Sean Fitzpatrick to get off Scott Free

Cyrus

Maisie Uninterested Stepmother wrote: »

He knowingly broke the law, lied, deceived and gambled with other people's money without their permission. He has caused huge misery and suffering to many people. 'Entrepreneurs' risk their own money, not everyone else's.

which law did he break?

Is he not bankrupt, is his own money now not gone as well?

thebaz

What a farce !! - is the collapse of the case solely down to ODCE incompetence ?

For such a large case how could such incompentce be executed - who are ODCE i?
is it a bureaucratic or a political Quango ? or a group of senior well payed legals ?


The whole thing seams unbelievable for such a high profile case involving so much money,

awec

thebaz wrote: »

What a farce !! - is the collapse of the case solely down to ODCE incompetence ?

For such a large case how could such incompentce be executed - who are ODCE i?
is it a bureaucratic or a political Quango ? or a group of senior well payed legals ?


The whole thing seams unbelievable for such a high profile case involving so much money,

ODCE are a bunch of civil servants in the department of justice I think.

seamus

thebaz wrote: »

What a farce !! - is the collapse of the case solely down to ODCE incompetence ?

For such a large case how could such incompentce be executed - who are ODCE i?
is it a bureaucratic or a political Quango ? or a group of senior well payed legals ?

The whole thing seams unbelievable for such a high profile case involving so much money,

Actually it seems entirely believable. The ODCE were suddenly staring down one of the largest investigations in the history of the state, and were a small and relatively inexperienced outfit.

The questions have to be asked to why they proceeded with the investigation without the resources that they needed. Overconfidence? Political interference? Denied funding?

I would have a hunch that "someone" decided this case was too juicy for the ODCE to hand over to the Gardai, but the ODCE were denied any significant funding to help bring in the support they needed. So they had no option but to make do with what they had and try to make a go of it.

thebaz

seamus wrote: »

Actually it seems entirely believable. The ODCE were suddenly staring down one of the largest investigations in the history of the state, and were a small and relatively inexperienced outfit.

The questions have to be asked to why they proceeded with the investigation without the resources that they needed. Overconfidence? Political interference? Denied funding?

I would have a hunch that "someone" decided this case was too juicy for the ODCE to hand over to the Gardai, but the ODCE were denied any significant funding to help bring in the support they needed. So they had no option but to make do with what they had and try to make a go of it.

well the guy who did they shredding , certainly seamed unbelievable - he certainly didn't seam fit or qualified to carry out his role (putting it mildly).

I get where you're coming from with the rest .

Anonymo

Maisie Uninterested Stepmother wrote: »

Cyrus wrote: »

yeah money handed to them like all the rest of the 'elite'

give me a break, Fitzpatrick was the son of a farmer and a civil servant, he made his own money. Ultimately it all went up in smoke, but for a long time anglo were seen as the blueprint from small banks and he built a massive company before the GFC took all the irish banks down.

the truth is that the man was a brilliant entrepreneur who was a self made multi millionaire. Most men of his ilk, who are as successful as he was at one stage arent what most of us would call nice people, and they get to where he got to through unbelievable hard work, determination and also a propensity to take short cuts where they present themselves.

in the end it all blew up in smoke, but this typical irish nonsense about the 'elite' baffles me, and the likelihood of his kids having a career anything like his is almost nil, how many people like him do you think come along every generation?

He knowingly broke the law, lied, deceived and gambled with other people's money without their permission. He has caused huge misery and suffering to many people. 'Entrepreneurs' risk their own money, not everyone else's.

I'm not 100% sure we can say that he knowingly broke the law, but my understanding was that, as someone who puts themselves in charge of other peoples money, the onus is on them to understand the law and be fully compliant. Otherwise what's the point of those laws. Case 1: he knew he was breaking the law. That's clearly fraudulent and should mean serious jail time. Case 2: he was incompetent. Then if it's reasonable that he should have known the law, he was being paid as CEO of a major corporation while not being diligent. Surely that is a case of serious fraud also, especially when it came to misleading the auditors. It's hard to be angry about something like this in the wake of the Manchester tragedy, but it's clear there is something very wrong with the judicial and political system in this country when Fitzpatrick can walk off scot-free (unless we're all wrong, the CAB is wrong, the reporters are wrong, ...)

