Garda investigated after CCTV showing arrest of naked, distressed woman goes viral.

Conor Bourke

silverharp wrote: »

did he know that? if it was someone who was just drunk or high it would just be grouped under crazy sh1t you see in cities of which there are a near infinite amount on youtube etc.

It doesn't matter whether she was drunk, high, coming from a sex party (what the actual fcuk that logic is about is another question but I digress) having a mental breakdown or out for their daily constitutional. It doesn't matter why, the guard simply should not, under any circumstances have thought it was okay to video the footage and circulate it amongst friends for a laugh.

The fact that this needs to be spelled out for people is astounding.

eviltwin

silverharp wrote: »

did he know that? if it was someone who was just drunk or high it would just be grouped under crazy sh1t you see in cities of which there are a near infinite amount on youtube etc.

She was naked and distressed. Maybe her distress wasn't obvious on the footage but she was naked. Is that alone not enough of an invasion of privacy? And what would it matter if she was just drunk or high, does that make it okay to laugh at people and make entertainment out of them.

neonsofa

tomwaterford wrote: »

It's still uploading it to the Internet

Scumbag behaviour from a scumbag tbh....I hope her family cleans him out

If/when he/she gets away with his....What's to stop other gaurds from doing the same??they literally are a law onto themselves at this stage

Same could be said about sending an email and uploading to YouTube. They are different, that's the only point I am making. They are two different forms of social media. Again, not saying either is worse or one ok.

tomwaterford

neonsofa wrote: »

Same could be said about sending an email and uploading to YouTube. They are different, that's the only point I am making. They are two different forms of social media. Again, not saying either is worse or one ok.

It would still be pretty sh1t of a gaurd to upload this onto youtube/email aswell??


The internet is the internet....no matter what way you dress it up,the gaurds here uploaded this onto to the Internet to show his friends


The sad part is...I'm not one bit surprised this was done and fully expect them to get off Scott free to do the same again

silverharp

eviltwin wrote: »

She was naked and distressed. Maybe her distress wasn't obvious on the footage but she was naked. Is that alone not enough of an invasion of privacy? And what would it matter if she was just drunk or high, does that make it okay to laugh at people and make entertainment out of them.

if someone on the street had camera phoned it and uploaded it, nothing illegal would have occurred and I don't think one would expect a right of privacy because it was so public. Contrast it with "PWC girl" a few years back, to me I don't know if it was illegal or not, probably not but it was a sh1tty thing to upload. I think we can all agree there is some line and in the Guard's case he has probably broken some misuse internal rules of equipment misuse, so he will probably be disciplined in some way.

Neyite

biscuithead wrote: »

But the Garda wasn't at the scene. He recorded the footage from a CCTV feed at a remote location. He could have been on the other side of the country for all we know.

I think that is even worse tbh. I've a dark sense of humour, but I see nothing honourable about mocking the vulnerable in our society.

He was a trained Garda. He swore to uphold the law and serve and protect. Firstly, he should have known that sharing a recording of a naked woman without her consent is a criminal offence.

He knew he was potentially breaking the law by uploading and sharing it?

He should have had enough experience and training to assess the situation and realise that there could be any kind of back story - fleeing from a rape, mental health breakdown, reaction to drugs or whatever. Powers of deduction and all that.

He's a disgrace to his profession. How could you have any confidence in him doing what a Garda should do after this.

biscuithead

infogiver wrote: »

An on duty public servant dispatched to help a citizen in danger and distress decides that it's appropriate to film that citizen for the purposes of sharing the distress for the comedic entertainment of his friends at a later date.
You think that's appropriate.

Have you even read the article and posts?
HE WASN'T THERE.

neonsofa

tomwaterford wrote: »

It would still be pretty sh1t of a gaurd to upload this onto youtube/email aswell??


The internet is the internet....no matter what way you dress it up,the gaurds here uploaded this onto to the Internet to show his friends


The sad part is...I'm not one bit surprised this was done and fully expect them to get off Scott free to do the same again

Did I say it wouldn't be? I said in both my posts that I am not saying any form is worse or any are OK. Just pointing out the fact that they are different forms of social media because you said to a poster that they were the same thing, they aren't. Maybe you should read my posts again because you seem to think I am justifying something, when I have explicitly stated in every post, that i am not.

biscuithead

neonsofa wrote: »

Ah yeah sure, they were probably thinking that- girl not in her right mind cause she's on whatever substance and isn't aware of what she's doing, gonna be mortified when her parents show up so im gonna compound that humiliation by sending round a video of her. That's great sure, lovely guy. She could have been coming from a sex party like. Who could blame him.
Weird logic.

