Jobstown 6 Not Guilty

hytrogen

CeilingFly wrote:

He should have been jailed for ten years - imagine having to listen to his self righteous bull for ever more now. And his silver spoon upbringing where he wanted for nothing.

He has that cut of a Sir William Evans-Gordon socialism alright. Just missing the casual racist remarks unfortunately. Then again if he got put in the slammer, would we have another Thomas Clarke protege afterwards? Guess we'll never know..

Harry Palmr

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Hmmm. I wonder if Clare Daly's car was surrounded by angry people for three hours would there be the same reaction. Anyway, I'm not a legal eagle but maybe there is the makings of a civil case?

The bill paying squeezed middle classes tend not to behave in such a fashion so it's unlikely to be put to the test.

Professor Moriarty

hytrogen wrote: »

He has that cut of a Sir William Evans-Gordon socialism alright. Just missing the casual racist remarks unfortunately. Then again if he got put in the slammer, would we have another Thomas Clarke protege afterwards? Guess we'll never know..

Perhaps it would be 1916 all over again with Paul Murphy assuming the role of James Connolly.

Sleeve of wizard

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

When it happens again, the guards should just send in the public order unit.

They did.

Zebra3

People in Jobstown arrested for peaceful protest.

Members of the RC church who moved priests around so could they could rape a fresh batch of kids, never even taken in for questioning over a possible crime committed.

This is the judicial system given to us by FF, FG, and Labour.

Pedro K

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Peaceful protest my ass, it was an attempt to intimidate a democratically elected TD.

When it happens again, the guards should just send in the public order unit.

They did that. It made the situation worse.

Dyr

And now the dip**** who pushed ahead of this farce of a case for her pal Joanie is away off to be a judge

Welcome to Ireland

Wheeliebin30

Bambi wrote: »

And now the dip**** who pushed ahead of this farce of a case for her pal Joanie is away off to be a judge

Welcome to Ireland

Yes that one point explains clearly what Ireland is only about.

johnnyskeleton

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Sean Fitz was acquitted too.

Our justice system is top notch:)

Yes it is actually. If juries only returned verdicts in accordance with political narrative then we wouldn't have a justice system, we would have show trials.

sbsquarepants

The whole thing was a farce from start to finish - an absolute abuse of power and position by a government with suspiciously fascist leanings to say the very least!

hytrogen

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Yes it is actually. If juries only returned verdicts in accordance with political narrative then we wouldn't have a justice system, we would have show trials.

But I like Judge Judy

Allinall

sbsquarepants wrote: »

The whole thing was a farce from start to finish - an absolute abuse of power and position by a government with suspiciously fascist leanings to say the very least!

What specifically did the government have to do with this case?

And which government, for that matter?

FrancieBrady

Great to see the disappointment on here of those who never had a problem with the wrongful conviction of the 'right' people.

Oops69

Allinall wrote: »

What specifically did the government have to do with this case?

And which government, for that matter?

Playing poker - face or incredibly naive ? , which is it , who knows ?

RoboRat

Joke of a trial... why it ever happened is beyond me.

Burton threw her toys out of the pram for what was a bit of an inconvenience. I don't condone the manner of the protest but it was instigated by the government ignoring protests and then enlisting heavy handed tactics of the guards against protesters.

This was never false imprisonment, never in a million years. If the unlikely had happened and they were convicted, there would be riots and it would further drive the social divide.

Why nobody in the DPP had the common sense to look at this and reject it is beyond me. I should only have ever been a civil suit taken by Burton and her PA.

Citroen2cv

Zebra3 wrote: »

Now to charge the guards that perjured themselves.




Right? :rolleyes:

seamus

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Yes it is actually. If juries only returned verdicts in accordance with political narrative then we wouldn't have a justice system, we would have show trials.

And if we start calling "not guilty" results "a waste of money", you'll suspiciously see the number of "Guilty" verdicts go through the roof.

There was very clearly a case to be answered here. All of the video shows an unruly, abusive crowd. A car was stopped by protestors and Paul Murphy is clearly heard asking "will we let her go".

So on the face of it, there was a case to be heard as to whether the occupants of that vehicle had been falsely imprisoned.

A jury said, "No", so that's great, justice has been done.

"Justice" is not measured by the delivery of the verdict that you want, but in the delivery of any verdict.

In fact, hoping for a verdict is the exact opposite of justice.

johnnyskeleton

Bambi wrote: »

And now the dip**** who pushed ahead of this farce of a case for her pal Joanie is away off to be a judge

Welcome to Ireland

Is there evidence that the Attorney General had any influence on the DPP, who under the 1976 Act is an independent prosecutor? If so, I would be very interested to hear it.

circadian

CeilingFly wrote: »

Fix - eitheer they had insiders on the jury or noibbled a cpouple fo jury members.