thebaz

just see the interview now outside the courts where he thanks his legal team -

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/its-over-former-anglo-irish-bank-chairman-sean-fitzpatrick-walks-from-court-for-the-final-time-35750715.html

Please don't tell me he was on free legal aid - not sure I could take salt

10000maniacs

Cyrus wrote: »

yeah money handed to them like all the rest of the 'elite'

give me a break, Fitzpatrick was the son of a farmer and a civil servant, he made his own money. Ultimately it all went up in smoke, but for a long time anglo were seen as the blueprint from small banks and he built a massive company before the GFC took all the irish banks down.

the truth is that the man was a brilliant entrepreneur who was a self made multi millionaire. Most men of his ilk, who are as successful as he was at one stage arent what most of us would call nice people, and they get to where he got to through unbelievable hard work, determination and also a propensity to take short cuts where they present themselves.

in the end it all blew up in smoke, but this typical irish nonsense about the 'elite' baffles me, and the likelihood of his kids having a career anything like his is almost nil, how many people like him do you think come along every generation?

The only time Fitzy and his ilk were in the same boat as the rest of us was when he sunk it. Even then he grabbed all the lifebuoys.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

Cyrus wrote: »

which law did he break?

Is he not bankrupt, is his own money now not gone as well?

He breached company law, hence why he was being prosecuted by the ODCE. Regardless of whether his own money is gone as well, he played fast and loose with other people's money, without their permission, and many people lost their life savings. That is not the action of an 'entrepreneur'. It is the action of a crook.

TallGlass

thebaz wrote: »

Please don't tell me he was on free legal aid - not sure I could take salt

Think he was.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sean-fitzpatrick-granted-legal-aid-for-upcoming-trial-1.1924222

c68zapdsm5i1ru

Cyrus wrote: »

yeah money handed to them like all the rest of the 'elite'

give me a break, Fitzpatrick was the son of a farmer and a civil servant, he made his own money. Ultimately it all went up in smoke, but for a long time anglo were seen as the blueprint from small banks and he built a massive company before the GFC took all the irish banks down.

the truth is that the man was a brilliant entrepreneur who was a self made multi millionaire. Most men of his ilk, who are as successful as he was at one stage arent what most of us would call nice people, and they get to where he got to through unbelievable hard work, determination and also a propensity to take short cuts where they present themselves.

in the end it all blew up in smoke, but this typical irish nonsense about the 'elite' baffles me, and the likelihood of his kids having a career anything like his is almost nil, how many people like him do you think come along every generation?

Too many. And like so many other greedy shysters with no morals, principles or ethical code he has got away with it.

Allinall

Maisie Uninterested Stepmother wrote: »

He breached company law, hence why he was being prosecuted by the ODCE. Regardless of whether his own money is gone as well, he played fast and loose with other people's money, without their permission, and many people lost their life savings. That is not the action of an 'entrepreneur'. It is the action of a crook.

So what you're saying is that all the people who are charged in court, but acquitted are actually guilty of the charges?

c68zapdsm5i1ru

Allinall wrote: »

So what you're saying is that all the people who are charged in court, but acquitted are actually guilty of the charges?

He was acquitted because the ODCE made a shambles of their case, not because a Jury decided, on the foot of evidence presented, that he was not guilty. In other words, it was pure luck that got him off.

thebaz

thebaz wrote: »

What a farce !! - is the collapse of the case solely down to ODCE incompetence ?

For such a large case how could such incompentce be executed - who are ODCE i?
is it a bureaucratic or a political Quango ? or a group of senior well payed legals ?

The whole thing seams unbelievable for such a high profile case involving so much money,

It's the legal department in the civil service, the Solicitor in the ODCE.

Of course, it being the civil service, we'll just have to get over it and move along.

As I said before, if a Solicitor in private practice did this, he'd be looking for his insurance policy. If he still had a job. In fact, the allegation was that the Solicitor for the Auditors was questioning the legitimacy and integrity of the investigation being carried out by the ODCE. Now it would be completely wrong to suggest shredding evidence central to the question of the integrity of the prosecution was wilful, we must accept it was a mistake.

