Olympic Council fella Pat Hickey Arrested in Rio

CMOTDibbler

ahlookit wrote: »

The police have alleged gouging rather than touting, which is a more serious crime there. €400 tickets being sold for €7000 seems to elevate it to gouging level. That money went somewhere - now they need to find it

Yeah, sorry I'm equating those two words as being the same thing but gouging is the correct term.

ahlookit wrote: »

Olive Loughnane saying she got one single ticket over the course of four olympics suggests this may have been going on for a while. I'd say antennae are twitching down in Revenue these days.

I think she was implying that she got one ticket for each games. It's not clear but she says "one single ticket for my event". This was a reply to a tweet that said athletes were to get two tickets for their event. But that tweet refers to Brazil which may have increased the allocation since Beijing when she last competed. From what I can make out, the NOC tickets are for everything. They could have tickets for swimming heats or first round soccer matches that nobody really wants.

ahlookit wrote: »

The fact they are still in contact is the bit thats in question - and how much contact there was between them a few months ago when Pro10 was being set up and bidding to be the ATR.

Looking at this article from RTE, it seems he was being somewhat economical with the truth:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0811/808451-olympic-tickets/

Yeah. That was pretty economical alright.

Stacksofwacks

philstar wrote: »

well it should be a criminal offence here, long overdue

If Pat Hickey or any of the other OCI members profited from this directly, then at best it's corrupt practices from the ruling body, at worst it's fraud. Hopefully the inquiry will find all this out. also, Marcus Evans the individual and Marcus Evans the company are two completely separate entities. Pat Hickey in those emails may have just been emailing an employee of the company, so it may not be what it seems at first glance. Marcus Evan's the individual is a reclusive alleged billionaire and it would be amazing if he was personally involved in such a 2 bit scam.

Thoie

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Yeah. That was pretty economical alright.

Hey lads, is it time for the OCI to start trotting out lines about "mental reservations" yet?

FrancieBrady

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

If Pat Hickey or any of the other OCI members profited from this directly, then at best it's corrupt practices from the ruling body, at worst it's fraud. Hopefully the inquiry will find all this out. also, Marcus Evans the individual and Marcus Evans the company are two completely separate entities. Pat Hickey in those emails may have just been emailing an employee of the company, so it may not be what it seems at first glance. Marcus Evan's the individual is a reclusive alleged billionaire and it would be amazing if he was personally involved in such a 2 bit scam.

Don't they say they have 'call me' texts between the two, after Mallon's arrest?

jmayo

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I doubt they just swooped last week.

They may have had this kind of shenanigans in their sights for a while, and then knocked on the doors at the right time for maximum publicity.

They sure knocked them all out for now anyway.

Might make our own take note too. Which can't be bad either. But nothing will happen here like it has in Brazil.

THG were on the radar and were banned after the World Cup from doing business in Brazil.
Hickey's link to THG and ticket selling was on the radar of Romario since 2012.
In August 2016 a THG employee/executive turns up in Rio.

Then being overly greedy is probably what finally did it for THG.
They shafted what looked like some real rich and being Brazil probably some very well connected people.

THG sold them tickets for supposedly $6,000 which were meant to have champagne reception in top Rio hotel, with supposed access to Olympic athletes and instead they took them to a hotel out in suburbs, gave them finger food and soft drinks.

Next thing you know Mallon is arrested and probably starts singing like a canary.

CFlat wrote: »

Yea sure, we've never sent any white collar crims to jail, ever, no siree we have not.

You might want to do some research on that.

How many of the Irish who ran ponzi schemes, and even openly admitted it, gone to jail.
Breffni O'Brien admitted to it in 2008 but he wasn't jailed for seven years until 2014.
WTF took so long ?

Insider trading in Ireland is not illegal and executives can effectively screw their own shareholders and have.
Has any stockbrokers gone to jail for screwing over their own clients and getting them to invest in failing parent banks ?

Have high profile politicians who admitted to tax evasion gone to jail ?

Have any public sector body CEOs gone to jail for fraudently claiming expenses ?

8/9 years after the bank meltdown have any bank CEOS/chairmen gone to jail yet for breaching lending guidelines, fraudently breaching companies acts regarding loans to directors and misleading shareholders with loan/deposit agreements ?

jive wrote: »

Catching an elderly man on the hop with a video camera in the nip in his hotel room is most definitely wrong. Can you honestly argue otherwise? Innocent until proven guilty, it's like a perp walk for an innocent man except even more demeaning.

Correction it wasn't his room, but his sons.
His wife had lied to police by all accounts.

maudgonner wrote: »

He showed no respect for Yulia Stepanova, despite the fact that she was instrumental in exposing the biggest doping scandal in history, and her life may be at risk because of it.

And he showed utter contempt for the victim of paedophile swimming coach George Gibney, who he pursued for 95k in legal costs.

How many wrongs is that now?

hickey never did respect.

CFlat wrote: »

It's absolutely about extorting money. All the Police saw were some rich American swimmers who will be their next big pay day. Simple as that.

I've been to Brazil and money talks, all the time.

You could be talking about hickey/evans who also thought some rich Brazilians and others were easy marks for a ticket scam by all accounts.

Deleted User wrote: »

Taking his passport and remanding a person from another country in custody would apply here too were the roles reversed. That's a legitimate bail process.

The unusual aspects from the Irish angle would be showing the arrest, selectively leaking aspects of the investigation and alleged evidence to the media to colour opinion, and remanding a 71 year old in a prison with people convicted of serious crimes.

conor conor we all know you as part of the system will defend it to the end.

The unusual aspect of this in Irish terms was that he was actually arrested and put in jail full stop.

Ireland does tribunals and enquiries by selected judges and nobody goes to jail in the end.

STB.