Also if she was detained under mental health act then they obviously deemed her as vulnerable and not of sound mind, and not just some woman high on a substance coming home from...a sex party (again wtf?!)

I like how you focus on the first part of my post and conveniently avoid the second part which portrays a not out-of-the-question similarity.

Caithfidhme

Cornelius Crow wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether she was drunk, high, coming from a sex party (what the actual fcuk that logic is about is another question but I digress) having a mental breakdown or out for their daily constitutional. It doesn't matter why, the guard simply should not, under any circumstances have thought it was okay to video the footage and circulate it amongst friends for a laugh.

The fact that this needs to be spelled out for people is astounding.

I think this sums it up admirably.

If it was a lay person who had done the same thing, and before I am berated with posts about how a lay person wouldn't have had access to it, yes, in circumstances they would depending on their job, it still would have been inexcusable to share a post about a young woman who clearly needed some appropriate, professional help & in a cry to do so, was treated this way.

The fact that is a Garda makes it a complete abuse of power. By sharing it with a Whatsapp group of people, shows his complete disregard for treating anything which he may be privy to during conducting his duties with the privacy and respect which Im sure a fair portion of it warrants. And in reality, he would have done it again, if he hadn't have been caught out by his mate posting it on a public forum. Whether it was whatsapp or not, he shouldn't have done it. The viral age we live in & the ease with which things like this travel & the fact that he didn't care about confidentiality & dignity whatsoever make it deplorable.

biscuithead

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

That's not exactly what happened.
A guard was reviewing CCTV footage of her and he recorded that on his phone. He wasn't one of the guards dispatched to help her.

Thank you.

But don't let the facts prevent people from underpinning their knee-jerk outrage by embellishing the story.

neonsofa

biscuithead wrote: »

I like how you focus on the first part of my post and conveniently avoid the second part which portrays a not out-of-the-question similarity.

I'm sorry, what would you like me to say about a hypothetical situation whereby a woman is riding a horse through a town naked? Was she coming from a sex party too? I really don't see what point you're making?

take everything

Just read the OP but what kind of emotional moron shares a video of a naked person against their consent.

This is why I hate the whole sharing culture. Everyone is meant to be so clued in socially and emotionally and you just end up with scumbags doing this.

Same with that recent case of that father killing his child on facebook. Now the father is probably mentally Ill but the fact that it was shared hundreds of thousands of times for 24 hrs before it was eventually taken down is the bit that shocked me.

Or didn't really shock me as this is what a lot of the sharing culture is nowadays. Sate your curiosity. Score social network points (whether by shocking your friends, duckfacing or virtue signalling- all sides of the same ****ty coin really (to misuse a metaphor). It's all just social points).

Anyway, RIP to this girl.

infogiver

biscuithead wrote: »

Have you even read the article and posts?
HE WASN'T THERE.

You are seriously suggesting it was ok for a public servant to film CCTV of a citizen in a distressed state to share with his friends for the purpose of entertainment?

biscuithead

infogiver wrote: »

He was on duty.
I work in a public service office with CCTV too.
The very idea that I would think that I could record footage of a distressed customer for the entertainment of my friends later, or that I would even think it was entertaining is just astonishing to me.
And I didn't swear to serve and protect.
That Garda did.
Who was he serving and protecting when he made the film?

You say he was dispatched to help her when he wasn't and now that equates to "Ugh, well, uh, HE WAS ON DUTY!!"

biscuithead

tomwaterford wrote: »

It's still uploading it to the Internet

Scumbag behaviour from a scumbag tbh....I hope her family cleans him out

If/when he/she gets away with his....What's to stop other gaurds from doing the same??they literally are a law onto themselves at this stage

Would you ever listen to yourself!

Cleans him out? How exactly?

eviltwin

silverharp wrote: »

if someone on the street had camera phoned it and uploaded it, nothing illegal would have occurred and I don't think one would expect a right of privacy because it was so public. Contrast it with "PWC girl" a few years back, to me I don't know if it was illegal or not, probably not but it was a sh1tty thing to upload. I think we can all agree there is some line and in the Guard's case he has probably broken some misuse internal rules of equipment misuse, so he will probably be disciplined in some way.