But WHAT a mistake.

Cee-Jay-Cee

No doubt Sean Fitz will now be free to legal action against the OCDE for the over zealous and biased investigation it conducted into his affairs and probably get a ball of money out of it too. There is no justice in this country.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

No doubt Sean Fitz will now be free to legal action against the OCDE for the over zealous and biased investigation it conducted into his affairs and probably get a ball of money out of it too. There is no justice in this country.

Unlikely. It would be a very difficult case.

And what scheme would enable him to take a civil case for free? You have a link?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

meeeeh wrote: »

Frances Fitzgerald has some star employees in her department. Even Sean Fitzpatrick should not be convicted just because of who he is. This just shows off the incompetence of ODCE.

I think the ODCE is part of the Dept of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.

Cyrus

Maisie Uninterested Stepmother wrote: »

He breached company law, hence why he was being prosecuted by the ODCE. Regardless of whether his own money is gone as well, he played fast and loose with other people's money, without their permission, and many people lost their life savings. That is not the action of an 'entrepreneur'. It is the action of a crook.

he hasnt been found guilty of anything

give me some examples of him playing fast and loose with other peoples money without their permission?

emo72

Somebody please explain the shredding to me? It was the head man in the ODCE? He wanted it gone. Admitted he done it, and........ Nothing?

c68zapdsm5i1ru

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/05/24/nation-ordered-to-apologise-to-sean-fitzpatrick/

uck51js9zml2yt

Cyrus wrote: »

he hasnt been found guilty of anything

He hasn't been found "not guilty" either.

He was acquitted thanks to the incompetence of the investigative and prosecution teams.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

Cyrus wrote: »

he hasnt been found guilty of anything

give me some examples of him playing fast and loose with other peoples money without their permission?

Yes, that's what we're all giving out about, and why the competency of the ODCE is being questioned.

Beta Ray Bill

CeilingFly wrote: »

No dispute on the figure, but every euro of loss can't be laid at the door of one person. The AAA brigade will mouth off stuff like that but its just their usual soundbites.

I do reckon that senior figures knew it was a basket case in mid 2008 and hoped that the market would recover and trued anything and everything to delay what became the inevitable.

Wouldn't be a fan of the Triple A or the Shinners now.
And yes, it can be laid at his door.
He was the CEO, he was ultimately responsible for the running of Bank and safe guarding it's customers.

They knew WAAAY before 2008 there was a problem. Anglo's business started targeting lotto winners in the mid 80's.
At the time the lotto was won at least once ever 2/3 weeks, and Anglo offered special rates specifically targeting lotto winners. This method meant they have at least £1,00,000 coming into the bank every few weeks. which was substantial for bank that only started in the mid 60's. Nearly all lotto winners in the 80's and 90's put their money in Anglo.

Clearly this method was not sustainable so they began looking for other ways to make money.
The only way they could continue to make money was offer builders loans at good rates and investors investment opportunities at better rates. It's clear they were unable to compete with AIB and BOI though, and as far as I am aware moved into sub prime lender territory.

So along comes "the messing" - Which could have only been sanctioned and approved by Sean Fitzpatrick.

CeilingFly wrote: »

But remember a year previously Anglo was stated to be the best performing bank in the world by the influential Oliver Wyman and was lauded at the Davos economic forum

But once the financial house of cards started falling around the world, any bank that depended on property assets was in trouble.

The combination of the Bank Guarantee, the financial crisis and Anglo packaging up their debt and selling it on as "An investment opportunity" was ultimately what brought the bank down, and cost the taxpayer €30 billion.
Thankfully someone called the regulator and told them what had been done and they stepped in before they could offer more of these "investment opportunities".

Mind you, all the US banks were doing this with B+++ and lower grade mortgages. (Packaging them up as investment opportunities, from the outside they looked VERY lucrative, but no one bothered to check what the investment actually was. These were called CDO's)
The problem was Anglo had issues before any of this even started.

Again, ultimately as CEO the decision was his to make. He could have stopped it and asked for help from the other banks pre 2008, or at least apply the brakes.
But he didn't, he decided to chance his arm with other peoples money, and lend his way through it.
But it all went "bang" and he got off Scott free.

givyjoe

Cyrus wrote: »

which law did he break?