Deleted User wrote: »

Woah woah woah, you keep referring to Gibney. I fully accept that she was abused and that he was a horrific character...but lots of reference to him are of no relevance to the topic.

Let's keep this on topic. How about referring to Hickey? How did the legal system fail her with reference to Hickey and the OCI?

etc

Pat Hickey was the president of the OCI at the time they pursued that victim in question for legal costs. The legacy that represents ones country in swimming and the all of these organisations complete mishandling or refusal to tackle the problem for decades is disgraceful.

I suggest you read it from the start. Read it all. http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/04/29/unreasonable-delay/
I got about half way through it before my head exploded.

When you get to the question that Justine McCarthy posed at February 26, 2012, you should be able to figure out yourself whether it was morally right for the OCI to do what they did. And bear in mind how long this stuff was going on and who served where at what times.

Then you wont be using whoa whoa whoa and questioning the relevance to this thread.

CMOTDibbler

Shuttle666 wrote: »

While there has been much comment about whether much of what happened was illegal, diverting tickets away from the intended recipients (family and friends of athletes) is a far cry from the Olympic ideal. So far we have only see a few athletes go public about the difficulties they have had securing tickets, but I think it has been a quite common occurrence over the recent history of the Games, and probably not just limited to OCI.

AFAIK, family and friends tickets are different from public and NOC tickets and are marked as such. I was able to enlarge some of the pictures of the tickets that the cops picked up and they were mostly public tickets and one or two NOC tickets (the police say they got more than twenty of them). I didn't see any family or friends tickets, but it would be good to see what they looked like. The designation of the ticket is in coloured print just above the area that gives the price and class of the ticket. On the Irish tickets I've seen, the print is green surprisingly. I've also seen German tickets and the print on those was blue.

ahlookit

Shuttle666 wrote: »

So far we have only see a few athletes go public about the difficulties they have had securing tickets, but I think it has been a quite common occurrence over the recent history of the Games, and probably not just limited to OCI.

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I think she was implying that she got one ticket for each games. It's not clear but she says "one single ticket for my event". This was a reply to a tweet that said athletes were to get two tickets for their event. But that tweet refers to Brazil which may have increased the allocation since Beijing when she last competed. From what I can make out, the NOC tickets are for everything. They could have tickets for swimming heats or first round soccer matches that nobody really wants.

Would love to see a journo do an interview with Loughnane or some other ex Olympians to see what their view of OCI ticketing is. And did they discuss this with athletes from other countries, and were their experiences similar or is this solely an OCI issue.

the suspense of not yet seeing Pat's new hairdo is terrible.

CMOTDibbler

jmayo wrote: »

Insider trading in Ireland is not illegal and executives can effectively screw their own shareholders and have.

Insider trading is illegal in Ireland! It's a criminal and civil offence. It's covered by both Irish and EU law.

LordSutch

Morally speaking is ticket touting wrong?

Obviously in Brazil ticket touting is illegal, (while in Ireland its not illegal), but where is our moral compass on this issue? if a Rio Olympic ticket costing 100 Euro can then be sold to some desperate (parent of an Olympian) for 7000 Euro!!!

Is that practice morally right?

Personally speaking I think it should be illegal (if a ticketing sales company) like Pro 10 is involved.

I don't care what touting is freely done between people at the gates of the AviVa, but I would be very anti "Official Touting" as performed in Rio.

CMOTDibbler

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Insider trading is illegal in Ireland! It's a criminal and civil offence. It's covered by both Irish and EU law.

and when has anyone ever been successfully prosecuted for this in Ireland - never afaik.

even when it was a very cut-and-dry case the guy got off.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/after-years-of-digging-jim-flavin-makes-a-great-escape-26625867.html

Ireland is just a fantastic place for white-collar criminals.

CMOTDibbler

LordSutch wrote: »

Morally speaking is ticket touting wrong?

Obviously in Brazil ticket touting is illegal, (while in Ireland its not illegal), but where is our moral compass on this issue? if a Rio Olympic ticket costing 100 Euro can then be sold to some desperate (parent of an Olympian) for 7000 Euro!!!

Is that practice morally right?

Personally speaking speaking I think it should be illegal (if a ticketing sales company) like Pro 10 is involved.

I don't care what touting is freely done between people at the gates of the AviVa, but I would be very anti "Official Touting" as performed in Rio.

I hate it. I have never bought an above face value ticket in my life and I never will. But if you make it illegal, it should be all illegal. Otherwise there will be loopholes for people to climb through.

CMOTDibbler

glasso wrote: »

and when has anyone ever been successfully prosecuted for this in Ireland - never afaik.

even when it was a very cut-and-dry case the guy got off.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/after-years-of-digging-jim-flavin-makes-a-great-escape-26625867.html

Ireland is just a fantastic place for white-collar criminals.

I'm very wary of jumping to conclusions based on an article printed in the Indo.

There's no real info there to draw a conclusion.

Calahonda52

LordSutch wrote: »

Morally speaking is ticket touting wrong?

Obviously in Brazil ticket touting is illegal, (while in Ireland its not illegal), but where is our moral compass on this issue? if a Rio Olympic ticket costing 100 Euro can then be sold to some desperate (parent of an Olympian) for 7000 Euro!!!

Is that practice morally right?

Personally speaking I think it should be illegal (if a ticketing sales company) like Pro 10 is involved.

I don't care what touting is freely done between people at the gates of the AviVa, but I would be very anti "Official Touting" as performed in Rio.

If the 7k, minus some acceptable admin, was used to fund the next batch of athletes then all very well: punter pays what market will bear...etc etc.

However when the 7k goes into someone arse pocket, tax free, then the moral compass is where the sun don't shine.