I'm not talking about the legalities of it, more the moral side of it. Maybe its an age thing but I don't understand the need for people to film everything and upload it to social media. I can't understand the entertainment in laughing at people who are drunk, high, mentally ill. Those clips aren't funny, they are depressing and tragic. I can't understand a garda of all people, someone you think would have a bit of sense and empathy, thinking its okay to share a clip of a naked women without consent. It doesn't matter that she was in public, its a huge invasion of her privacy.

biscuithead

infogiver wrote: »

Do you think recording the CCTV for the entertainment of his pals was ok?

Stop trying to paint me into a corner and/or put words in my mouth to justify your own over the top hysteria. You've chosen to take an extreme view of the whole episode. I've decided to be a bit more objective and open-minded about it.

tomwaterford

biscuithead wrote: »

Would you ever listen to yourself!

Cleans him out? How exactly?

Sues him for all that he's worth??



If your happy to stand over and defend this though pedanticness


That's your prerogative,

However il continue to see gaurds recording this while on duty (assuming he was on duty watching the cctv) and then uploading it to the Internet to show his friends.....

Scumbag behaviour by a scumbag.....who deosnt deserve 1 more cent in pay off the state and should be sacked.....

What else are gaurds sharing online to friends....pics of the PULSE system,perhaps??....too long they've been a law onto themselves....how bad deos it have to get before someone says stop?

tomwaterford

biscuithead wrote: »

Stop trying to paint me into a corner and/or put words in my mouth to justify your own over the top hysteria. You've chosen to take an extreme view of the whole episode. I've decided to be a bit more objective and open-minded about it.

Have you read the OP??


He's accused of recording the cctv footage and uploading it to a whatsapp group?



No one's trting to be putting words anywhere,these are the facts??

biscuithead

infogiver wrote: »

Not a poor desicion at all. Inexcusable.
Not worthy of a jail sentence of course thats ridiculous but should be sacked as soon as even the filming on the mobile phone is confirmed never mind the Whatsapp bit.
And potential future employers deserve to know what the make up of this guys character is like, so I'd like him named and shamed.

Now, do you want just the garda to be sacked or do you want all the members of the WhatsApp group sacked as well since anyone of them would have released it to Facebook. How comprehensive do you want the sacking frenzy to go? Do you want to also sack the people who vetted/trained this garda because they let such an unsavoury character onto the force? Slip through the net, so to speak? Do you want all the gardai who knew that he recorded the CCTV footage on his phone and didn't grab it out of his hand and smash it and then report him....do you want all of them to be sacked too?

tomwaterford

biscuithead wrote: »

Now, do you want just the garda to be sacked or do you want all the members of the WhatsApp group sacked as well since anyone of them would have released it to Facebook. How comprehensive do you want the sacking frenzy to go? Do you want to also sack the people who vetted/trained this garda because they let such an unsavoury character onto the force? Slip through the net, so to speak? Do you want all the gardai who knew that he recorded the CCTV footage on his phone and didn't grab it out of his hand and smash it and then report him....do you want all of them to be sacked too?

Members of the whatsapp group that were gaurds and not report it-sacked

Vetting people-not sacked


All gaurds that knew/seen him record on the phone and not report it/stop him....reprimanded and demoted where possible



Not too much to ask surly??

pilly

biscuithead wrote: »

Now, do you want just the garda to be sacked or do you want all the members of the WhatsApp group sacked as well since anyone of them would have released it to Facebook. How comprehensive do you want the sacking frenzy to go? Do you want to also sack the people who vetted/trained this garda because they let such an unsavoury character onto the force? Slip through the net, so to speak? Do you want all the gardai who knew that he recorded the CCTV footage on his phone and didn't grab it out of his hand and smash it and then report him....do you want all of them to be sacked too?

What exact point are you trying to make? That this is no big deal?

Stop attacking others posts and put forward your own point of view if you have one.

nhunter100

GSOC and the Garda themselves are investigating the matter, maybe put away the pitchforks until a conclusion is reached. If true the Garda in question was incredibly stupid in their actions I however do not believe they foresaw the results of their actions.

retro:electro

I remember a few years ago in Galway, I think it was Good Friday, seeing a young woman walk down shop street completely naked. She had her hands in her mouth and was obviously either high on drugs or not in any fit mental state. Either way she was completely vulnerable. It was actually really shocking and a distressing thing to witness. I called the Guards immediately and told them what was going on they said they'd be right there. In all that time I didn't see one person trying to film this girl, everyone looked shocked and really concerned for her.