Is he not bankrupt, is his own money now not gone as well?

The ones he was, you know.. he was in court charged with breaking?

Cyrus

givyjoe wrote: »

The ones he was, you know.. he was in court charged with breaking?

oh so he was found you know.... guilty?

givyjoe

Cyrus wrote: »

oh so he was found you know.... guilty?

I can only assume you're from the 'circle' given your location and stubborn 'ignorance' on the matter. You do realise that we has acquitted due to, you know.. the incompetence of investigators..

Jamiekelly

Cyrus wrote: »

oh so he was found you know.... guilty?

Stockholm syndrome

TallGlass

Cyrus wrote: »

oh so he was found you know.... guilty?

Depends, legally no he wasn't (according to law at the moment). Morally, to me yes he is guilty.

NinetyTwoTeam

This country makes me sick. The rich can ruin countless lives and get away with it. A poor person will get thrown in jail for not paying their TV license.

He's about as innocent as OJ, and his crimes no doubt cost more lives due to suicide.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

Cyrus wrote: »

oh so he was found you know.... guilty?

Unfortunately, proceedings collapsed before it got to that stage.

But he is morally responsible for what he did, and many people suffered financial loss and hardship because of his actions.

He is corrupt and unrepentant.

Atoms for Peace

Maisie Uninterested Stepmother wrote: »

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/05/24/nation-ordered-to-apologise-to-sean-fitzpatrick/

Thought I was reading the irish indo for a moment. :pac:

ohnonotgmail

Juan Salty Turpentine wrote: »

He hasn't been found "not guilty" either.

He was acquitted thanks to the incompetence of the investigative and prosecution teams.

He was found not guilty by the trial judge. is there another meaning you are using?

Hermy

grahambo wrote: »

And yes, it can be laid at his door.

He was the CEO, he was ultimately responsible for the running of Bank and safe guarding it's customers.

Again, ultimately as CEO the decision was his to make.

+1

It beggars belief that almost a decade on there are those who would have us believe that responsibility for the collapse is still up for debate.

10000maniacs

Cyrus wrote: »

he hasnt been found guilty of anything

give me some examples of him playing fast and loose with other peoples money without their permission?

Well it ended up being our debt in the end.
I thought the whole Anglo nationalization thing in 2009 was triggered when he admitted he had hidden a total of €87 million in loans from Anglo.
Or maybe Wikipedia is wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo_Irish_Bank_hidden_loans_controversy

knipex

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

This country makes me sick. The rich can ruin countless lives and get away with it. A poor person will get thrown in jail for not paying their TV license.

He's about as innocent as OJ, and his crimes no doubt cost more lives due to suicide.

OFFS get some perspective.. I have no time not do I for one second the behavior of the banks pre crisis.. but some of the baying screaming and hyperbole is beyond belief..

What crimes did he commit ???

OK he was charged with providing false info the auditors re his personal loans.

What else ???

What suicides did he actually personally cause ?

What treason did he commit ?? Not random waffle about bankers and treason but an actual act of treason ? an actual crime that was committed..

Is he personally responsible for the housing crash ?
Is he personally responsible for the banking crash ? All the banks ?
Is he personally responsible for the 160 billion odd billion the state borrowed between 2007 and 2017 ??

Cee-Jay-Cee

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Unlikely. It would be a very difficult case.

And what scheme would enable him to take a civil case for free? You have a link?

The facts of the incompetence and bias are available and well reported on. I think it would be an easy case to win. He could claim the thevwhole ordeal caused him distress and suffering and considering how great judges in this country are at awarding large sums of money for baloney cases then any solicitor worth his/her salt would willingly take it on with a fee on a % of the award basis.

TallGlass

'Minister has asked ODCE for a full report of all personnel involved in the investigation & will review related issues'

Christ on a bike, please god not another tribunal. I think it's safe to say he got away with it, enough good money has been wasted on this already, lets not waste anymore.

No point in a report which we will ultimately do nothing with nor about.

knipex

Hermy wrote: »

+1

It beggars belief that almost a decade on there are those who would have us believe that responsibility for the collapse is still up for debate.