Let the advertising sponsors fund the first class [ air tickets, hotels, hookers, rent boys, restaurants etc] but don't have the 7k used for it

Means Of Escape

This non statutory inquiry is toothless and a waste of time .
No one with a scintilla of a connection to corruption in this mess will testify to anything . They will go off and play golf.
This is the pussy footing around that I aluded to earlier . A testing of the water so to speak
After thousands of euros spent and reports published they will have nothing to show for it .
THEN they will move to a statutory tribunal if the pathetic attempt reveals widescale and habitual flouting of the law whereby those called will not e able to confirm facts ,be ill,get a sausage fingered solicitor to block with letters etc etc
Dead duck

Something new comes up
Forgotten about .
Done before
Monkeys and donkeys led by foxes.

Awesomeness

LordSutch wrote: »

Morally speaking is ticket touting wrong?

Obviously in Brazil ticket touting is illegal, (while in Ireland its not illegal), but where is our moral compass on this issue? if a Rio Olympic ticket costing 100 Euro can then be sold to some desperate (parent of an Olympian) for 7000 Euro!!!

Is that practice morally right?

Personally speaking I think it should be illegal (if a ticketing sales company) like Pro 10 is involved.

I don't care what touting is freely done between people at the gates of the AviVa, but I would be very anti "Official Touting" as performed in Rio.

I cannot stand touts they are out and out criminals. I have sold numerous extra tickets for events over the years but never above face value and only to be people I was convinced would be going themselves.

Why should the parent of an olympian pay 7000 and not the 100 it should cost because some scumbag wants to exploit their interest

daisybelle2008

ahlookit wrote: »

The fact they are still in contact is the bit thats in question - and how much contact there was between them a few months ago when Pro10 was being set up and bidding to be the ATR.

There is no evidence Start-up PRo10 were awarded contract in a bidding process. It looks like they didn't have to try that hard. Why were PRO10 unable to sell opening and closing ceremony tickets and happily let Hickey give them to THG to sell at face value?

elastico wrote: »

That's the point though. There is no evidence in the email released, or any other items of interest put forward to suggest Hickey was getting any payment for the tickets.

Hickey just gave a banned ATR the tickets out of the goodness of his heart? Why not use an official ATR and get Pro10 to work with IMM through official channels?
I think the fact it doesn't mention money is is very telling.

The Brazilian OC stated that THG Sports and any other company linked to its parent Marcus Evans Company are not authorised sellers, “the commercialisation of such tickets constitutes a contractual infraction and eventually, illegal, if they were commercialised above face value"

So far...
Hickey = contractual infraction, unless he gave Mallon the tickets for free i.e not commercialised to an unauthorised seller.
Mallon = illegal, if commercialised above face value

Now if we are to believe Hickey gave Mallon the tickets for free and Mallon was selling them at face value.....:rolleyes:

Hickey has some explaining to do to explain what the terms and conditions of THG getting the tickets.

The Bishop Basher

Means Of Escape wrote: »

This non statutory inquiry is toothless and a waste of time .
No one with a scintilla of a connection to corruption in this mess will not testify to anything . They will go off and play golf.
This is the pussy footing around that I aluded to earlier . A testing of the water so to speak
After thousands of euros spent and reports published they will have nothing to show for it .
THEN they will move to a statutory tribunal if the pathetic attempt reveals widescale and habitual flouting of the law whereby those called will not e able to confirm facts ,be ill,get a sausage fingered solicitor to block with letters etc etc
Dead duck

Something new comes up
Forgotten about .
Done before
Monkeys and donkeys led by foxes.

You have it in a nutshell.

Thankfully on this occasion we have the Brazillians to ensure that justice is done..

Enda and Norin - watch and learn..

Means Of Escape

Brendan Howlin is bemoaning the treatment of Hickey so the wagons are starting to circle
Rather than stating that the laws in other countries do not mirror ours and to stress the importance of respecting them
Politicians breaking bread with these head honchos is not a good for democracy .
Proves that if this broke in Ireland he and his ilk would be shielded ,cosseted and helped through pc gone mad .
Only for our tenacious journalists they would be culpable for nothing .

jackofalltrades

LordSutch wrote: »

Morally speaking is ticket touting wrong?

Yes, in most cases it's people with power(preferential access to tickets) screwing over people who don't.

ahlookit

STB. wrote: »

Pat Hickey was the president of the OCI at the time they pursued that victim in question for legal costs. The legacy that represents ones country in swimming and the all of these organisations complete mishandling or refusal to tackle the problem for decades is disgraceful.

I suggest you read it from the start. Read it all. http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/04/29/unreasonable-delay/
I got about half way through it before my head exploded.

When you get to the question that Justine McCarthy posed at February 26, 2012, you should be able to figure out yourself whether it was morally right for the OCI to do what they did. And bear in mind how long this stuff was going on and who served where at what times.

Then you wont be using whoa whoa whoa and questioning the relevance to this thread.

The article says get a big mug of tay. I think you need something much stronger to get through it.

So many kids and families lives ruined. So many complaints ignored and hushed up.

And a despicable perpetrator flies off into the sunset to carry on the abuse.

And for people who cast aspersions on the Brazilian justice system, read this article which was linked to the one STB posted:

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/04/29/the-chief-justice-her-brother-and-how-george-gibney-got-away/

The Irish system has many questions to answer as well

CMOTDibbler

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I'm very wary of jumping to conclusions based on an article printed in the Indo.

There's no real info there to draw a conclusion.

point is nobody has ever done time in Ireland for insider trading.

not one person.

The Fyffes case was blatant.

Just used the indo article as a reference - not as proof.

Birdie Num Num

Shuttle666 wrote: »

While there has been much comment about whether much of what happened was illegal, diverting tickets away from the intended recipients (family and friends of athletes) is a far cry from the Olympic ideal. So far we have only see a few athletes go public about the difficulties they have had securing tickets, but I think it has been a quite common occurrence over the recent history of the Games, and probably not just limited to OCI.

