicit, you're getting a criminal record and all the unpleasantness which accompanies that for the average man or woman on the street. No exceptions, bye bye, the end.

Until Ireland starts treating wrongdoing and incompetence in this manner, our culture of "whatever you did, you can get away with it" is literally never going to change.

I am getting fed up of proposals which seek to abolish the innocent until proven guilty premise and impose draconian penalties on people for something which isn't a crime.

I someone steals my phone, I am not criminally negligent. If my phone is upgraded and I wipe and carefully destroy my old phone, I am not criminally negligent. If my phone is lost despite me taking great care of it, I am not criminally negligent.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

What motive would McGuinness have to lie?

Strange claims to make if He has nothing to gain from making spurious allegations if you ask me.

Callinan, on the other hand has every reason to lie.

Political advantage. Simple enough motive.

Mr.Micro

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Mick Clifford just on Newstalk at the minute, he said that it was claimed that Callinan described the Wilson/ horse incident as:




If true (and given Callinans form I would tend to believe it), These are shocking and unbelievable derogatory comments for a commissioner to make about members of the public, and force.

Then we have the missing phones and claims that numerous paperwork had been shredded.

I find it hard to fathom how any past or present members of AGS could defend any of these allegations.

The force is supposed to uphold the law, not act like they're above it, or only certain aspects of it apply to them.

AGS are going to defend the allegations. The whole Garda culture has to be protected. AGS has had its own agenda for decades.

Rubberchikken

Of course the asg will defend any allegations.
Its how they operate.
Erasing the entire force and starting again wont fix it until we have politicians that are lawful and not interfering in policing and a force that is trained from the top down to do a professional lawful job but thats never going to happen

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

Political advantage. Simple enough motive.

Already answered a similar suggestion below.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I'd say at this stage of his career, McGuinness is set for life (how many pensions would he have clocked up?) I think it would quite foolish to embroil himself in tribunals where claims he was making were spurious ones.

McGuinness has been fairly consistent from the off with his story about Bewleys hotel, and what was said to him, this came long before the Tulsa revelation, the emails with Frances Fitzgerald saga, and other controversies surrounding this whole sorry mess.

As I already posted, Callinan left no one in any doubts what his thoughtson the whistleblowers were.

I find it completely plausible that he said what McGuinness claims he said.

Phoebas

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Already answered a similar suggestion below.



McGuinness has been fairly consistent from the off with his story about Bewleys hotel, and what was said to him, this came long before the Tulsa revelation, the emails with Frances Fitzgerald saga, and other controversies surrounding this whole sorry mess.

As I already posted, Callinan left no one in any doubts what his thoughtson the whistleblowers were.

I find it completely plausible that he said what McGuinness claims he said.

McGuinness kept the secret meeting secret for a good while.
We have the chairman of the PAC holding a secret meeting with an upcoming witness that we keeps secret from the committee members.

Both of them are very badly compromised in this. I'd suggest that anyone thinking that McGuiness is 'completely plausible' is doing so because they want to believe him.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Already answered a similar suggestion below.



McGuinness has been fairly consistent from the off with his story about Bewleys hotel, and what was said to him, this came long before the Tulsa revelation, the emails with Frances Fitzgerald saga, and other controversies surrounding this whole sorry mess.

As I already posted, Callinan left no one in any doubts what his thoughtson the whistleblowers were.

I find it completely plausible that he said what McGuinness claims he said.

It is plausible that Callinan said what he said. It is also plausible that he didn't. It is plausible that McGuinness conflated conversations with different people or that he assume something from what Callinan said backed up a rumour he had heard elsewhere. We aren't hearing the full evidence or seeing the body language of the witnesses. Ultimately Charleton will decide, based on the balance of probabilities.

McGuinness still has big ambitions. He would want to be a Minister in a FF government and his ambitions might not stop there.

RustyNut

blanch152 wrote: »

I someone steals my phone, I am not criminally negligent. If my phone is upgraded and I wipe and carefully destroy my old phone, I am not criminally negligent. If my phone is lost despite me taking great care of it, I am not criminally negligent.