No its not. There have been multiple reports

No one person is responsible.

The responsibility lies with

The state (as in the government) for increasing day to day spending based on one off taxes.
The state and its various bodies for not clamping down on crazy lending practices.
The state and its various bodies for poor regulation of the banks.
The state (as in the government) for not reigning in the economy and instead spending..
The voters for electing he who promised most
Our membership of the Euro for having inappropriate interest rates.
The state and its various bodies for not putting policies in place to counteract that.
The banks for loose lending practices and taking advantage of the poor policies and regulations.
The shareholders who urged them on and punished those boards and banks who didn't join in
The people who borrowed more than the could afford.
The developers, house flippers, part time landlords etc who thought there was no end.
The public who overpaid for houses.
The state and its various agencies for poor regulation of the sector.
The unions, trades people, employees, etc who demanded ever increasing wages to chase a property bubble
The unions, trades people, employees who demanded laxer lending to chase a property bubble.
etc
etc
etc

The_Pretender

seamus wrote: »

Actually it seems entirely believable. The ODCE were suddenly staring down one of the largest investigations in the history of the state, and were a small and relatively inexperienced outfit.

This.

I work in insolvency and as such have to report to the ODCE regularly. The ODCE were a small outift, and since the beginning of the recession have only become smaller.

The ODCE has three core functions:

encouraging compliance with company law

investigating and enforcing suspected breaches of the legislation

bringing to account those who disregard the law

The Gardai have over 13,000 members responsible for upholding criminal law and taking action against blue collar crimes.

How many staff do the guys who go after white collar crime have? 35 plus 5 gardai. They have 5 accountants - the small practice I work in has more accountants than that investigating the collapse of companies. They can only work with what they have - an annual budget of approx. 3 million. [URL="hhttp://www.independent.ie/business/irish/kpmg-paid-76m-in-fees-for-its-work-on-liquidation-of-ibrc-34405598.html"]KPMG have been paid fees of over €76m so far in the liquidation of the IBRC.[/URL]

You can be damn sure there is incompetence in the ODCE, what Govt. run department doesn't? There are numerous factors in the failure of the case taken against Sean Fitzpatrick, and you can be sure there are staff in the ODCE who've been working this case for years who are sickened to hear of what has happened, the same as gardai who investigate crimes only for the criminal to get off on a technicality.

thebaz

TallGlass wrote: »

Think he was.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/sean-fitzpatrick-granted-legal-aid-for-upcoming-trial-1.1924222

so the state funds a top legal team to defend Mr. Fitzpatrick , and yet employees a team of duds for the prosecution of probably the biggest financial irregularity in the state history - Call me cynical , but it triluly seams near comical to me , and thats not mentioning Shreddargate

uck51js9zml2yt

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

He was found not guilty by the trial judge. is there another meaning you are using?

The words "not guilty" were not used.

The judge acquitted him with no verdict being reached due to the incompetence of the prosecution team.

Cyrus

givyjoe wrote: »

I can only assume you're from the 'circle' given your location and stubborn 'ignorance' on the matter. You do realise that we has acquitted due to, you know.. the incompetence of investigators..

yeah im from the circle, im one of the maple 10 :pac:

i realise the case against him was so bad that the judge ruled on an acquittal before it even reached a jury

but to you that means he is guilty

Cyrus

10000maniacs wrote: »

Well it ended up being our debt in the end.
I thought the whole Anglo nationalization thing in 2009 was triggered when he admitted he had hidden a total of ?87 million in loans from Anglo.
Or maybe Wikipedia is wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo_Irish_Bank_hidden_loans_controversy

yeah anglo collapsed over 87m of loans that werent disclosed :pac:

Cyrus

knipex wrote: »

OFFS get some perspective.. I have no time not do I for one second the behavior of the banks pre crisis.. but some of the baying screaming and hyperbole is beyond belief..

What crimes did he commit ???

OK he was charged with providing false info the auditors re his personal loans.

What else ???

What suicides did he actually personally cause ?

What treason did he commit ?? Not random waffle about bankers and treason but an actual act of treason ? an actual crime that was committed..