There is so much conjecture, speculation and rubbish being aired by many in relation to all this. The distribution and selling of tickets for the games is flawed and open to malpractice. Having attended the two previous games I have formed somewhat of an educated opinion. There needs to be a mechanism for real supporters to buy tickets at face value right up to the last minute if they are available. In theory they should become available as competitors progress or not through to subsequent rounds.

The hosting organising committee has a duty to ensure that tickets are available for the people of the hosting city/country and travelling supporters from abroad first and foremost. The problem for travelling supporters, friends and family is that in many cases it can be a last minute decision or at least just a few months out from the games before deciding to go. It's not like when soccer World Cup tickets are released for Ireland's 3 matches in the group stages and you can decide to go the host country on that basis and support Ireland. With the Olympic games tickets are issued long before teams or individuals have guaranteed themselves a qualifying place. For example the Irish Women's rugby sevens team only lost out on qualification weeks before the games as did many athletes. Some athletes from all countries qualified just weeks before. I think our men's hockey team were late enough too.

In my experience of travelling to a previous games and attending events, the only option for getting tickets was through unofficial channels except through Cosport the US ATR. I had reservations about Cosport however, in what they were communicating. They claimed tickets came back to them, returned as unwanted by their clients but in reality they were less desirable tickets with restricted views etc. Plus they were sold above face value.

Hickey, THG and Pro10 have many questions to answer. Who even knew Pro10 was the official ATR prior to the scandal? I'd say most Irish people wishing to attend the games wouldn't have known publicly where to go for tickets in an official capacity.

It is a real shame that this stuff goes on and ticket sales are open to corruption. It's also a shame that sport suffers and the gloss is taken off the achievements of competitors at the games. What I fear is that these are the people, along with their sports and sports clubs around the country that will suffer in funding and otherwise. It's also a shame that the various ministers for sport are solely focused on Ireland Inc and the scandal rather than sport itself. I may be wrong but I saw very little support of the Irish team from political quarters.

jmayo

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Insider trading is illegal in Ireland! It's a criminal and civil offence. It's covered by both Irish and EU law.

Sorry I thought insider trading in Ireland was not a crime at time of that infamous incident.
That was what did for the likes of Martha Stewart and helped bring down Michael Milken in the states.

BTW there have been a few instances where there was distinct probability of insider trading here.
I mean funny how trading volumes jump just days before impending takeover is announced. :rolleyes:

One was Aer Lingus where the trading volumes jumped drastically the days before announcement of IAG's takeover attempt.

BTW it is our ever vigilant Central Bank that monitors share trading here and investigates these very strange occurrences.
Nothing to worry about then I guess. :rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

Do we know if he is definitely in court today?

maudgonner

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Do we know if he is definitely in court today?

Friday at the earliest, according to this:

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rio-2016-olympics/pat-hickey-will-not-appear-in-rio-court-until-friday-at-the-earliest-34988743.html

daisybelle2008

Means Of Escape wrote: »

This non statutory inquiry is toothless and a waste of time .
No one with a scintilla of a connection to corruption in this mess will testify to anything . They will go off and play golf.
This is the pussy footing around that I aluded to earlier .

Barristers get richer, taxpayer gets stung for nothing, and even if litigious Hickey testified he can sue PAC (or whoever) for damaging his health due to the line of questioning. He wasn't long getting a hospital visit when arrested :rolleyes:.

darkpagandeath

daisybelle2008 wrote: »

Barristers get richer, taxpayer gets stung for nothing, and even if litigious Hickey testified he can sue PAC (or whoever) for damaging his health due to the line of questioning. He wasn't long getting a hospital visit when arrested :rolleyes:.

Odd they put an elderly frail man in charge of the OCI......

daisybelle2008

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Odd they put an elderly frail man in charge of the OCI......

I have a feeling Pats health will quickly deteriorate from robust fitness running 5 times a week in the Phoenix park, when the questions start getting tough.

CMOTDibbler

jmayo wrote: »

Sorry I thought insider trading in Ireland was not a crime at time of that infamous incident.
That was what did for the likes of Martha Stewart and helped bring down Michael Milken in the states.

BTW there have been a few instances where there was distinct probability of insider trading here.
I mean funny how trading volumes jump just days before impending takeover is announced. :rolleyes:

One was Aer Lingus where the trading volumes jumped drastically the days before announcement of IAG's takeover attempt.

BTW it is our ever vigilant Central Bank that monitors share trading here and investigates these very strange occurrences.
Nothing to worry about then I guess. :rolleyes:

It's notoriously difficult to prove though. The biggest one in the UK which concluded this year cost them £14 million and only got five of the eight defendants.

They only got their first conviction in 2009. The longest prison sentence handed out so far was four years. It's equally difficult in the US and has got even more difficult after a recent Supreme Court ruling.

As usual here, we have the laws but not the resources to enforce them. You need a lot of very specialised people to do it. The UK watchdog; the FCA have over 2,500 staff and they're experiencing a lot of resignations lately for better paid jobs elsewhere.

The main problem for us is that most of our bigger securities are traded on other markets like the LSE and that makes the process of tracking down insider trading hugely difficult.

fullstop

Muahahaha wrote: »

Hickey/Marcus Evans relationship going back to 2010, which coincidentally is when John Delaney first gave Evans a contract to sell corporate tickets and boxes in the south stand of Lansdowne.

No corporate boxes in the South Stand, just the general corporate tickets with tables out the back of the stand. The boxes are along the East and West stands.

Lyaiera wrote: »

This thread is like watching a masterclass of spin, lies and obfuscation. Pat Hickey himself would be proud of it all. Bravo. And some in this thread actually doing it for free!