I just had to leave it at that and let the Guards follow it up because I wasn't comfortable following her to see where she was going and was she okay. If I saw the same thing today I'd still call the Guards. The actions of one moron should not mean that confidence in the whole force should be shattered- but I do see how this could be the case for some people.

infogiver

biscuithead wrote: »

You say he was dispatched to help her when he wasn't and now that equates to "Ugh, well, uh, HE WAS ON DUTY!!"

But he was.
You think this is just fine.
I hope to God your not a public servant.

infogiver

biscuithead wrote: »

Now, do you want just the garda to be sacked or do you want all the members of the WhatsApp group sacked as well since anyone of them would have released it to Facebook. How comprehensive do you want the sacking frenzy to go? Do you want to also sack the people who vetted/trained this garda because they let such an unsavoury character onto the force? Slip through the net, so to speak? Do you want all the gardai who knew that he recorded the CCTV footage on his phone and didn't grab it out of his hand and smash it and then report him....do you want all of them to be sacked too?

The Garda who filmed sacked named and shamed
The Garda that didn't stop him from filming sent to a retraining course.
Nothing else.
What is your own opinion of his actions btw?

pilly

nhunter100 wrote: »

GSOC and the Garda themselves are investigating the matter, maybe put away the pitchforks until a conclusion is reached. If true the Garda in question was incredibly stupid in their actions I however do not believe they foresaw the results of their actions.

I presume it's sarcasm when you say that the Garda and GSOC are investigating this?

retro:electro

nhunter100 wrote: »

GSOC and the Garda themselves are investigating the matter, maybe put away the pitchforks until a conclusion is reached. If true the Garda in question was incredibly stupid in their actions I however do not believe they foresaw the results of their actions.

Exactly. Lack of foresight. That doesn't make it okay though. I'm sure if this hasn't come to light he'd have moved on and not given his actions that day a second thought. He'd prob be revelling in the banter of it. What he is experiencing now is regret that he was found out- not regret for shaming a vulnerable woman, who later killed herself.

nhunter100

pilly wrote:

I presume it's sarcasm when you say that the Garda and GSOC are investigating this?

No it's in the Time's, contact the editors if you believe it's not true.

nhunter100

anna080 wrote:

Exactly. Lack of foresight. That doesn't make it okay though. I'm sure if this hasn't come to light he'd have moved on and not given his actions that day a second thought. He'd prob be revelling in the banter of it. What he is experiencing now is regret that he was found out- not regret for shaming a vulnerable woman, who later killed herself.

I doubt if you or anyone knows what the guard in question was thinking at the time of the incident and I'm pretty sure you haven't a clue what he is going through now.

nhunter100

infogiver wrote:

You think this is just fine.

Why are you saying this when the poster made no such claim or suggestion?

nhunter100

anna080 wrote:

Exactly. Lack of foresight. That doesn't make it okay though.

Please point out in my comment where I suggested it was OK.

retro:electro

nhunter100 wrote: »

I doubt if you or anyone knows what the guard in question was thinking at the time of the incident and I'm pretty sure you haven't a clue what he is going through now.

But you seem to think they "did not forsee the results of their actions". How do you know that?

Funny how you tell everyone to "put away the pitchforks" they "did not foresee the results of their actions", but, judging by certain posts, you are more than capable of being a part of mob mentality when it suits you.

nhunter100

anna080 wrote:

But you seem to think they "did not forsee the results of their actions". How do you know that?

Maybe because since I know nothing of the guard in question I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and leave my pitchfork down till I'm in possession of more facts as to whether it was a callous act or just stupidity.

nhunter100

anna080 wrote:

Funny how you tell everyone to "put away the pitchforks" they "did not foresee the results of their actions", but, judging by certain posts, you are more than capable of being a part of mob mentality when it suits you.

Sorry what are you alluding to? Although it is funny to say as there is usually two 'mobs' just neither side wants to be labelled as such or see that they are. ;-)

retro:electro

nhunter100 wrote: »

Maybe because since I know nothing of the guard in question I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and leave my pitchfork down till I'm in possession of more facts as to whether it was a callous act or just stupidity.