Your not the head of the state security service.

tayto lover

Rubberchikken wrote: »

Of course the asg will defend any allegations.
Its how they operate.
Erasing the entire force and starting again wont fix it until we have politicians that are lawful and not interfering in policing and a force that is trained from the top down to do a professional lawful job but thats never going to happen

That's my point always. Political interference.
If Mc Guinness was a FG member do you think he'd be bringing up all this stuff?
Does anyone seriously think this?

blanch152

tayto lover wrote: »

That's my point always. Political interference.
If Mc Guinness was a FG member do you think he'd be bringing up all this stuff?
Does anyone seriously think this?

McGuinness sat on the information for two years, for whatever reason, possibly content that he had a direct line into the Commissioner for whatever political reason he might need. McGuinness is a part of the problem.

tayto lover

blanch152 wrote: »

McGuinness sat on the information for two years, for whatever reason, possibly content that he had a direct line into the Commissioner for whatever political reason he might need. McGuinness is a part of the problem.

Indeed. Why was there a meeting at all? Why did Mc Guinness say he didn't tell Micheal Martin about it and why did Martin then say that he did tell him?
Mc Guinness also said that he didn't take notes but they were found two years later?
I never trust politicians as they're all out for themselves first and foremost and after that to put down mistrust in other politicians and parties. Poor auld Mc Cabe was only being used by them for political reasons as they couldn't care less about him or his family imo.

McMurphy

tayto lover wrote: »

That's my point always. Political interference.
If Mc Guinness was a FG member do you think he'd be bringing up all this stuff?
Does anyone seriously think this?

Wasn't Callinan an FF appointee though, so that seems pretty irrelevant.

tayto lover

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Wasn't Callinan an FF appointee though, so that seems pretty irrelevant.

They would hang their own in order to get into power so relevence doesn't really come into it.
I'm reading now that McGuinness said he did not deliberately withhold from interviewer Richard Crowley that he had made a note of the meeting after telling him he made no notes. The note was squeezed into a wee gap in a notebook apparently.:pac:

blanch152

tayto lover wrote: »

They would hang their own in order to get into power so relevence doesn't really come into it.
I'm reading now that McGuinness said he did not deliberately withhold from interviewer Richard Crowley that he had made a note of the meeting after telling him he made no notes. The note was squeezed into a wee gap in a notebook apparently.:pac:

That only leads to more questions.

If the note was squeezed into a wee gap, was that done at the same time as everything else in the notebook, or was it added at a later date to give credibility to testimony?

I don not envy the judge on this one, having to weigh up the conflicting evidence of politicians and Callinan.

James Brown

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Firearms are kept in a locked safe. Phones are kept on a table or shelf. Like I said above. Give secure storage for things you expect to be kept secured.

Sometimes firearms are left in toilets.
You are responsible for tax payer/state owned property. The fact that they went through so many phones suggests incompetence or something more sinister, and them law enforcement.

Look at it this way, we have McCabe making claims about improprieties within Garda ranks. Then we have the scandalous way he was treated after being decent enough to try sort out the mess the Garda are. Then we've people in the organisation out to smear him, from missing evidence to personal slurs.
Based on the organisation and it's obvious poor sense of decency and fair play, I'm inclined to believe McGuinness. He is another player with another story, attacking his character will not save the reputation of Callinan or the Garda. I can't see anyone, with nothing tangible to gain, getting involved and telling lies. I can however see people with something to lose, doing that.
The boiler plate 'full confidence' is just something politicians trot out to put on a front. Ask them for details on what and they'll become vague and forgetful.

tayto lover

blanch152 wrote: »

That only leads to more questions.

If the note was squeezed into a wee gap, was that done at the same time as everything else in the notebook, or was it added at a later date to give credibility to testimony?

I don not envy the judge on this one, having to weigh up the conflicting evidence of politicians and Callinan.

Who benefitted from the squashing of the penalty points? Ans - The Golden Circle, Politicians, Judges, Famous personalities, High ranking garda members.

Who squashed them? Ans Garda of not below the rank of Superintendant.
Who made them Superintendants? Ans - Politicians or those appointed by politicians.

The circle is squared.

McMurphy

Here's something I've noticed, lots of comments about where and when McGuinness wrote his notes.

Nothing from the same posters about almost a dozen missing phones and shredded paperwork.