We're No. 1!

Soooo...this scandal you mentioned the other day

brooke 2

maudgonner wrote: »

What hell was this victim of child abuse put through by the legal system?

First the DPP decide not to seek an extradition from the USA for Gibney, so there is no chance she will get to see him face legal charges.

So she and her family decide to take a civil case. You say 'the case went nowhere' as if this is the fault of the case? It took a journalist to discover that the solicitor had never served the papers. Now you're the legal expert, but the fact that the family successfully claimed against his insurance suggests that he let them down in that matter.

A judge threw out the civil case, meaning that for a second time, the girl was denied her chance to have her day in court.

All the while, Gibney is living the high life out in the USA and fresh allegations of abuse are emerging over there. When journalists questioned how he gained a visa, who signed a form to say he was of good character, and submitted a FOI request, they got back a massively, ridiculously redacted file. (And before you say it, I know that's not a result of the Irish legal system. I never specified it was just the Irish system that put her through hell).

And on top of all that there's the fact that the whole decision not to prosecute Gibney in the first place came down to a Supreme Court decision where one of the judges on the bench was the sister of the barrister representing Gibney. Something which is against the UN's Code of Conduct. That landmark decision (on historical claims of abuse being too old to allow a fair trial) has led to a litany of alleged abusers not having to stand trial.

As to the rest of your post - why shouldn't Hickey have gone after her for legal costs? Human decency maybe? Which is why I keep bringing this up, and why it was mentioned in the article. People keep going on about how we should feel sorry for him. And I myself felt some sympathy for him being held in that particular prison. But not after I read that article. Why should I feel sympathy for him after the way he treated her, after the way tried to bully the reporter who asked him if he felt his actions were warranted? I'll save my sympathy for the real victims.

+100

ahlookit

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Odd they put an elderly frail man in charge of the OCI......

Sure he was a young slip of a thing at 44 when he was first elected.
Delaney has bean CEO of FAI for nearly 12 years.

There should be a 2 term limit on any of these roles in sports administration - 4 year term * 2 = 8 years max.

Of course a special exemption would exist for Frank Murphy in Cork, but there's probably a whole other thread on that!

anothernight

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I don't know if you know this or not, but ticket touting is not a crime here and indeed most of the rest of the world. Selling a ticket above face value is a breach of your agreement with the ticket issuer and they can go after you in civil court, but it's not a criminal offence.

According to the Brazilian newspapers I've read, it's not just the touting that got Hickey intro trouble. It's also fraud. They were selling hospitality packages and not delivering the service their customers had paid for. The investigation is about fraud.

EDIT: I looked up the specific law that makes touting illegal, and it's from 1951, so it wasn't implemented because of the olympics. Specifically, it's Article 2 IX 1521/51, which is about "crimes against the people's economy". They're supposed to be crimes that affect an undefined number of people in such a way that innocent people lose money. Other things included in that designation are cutting products and selling them as pure, selling a lower weight of a product than is stated on the label, false advertising and a lot of other stuff. For touting, it says it's a crime regardless of whether the buyers know that they're paying more than face value.

There is also another law from 2010 (article 41-F of 12299/2010) that specifies that ticket touting for sport events is a crime, and defines the penalty for it to be of between 1 and 2 years of prison, plus a fine. The sentence can be increased by a third to a half if the person convicted is an employee or official of the sport institution responsible for organising the competition, or of a company with the contract for distributing and selling the tickets.

Muahahaha

seamus wrote: »

The Irish system is not that corrupt. Just painfully ineffective.

We love a good tribunal. Something that goes on for at least a decade, where hopefully the original judge dies and has to be replaced. Costing the country 8 or even 9 figures, it produces a tome at the end to rival Game of Thrones both in size and scandal. And then nothing can happen because the tribunal never had any powers to actually do anything except make a report, and all chances of bringing criminals charges have now been lost.

I agree with this view that they can be toothless but that doesnt mean we should stop holding them where necessary. Granted tribunals can be costly and lengthy but often the reason behind that is because the witnesses who show up tell a pack of lies and then it becomes even harder and longer for the judge to get to the truth of the issue. But that shouldnt mean they dont happen IMO as these are matters of public importance. They happen for good reason, consider the following, their purposes and their costs:-

Smithwick Tribunal- established to find out if Gardai colluded with the IRA to murder two RUC officers. Cost €12m

Morris Tribunal -established to determine the framing (by Gardai) of Frank Brearty of the manslaughter of cattle dealer Richie Barron. As truth came out it then moved to Gardai planting bombs and guns in Donegal to find them again to get promotions as well as a host of more Garda corruption. Cost €70m

Mahon Tribunal- established to uncover planning corruption in the Dublin area. Cost €160m

Moriarty Tribunal- examined corrupt payments from Denis OBrien to Michael Lowry for his assistance in gaining the second mobile phone licence. Cost €46m

McCracken Tribunal- looked at corrupt payments by businessman Ben Dunne to Charlie Haughey and Michael Lowry. Cost €6.5m

Filnlay Tribunal -examined problems in the Health Service that led to patients being infected by Hep C. Cost €4.5m


Some points-
The Tribunals involving Garda collusion/corruption/murder simply had to be held as did the one on Hepatitis C.

Mahon and Moriarity were the most costly tribunals. In the Moriarty this was because of conflicting evidence left, right and center between Denis OBrien, Michael Lowry, Ben Dunne and pals. If the truth was told to the judge these matters would have been over a lot quicker. Same went for the Mahon but this time it was FF politicians like Liam Lawlor and Charlie Haughey telling lies and extending the time it took.