Stupidity is crossing the road without looking.
What he did was the definition of callous behaviour, and I'd describe it in no other terms.

biscuithead

silverharp wrote: »

did he know that? if it was someone who was just drunk or high it would just be grouped under crazy sh1t you see in cities of which there are a near infinite amount on youtube etc.

Thank you.

It's amazing how people retroactively opportion their seething outrage.

retro:electro

silverharp wrote: »

did he know that? if it was someone who was just drunk or high it would just be grouped under crazy sh1t you see in cities of which there are a near infinite amount on youtube etc.

Are those videos filmed and uploaded by people who have a duty of care, and are sworn to serve and protect the citizens of their country?

nhunter100

anna080 wrote:

What he did was the definition of callous behaviour, and I'd describe it in no other terms.

Sadly nothing in life is black and white. You have claimed to know exactly what he was thinking which I find astonishing.

retro:electro

nhunter100 wrote: »

Sadly nothing in life is black and white. You have claimed to know exactly what he was thinking which I find astonishing.

Nope that was you, actually. And if you don't think this act was heartless, uncaring and a complete disregard for an obviously vulnerable person, then I think that says a lot about you and quite frankly I'm done talking to you.

Dyr

sugarman wrote: »

Secondly, the Garda in question sent it to a private whatsapp group. Someone else in that group decided to share it or send it on until it reached facebook. I dont think there was any real intent or malicious here to defame anyone. It was probably a 'Ah you'll never guess what happened in work' type of message sent onto the lads.

I dont think the guard done a whole lot wrong, I mean the woman was recorded in the middle of the street. It not illegal to record anyone in a public place. It was stupid and imature, but thats really it.
.

Ah well that's okay then.

Hopefully karma gets a hold of this lad. Cos that's the only sanction he'll face in this country

tomwaterford

anna080 wrote: »

Are those videos filmed and uploaded by people who have a duty of care, and are sworn to serve and protect the citizens of their country?

The gaurds do not swear to serve ano protect the citizens of the country??


Only to uphold the constitution ano human rights afaik

biscuithead

neonsofa wrote: »

I'm sorry, what would you like me to say about a hypothetical situation whereby a woman is riding a horse through a town naked? Was she coming from a sex party too? I really don't see what point you're making?

The point I'm making is that I wouldn't see anything innocuous about someone filming a woman naked on a horse. But then of course if a month later she committed suicide then people on here would be baying for blood.

I would imagine that if the hypothetical horse woman didn't commit suicide and was never heard from again or just went on about her life then the same people who are calling for the guard to be sacked/sued/jailed (ffs) wouldn't give a damn about her being filmed.

nhunter100

anna080 wrote:

Nope that was you, actually. And if you don't think this act was heartless, uncaring and a complete disregard for an obviously vulnerable person, then I think that says a lot about you and quite frankly I'm done talking to you.

I said I doubt he knew what the consequences of his actions would be I never claimed to know his thought process, you seem to wish to attribute something to me I did not say. Why? Maybe you would to try a 'ninja edit ? It wouldn't be the first time now would it?

retro:electro

nhunter100 wrote: »

I said I doubt he knew what the consequences of his actions would be I never claimed to know his thought process, you seem to wish to attribute something to me I did not say. Why? Maybe you would to try a 'ninja edit ? It wouldn't be the first time now would it?

Please go away.

tomwaterford

biscuithead wrote: »

The point I'm making is that I wouldn't see anything innocuous about someone filming a woman naked on a horse. But then of course if a month later she committed suicide then people on here would be baying for blood.

I would imagine that if the hypothetical horse woman didn't commit suicide and was never heard from again or just went on about her life then the same people who are calling for the guard to be sacked/sued/jailed (ffs) wouldn't give a damn about her being filmed.

Are we into realms of make believe and easter bunnies now??

infogiver

nhunter100 wrote: »

Why are you saying this when the poster made no such claim or suggestion?

Where would I be only for you....

nhunter100

anna080 wrote:

Please go away.

I'll respect your request, pity not everyone listens the first time though they are asked.............

nhunter100

infogiver wrote:

Where would I be only for you....

No idea... but maybe just reply to a comment without suggesting the poster has said something they didn't. Simple really.