Is he personally responsible for the housing crash ?
Is he personally responsible for the banking crash ? All the banks ?
Is he personally responsible for the 160 billion odd billion the state borrowed between 2007 and 2017 ??

a 1000 times this

he appears to be a lightning rod for all the ire from the AAA and SF brigade

Beta Ray Bill

knipex wrote: »

No its not. There have been multiple reports

No one person is responsible.

The responsibility lies with

The state (as in the government) for increasing day to day spending based on one off taxes.
The state and its various bodies for not clamping down on crazy lending practices.
The state and its various bodies for poor regulation of the banks.
The state (as in the government) for not reigning in the economy and instead spending..
The voters for electing he who promised most
Our membership of the Euro for having inappropriate interest rates.
The state and its various bodies for not putting policies in place to counteract that.
The banks for loose lending practices and taking advantage of the poor policies and regulations.
The shareholders who urged them on and punished those boards and banks who didn't join in
The people who borrowed more than the could afford.
The developers, house flippers, part time landlords etc who thought there was no end.
The public who overpaid for houses.
The state and its various agencies for poor regulation of the sector.
The unions, trades people, employees, etc who demanded ever increasing wages to chase a property bubble
The unions, trades people, employees who demanded laxer lending to chase a property bubble.
etc
etc
etc

I wasn't talking about the crash
I was talking about 1 individual bank and how it's CEO lied to Auditors and engaged in exceptionally dishonest practices.

Sean Fitzpatrick was the CEO when this happen, he gave it the "Ok"
As CEO, he is responsible for that banks running.... And he ran it into the ground at the expense of the taxpayer.

He is responsible for that 30 Billion of the 160 Billion borrowed.

I do agree with you that everyone was responsible for the crash over all.
But some of us played a far bigger role in the crash than others namely:
Bankers and Regulators
more so than politicians, developers, joe public, etc

Bankers wreckless lending trying to make more and more and more money and the regulators failure to give them a tug in the reins was the heaviest blow for sure.

The whole sub prime lender thing... Even now when I think about it, how did they EVER get away with that? Some of the Banks had a sub prime lender operation in house running alongside their primary Lending operation!

MADNESS!!

For anyone that doesn't know: A subprime lender is a lender you go to when all the prime lenders refuse you a loan cause your credit rating is sh*t, they will offer you a loan at a higher interest rate to off set the risk of you defaulting on the loan.

Hermy

knipex wrote: »

No one person is responsible.

I agree that no one person was responsible but it is wrong to suggest that everybody was responsible.

Everybody was not in charge - ergo everybody was not responsible.

The people who were responsible were people like Sean Fitzpatrick, the people in charge, the people who sat at the top table in business, finance and politics, the people who should have known better, the people whose job it was to know better.

I believe they did know better but chose to act against their better judgement because at the end of the day they wouldn't be held to account for their actions and if it were otherwise we wouldn't be discussing this topic.

Cyrus

Hermy wrote: »

I agree that no one person was responsible but it is wrong to suggest that everybody was responsible.

Everybody was not in charge - ergo everybody was not responsible.

and this type of attitude is why everyone wants a scapegoat easier blame Fitzpatrick or an invisible elite than take responsibility for your own actions

Hermy

Cyrus wrote: »

and this type of attitude is why everyone wants a scapegoat easier blame Fitzpatrick or an invisible elite than take responsibility for your own actions

I agree with your earlier point re all the ire from the AAA and SF brigade but this isn't about a scapegoat.

Most peoples own actions did not lead to the collapse of a bank costing the tax payer €30 billion.

Sean Fitzpatrick's actions did.

Jamiekelly

Cyrus wrote: »

and this type of attitude is why everyone wants a scapegoat easier blame Fitzpatrick or an invisible elite than take responsibility for your own actions

Very funny considering you were blaming SF/AAA in your last post.

Must be very convenient to live in such a black and white reality.

You do realise what you are advocating for is unchecked, unaccountable corporate socialism yes? After all, no one is to blame in your eyes for tens of billions of wealth disappearing from the countries value. No criminality at all just scape goats.

Can I ask if you are employed in the financial sector? I think it's fair to ask before assuming, considering anyone who disapproves of your own viewpoint is automatically a shinner.

Nuance doesn't seem to be your strong suit.