Finally despite all the above costs- consider this- the McCracken Tribunal cost €6.5m but the Revenue yield from it has been more than €250m as it was Judge McCrackens investigation which revealed the Ansbacher accounts in the Cayman Islands where 700 of the Irish establishment hid their money. Revenue had a field day charging interest and penalties on back taxes.

IMO the problem we have with tribunals is not the actual tribunal itself, they have done sterling work which was a matter of huge public importance and interest.

The problem we have is the actual structure of the Tribunal, something which is written by the politicians, not the judges holding them. In the US when you face a Grand Jury the FBI brings all witnesses into a room for an act known as "giving them some truth serum". They involves outlining to all witnesses that if they dont tell the truth then the FBI will come down on them like a ton of bricks which over there means lengthy prison sentences.

Here in Ireland the concept of prosecuting someone for perjury is almost unheard of. So our lot go into the judge, tell lies and get away with it. This undoubtedly needs to change with Gardai willing to prosecute perjury and stiff sentences for lying in the witness box.

Finally the cost of the above six tribunals has been €298m. If people told the truth the costs would likely have been under half of that, especially with the Mahon tribunal which was essentially a pack of county councillors, property developers and TDs telling lie after lie about brown envelopes.

The yield has been over €250m and is still rising with Revenue still prosecuting the final 6 Ansbacher accounts. So far the net cost to the State has been €48m across those six tribunals held in the last 25 years.

Now if we could only find a way to make sure people tell the truth at these public inquiries like other countries do then we would actually have a very good system. That is in the gift of the government of the day who write the terms of reference. If that could be done costs would come tumbling down but as long as witnesses know they can lie in a witness box and get away with it then the Tribunal will take twice as long as it should.

A tribunal is actually a good system for getting to the truth and the judges have done excellent work IMO. The problem lies with the political sphere who write the rules, not with the legal sphere who apply them.

Moo Moo Land

ahlookit wrote: »

There should be a 2 term limit on any of these roles in sports administration - 4 year term * 2 = 8 years max.

+1000

This absolutely needs to be done - for all organisations and charities!

EndaHonesty

ahlookit wrote: »

Sure he was a young slip of a thing at 44 when he was first elected.
Delaney has bean CEO of FAI for nearly 12 years.

There should be a 2 term limit on any of these roles in sports administration - 4 year term * 2 = 8 years max.

Not only these roles. Career politicians are just as bad, there should be a 2 term limit on all politicians.

And a ban on family members taking over seats from other family members.

CMOTDibbler

Moo Moo Land wrote: »

+1000

This absolutely needs to be done - for all organisations and charities!

This could certainly be the case with organisations that pay their sports administrators. Or where (like the OCI) it's quite a poweful or at least influential position.

The problems start to appear when volunteers are in charge. A lot of the time, getting people to actually volunteer is a struggle and in many cases just doesn't happen. People aren't volunteering any more. There are many reasons for this, but presures of work, family life etc. can be factors as well as the general belief that "it's somebody else's job" or because it's such a thankless task where all you'd get is grief and hardship.

I volunteered for a local club over twenty years ago. I'm still there, despite pleading and begging other people to take on the task, or just to help out a bit. I joined another club recently and even though I know they need volunteers, I won't turn up at the AGM in case I'm railroaded into something.

Alive1

EndaHonesty wrote: »

Not only these roles. Career politicians are just as bad, there should be a 2 term limit on all politicians.

And a ban on family members taking over seats from other family members.

yeah
lets outlaw democracy
people should not be allowed to vote for whom they coose

darkpagandeath

Alive1 wrote: »

yeah
lets outlaw democracy
people should not be allowed to vote for whom they coose

You cant. you can only vote for those that the party field. Unless you vote Indi. So You will be getting a large amount of career inherited seater's to chose from.

ahlookit

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

This could certainly be the case with organisations that pay their sports administrators. Or where (like the OCI) it's quite a poweful or at least influential position.

The problems start to appear when volunteers are in charge. A lot of the time, getting people to actually volunteer is a struggle and in many cases just doesn't happen. People aren't volunteering any more. There are many reasons for this, but presures of work, family life etc. can be factors as well as the general belief that "it's somebody else's job" or because it's such a thankless task where all you'd get is grief and hardship.

I volunteered for a local club over twenty years ago. I'm still there, despite pleading and begging other people to take on the task, or just to help out a bit. I joined another club recently and even though I know they need volunteers, I won't turn up at the AGM in case I'm railroaded into something.

First of all, fair play for doing your bit.

Do you think more people would volunteer if they reckoned they would be out of a given role in a fixed time?

If someone asked me to take on their role in the local club, and they had been there for 20 years I'd run a mile... but if they said its for x years and then you'll be replaced I'd be more receptive.

Its something we discuss at our local club - attracting and retaining the right volunteers. I know its not easy and its generally a thankless task as you say.
Just try to rope them in by stealth

jmayo

Muahahaha wrote: »

I agree with this view that they can be toothless but that doesnt mean we should stop holding them where necessary. Granted tribunals can be costly and lengthy but often the reason behind that is because the witnesses who show up tell a pack of lies and then it becomes even harder and longer for the judge to get to the truth of the issue. But that shouldnt mean they dont happen IMO as these are matters of public importance. They happen for good reason, consider the following, their purposes and their costs:-

Smithwick Tribunal- established to find out if Gardai colluded with the IRA to murder two RUC officers. Cost €12m

Morris Tribunal -established to determine the framing (by Gardai) of Frank Brearty of the manslaughter of cattle dealer Richie Barron. As truth came out it then moved to Gardai planting bombs and guns in Donegal to find them again to get promotions as well as a host of more Garda corruption. Cost €70m

Mahon Tribunal- established to uncover planning corruption in the Dublin area. Cost €160m

Moriarty Tribunal- examined corrupt payments from Denis OBrien to Michael Lowry for his assistance in gaining the second mobile phone licence. Cost €46m

McCracken Tribunal- looked at corrupt payments by businessman Ben Dunne to Charlie Haughey and Michael Lowry. Cost €6.5m

Filnlay Tribunal -examined problems in the Health Service that led to patients being infected by Hep C. Cost €4.5m


Some points-
The Tribunals involving Garda collusion/corruption/murder simply had to be held as did the one on Hepatitis C.

Mahon and Moriarity were the most costly tribunals. In the Moriarty this was because of conflicting evidence left, right and center between Denis OBrien, Michael Lowry, Ben Dunne and pals. If the truth was told to the judge these matters would have been over a lot quicker. Same went for the Mahon but this time it was FF politicians like Liam Lawlor and Charlie Haughey telling lies and extending the time it took.

Finally despite all the above costs- consider this- the McCracken Tribunal cost €6.5m but the Revenue yield from it has been more than €250m as it was Judge McCrackens investigation which revealed the Ansbacher accounts in the Cayman Islands where 700 of the Irish establishment hid their money. Revenue had a field day charging interest and penalties on back taxes.

IMO the problem we have with tribunals is not the actual tribunal itself, they have done sterling work which was a matter of huge public importance and interest.

The problem we have is the actual structure of the Tribunal, something which is written by the politicians, not the judges holding them. In the US when you face a Grand Jury the FBI brings all witnesses into a room for an act known as "giving them some truth serum". They involves outlining to all witnesses that if they dont tell the truth then the FBI will come down on them like a ton of bricks which over there means lengthy prison sentences.

Here in Ireland the concept of prosecuting someone for perjury is almost unheard of. So our lot go into the judge, tell lies and get away with it. This undoubtedly needs to change with Gardai willing to prosecute perjury and stiff sentences for lying in the witness box.

Finally the cost of the above six tribunals has been €298m. If people told the truth the costs would likely have been under half of that, especially with the Mahon tribunal which was essentially a pack of county councillors, property developers and TDs telling lie after lie about brown envelopes.

The yield has been over €250m and is still rising with Revenue still prosecuting the final 6 Ansbacher accounts. So far the net cost to the State has been €48m across those six tribunals held in the last 25 years.

Now if we could only find a way to make sure people tell the truth at these public inquiries like other countries do then we would actually have a very good system. That is in the gift of the government of the day who write the terms of reference. If that could be done costs would come tumbling down but as long as witnesses know they can lie in a witness box and get away with it then the Tribunal will take twice as long as it should.

A tribunal is actually a good system for getting to the truth and the judges have done excellent work IMO. The problem lies with the political sphere who write the rules, not with the legal sphere who apply them.

After all those tribunals can you tell us how many people went to jail for fraud, corruption, perverting the course of justice ?

I know lawlor, burke, dunlop and redmond went to jail.
burke for making false tax returns, he got 6 months and served 4.5 month.
lawlor went to jail for failing to co-operate with Flood tribunal and spent a massive 6 weeks in jail. :rolleyes:

frank dunlop got two years for corruptiojn but serverd 14 months.

george redmond was jailed for two years but his conviction was overturned a year later.

After all those tribunals very few ended up spending much time in jail and in some ways the major players are still around.

BTW you can add the Beef Tribunal to your list as well and the major player there is the largest player in the industry today.
Yet who bore the cost of the export credit insurance given to him in the 80s, who bore the cost of bailing out his empire when the Iraqis couldn't repay the £180 million owed to him, not to mention the cost of the enquiry ?
Why we the taxpayers.

Also good old larry goodman provides a timely reminder how there always has been cosy carterls, to use lowry's own descriptuion, in action in Ireland and the same names crop up all over the place.
larry was involved with trying to take over Irish Sugar and who held 11,000 shares in larry's Food Industries company, was non executive director and at the same chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on commercial State-Sponsored bodies that had some oversight of Irish Sugar but none other than one liam lawlor.

Look under the rocks and you always find the same individuals.

CMOTDibbler

ahlookit wrote: »

First of all, fair play for doing your bit.

Do you think more people would volunteer if they reckoned they would be out of a given role in a fixed time?

If someone asked me to take on their role in the local club, and they had been there for 20 years I'd run a mile... but if they said its for x years and then you'll be replaced I'd be more receptive.

Its something we discuss at our local club - attracting and retaining the right volunteers. I know its not easy and its generally a thankless task as you say.
Just try to rope them in by stealth

The thing is though you can't guarantee anything. I'd love to be told I can step back in a couple of years time, but I know that's not going to happen. The only thing I can do is keep cajoling younger members to take a small role and get them involved that way. By stealth as you put it

But that's just my experience, there's been a downward slide in volunteerism over the last ten to fifteen years.

I'd just be afraid that some sort of strict rule on length of service could end up with sports clubs and organisations having nobody to run them.

ahlookit

Judge appointed to government commission - also looking back at Rio and Sochi, both handled by THG as was pointed out earlier.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/government-inquiry-will-look-at-handling-of-tickets-for-sochi-and-london-olympics-as-well-as-rio-34992671.html

Means Of Escape

Pat Hickey will emerge a different man even if he got out tomorrow
Despite sharing a cell with Mallon a short time in those South American jails would knock the stuffing out of any 71 year old even if his wife could visit him every hour.
The Columbia 3 Had experience of this .
The cloud of suspicion and his name tarnished only adds to his mental anguish .
He may come out all guns blazing too but if had been in the slammer on his own he'd be goosed .
His unbridled arrogance that has been unveiled down through the years has cost him the sympathy of most .

If he's convicted then the sheer greed of the man will have forged his path to perdition

Muahahaha

elastico wrote: »

That's the point though. There is no evidence in the email released, or any other items of interest put forward to suggest Hickey was getting any payment for the tickets.

Yeah but youre only seeing two of literally hundreds of emails. Yesterdays release was the Rio police showing the media that 1) Hickey/Marcus Evans relationship goes back to 2010 despite Hickey telling him he had only contacted Evans once and didnt have any kind of relationship with him, ticketing or otherwise and 2) that Pat was dealing in tickets on Brazilian soil, contrary to Brazilian law.

The two emails released were done as a justification of the police holding him in custody. They are showing the media that Hickey has a case to answer due to the lies he told under questioning and the breaking of Brazilian law. There are hundreds more emails that will be submitted as evidence in Hickeys trial, the best is yet to come IMO

In other news Marcus Evans was up to more of his tricks just a few weeks ago at the Euro 2016 tournament in France
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/jun/13/ipswich-town-marcus-evans-sued-uefa-euro-2016-tickets

Hospitality companies belonging to Ipswich Town’s owner, Marcus Evans, are among those being sued by Uefa for allegedly selling unauthorised packages of Euro 2016 tickets.

As at every major sporting event a game of cat and mouse has been playing out in France between those offering unauthorised packages and the official hospitality provided by Uefa and its partners.

Uefa has stepped up its efforts to clamp down on unauthorised vendors and it said that among the companies it was suing were several that were part of the Marcus Evans Investment group, whose reclusive owner made his fortune from the burgeoning sports hospitality industry.

“In order to protect consumers Uefa has repeatedly taken action against unauthorised sellers both in France and abroad,” it said in a statement. “Uefa has previously obtained orders against other rogue sellers and Uefa is confident that it will obtain orders against these companies on this occasion as well.

“Continuing its policy of taking vigorous action to prevent unauthorised sales, Uefa has today announced that it has commenced proceedings against a number of companies alleged to be involved in the sale of unauthorised packages for Uefa Euro 2016 matches. Among the companies sued are British companies which are part of the Marcus Evans Investment group of companies which is owned by Marcus Evans, the owner of Ipswich Town Football Club.”

Moo Moo Land

ahlookit wrote: »

Judge appointed to government commission - also looking back at Rio and Sochi, both handled by THG as was pointed out earlier.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/government-inquiry-will-look-at-handling-of-tickets-for-sochi-and-london-olympics-as-well-as-rio-34992671.html

There is smoke coming our of some shredding machines now!

Means Of Escape

jmayo wrote: »

After all those tribunals can you tell us how many people went to jail for fraud, corruption, perverting the course of justice ?

I know lawlor, burke, dunlop and redmond went to jail.
burke for making false tax returns, he got 6 months and served 4.5 month.
lawlor went to jail for failing to co-operate with Flood tribunal and spent a massive 6 weeks in jail. :rolleyes:

frank dunlop got two years for corruptiojn but serverd 14 months.

george redmond was jailed for two years but his conviction was overturned a year later.

After all those tribunals very few ended up spending much time in jail and in some ways the major players are still around.

BTW you can add the Beef Tribunal to your list as well and the major player there is the largest player in the industry today.
Yet who bore the cost of the export credit insurance given to him in the 80s, who bore the cost of bailing out his empire when the Iraqis couldn't repay the £180 million owed to him, not to mention the cost of the enquiry ?
Why we the taxpayers.

Also good old larry goodman provides a timely reminder how there always has been cosy carterls, to use lowry's own descriptuion, in action in Ireland and the same names crop up all over the place.
larry was involved with trying to take over Irish Sugar and who held 11,000 shares in larry's Food Industries company, was non executive director and at the same chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on commercial State-Sponsored bodies that had some oversight of Irish Sugar but none other than one liam lawlor.

Look under the rocks and you always find the same individuals.

Agreed. And let's not forget the horsemeat scandal in the factory he controlled
Name changed
Fine and dandy
Let's move on now

Muahahaha

jmayo wrote: »

After all those tribunals can you tell us how many people went to jail for fraud, corruption, perverting the course of justice ?

I know lawlor, burke, dunlop and redmond went to jail.
burke for making false tax returns, he got 6 months and served 4.5 month.
lawlor went to jail for failing to co-operate with Flood tribunal and spent a massive 6 weeks in jail. :rolleyes:

frank dunlop got two years for corruptiojn but serverd 14 months.

george redmond was jailed for two years but his conviction was overturned a year later.

After all those tribunals very few ended up spending much time in jail and in some ways the major players are still around.

BTW you can add the Beef Tribunal to your list as well and the major player there is the largest player in the industry today.
Yet who bore the cost of the export credit insurance given to him in the 80s, who bore the cost of bailing out his empire when the Iraqis couldn't repay the £180 million owed to him, not to mention the cost of the enquiry ?
Why we the taxpayers.

Also good old larry goodman provides a timely reminder how there always has been cosy carterls, to use lowry's own descriptuion, in action in Ireland and the same names crop up all over the place.
larry was involved with trying to take over Irish Sugar and who held 11,000 shares in larry's Food Industries company, was non executive director and at the same chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on commercial State-Sponsored bodies that had some oversight of Irish Sugar but none other than one liam lawlor.

Look under the rocks and you always find the same individuals.

Im not disagreeing with you jmayo, Im just making the point that tribunals in and of themselves are a good way to get to the bottom of public scandals and corruption. Im making the point that it is the political class who write legislation giving tribunals terms of reference,that dont allow for criminal proceedings to follow or if the Gardai dont take perjury seriously and prosecute it. This is where the problems of tribunals lie, not with the judges who run them. But if people allow our TDs to get away with this (and they have, especially in FF/FG) then the same mistakes will keep getting repeated ad nauseum.

So IMO it is not the tribunal that people should be against, it is the way the TDs rig the tribunal to ensure people who fund their parties never truly face justice for white collar corruption and bribery.