He shoudl nahve been jailed for ten years - imagine having to listen to his self righteous bull for ever more now. And his silver spoon upbringing where he wanted for nothing.

Classic thinking faster than you can type post.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

So what about the 16 year old who was previously convicted?

Hopefully his conviction quashed and his name is cleared.

He was nothing but a little uneducated scumbag who saw an opportunity to cause trouble. He deserved to be convicted and hopefully the period for appeal has expired and the little scroate is stuck with the conviction.

fred funk }{

seamus wrote: »

And if we start calling "not guilty" results "a waste of money", you'll suspiciously see the number of "Guilty" verdicts go through the roof.

There was very clearly a case to be answered here. All of the video shows an unruly, abusive crowd. A car was stopped by protestors and Paul Murphy is clearly heard asking "will we let her go".

So on the face of it, there was a case to be heard as to whether the occupants of that vehicle had been falsely imprisoned.

A jury said, "No", so that's great, justice has been done.

"Justice" is not measured by the delivery of the verdict that you want, but in the delivery of any verdict.

In fact, hoping for a verdict is the exact opposite of justice.

Chanting "Will we let her go" doesn't warrant the level of charges against them. It was a ridiculous trial.

seamus

fred funk }{ wrote: »

Chanting "Will we let her go" doesn't warrant the level of charges against them. It was a ridiculous trial.

The DPP disagrees with you.

That's the whole point of a judicial system - to test whether a charge can be proven. The level or severity of the charges are irrelevant.

You can charge me with murder, but that doesn't make me guilty of murder. At the criminal level, there is functionally no difference between a big charge and a small charge. It doesn't matter if you've been charged with common assault or attempted murder, the case must be proven either way.

who_ru

The guards lying through their teeth on the stand while under oath. Typical.

There is no bigger criminal organisation in this country than the guards.

Falsifying everything from evidence on the stand to crime figures regarding homicides and burglaries and breath tests.

A reprehensible bunch.

PokeHerKing

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote:

He was nothing but a little uneducated scumbag who saw an opportunity to cause trouble. He deserved to be conviced and hopefully the period for appeal has expired and the little scroate is stuck with the conviction.

I assume you know him personally?

Complete waste of time and money.

If people are restricting the movement of a state car then just set the bat to womp and clear house.

Professor Moriarty

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

He was nothing but a little uneducated scumbag who saw an opportunity to cause trouble. He deserved to be convicted and hopefully the period for appeal has expired and the little scroate is stuck with the conviction.

Stop. You're giving us right wing, fascist pigs a bad name.

johnnyskeleton

seamus wrote: »

And if we start calling "not guilty" results "a waste of money", you'll suspiciously see the number of "Guilty" verdicts go through the roof.

There was very clearly a case to be answered here. All of the video shows an unruly, abusive crowd. A car was stopped by protestors and Paul Murphy is clearly heard asking "will we let her go".

So on the face of it, there was a case to be heard as to whether the occupants of that vehicle had been falsely imprisoned.

A jury said, "No", so that's great, justice has been done.

"Justice" is not measured by the delivery of the verdict that you want, but in the delivery of any verdict.

In fact, hoping for a verdict is the exact opposite of justice.

I never called a not guilty verdict a waste of money or said that there was no case to answer. I didn't say that I wanted a particular verdict, or hoped for a particular verdict. See my post here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103944581&postcount=49

This case shows that the system works. So for all the criticism of the jury selection, the DPP, the Judge etc etc, the system provided a verdict in accordance with law, and that is justice. It might not have been what some people wanted, indeed, it might not have been what anyone wanted, especially not those who were setting themselves up to be martyrs, but it is an endorsement of the jury system.

Captain Obvious

Bambi wrote: »

And now the dip**** who pushed ahead of this farce of a case for her pal Joanie is away off to be a judge

Welcome to Ireland

Are you confusing the Attorney General with the D.P.P?

seamus

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I never called a not guilty verdict a waste of money or said that there was no case to answer. I didn't say that I wanted a particular verdict, or hoped for a particular verdict.

Sorry, my post was meant to be an addendum to yours, not a response. Apologies if it comes across that way.

golfball37

Political show trial falls flat on its arse. What a terrible waste of our money. The Gardai who committed a crime by perjuring themselves should really be sanctioned, and would be in a proper country.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Joan Burton could take the case if such a case could be made.

Seeing as she made no complaint in the first place, I doubt it!

Captain Obvious

golfball37 wrote: »

The Gardai who committed a crime by perjuring themselves

This has been mentioned a few times. What are ye referring to?

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

Seeing as she made no complaint in the first place, I doubt it!

Dunno. If such a case were possible would that preclude her from taking it?

RustyNut

This case makes it easy to see why the Guards want to stop the public from filming them and why that would be such a bad idea.

Shemale

The DPP should be sacked for sending this to trial, complete political posturing of the highest order.

I am in Burton's constituency and always have been, she was always first on my ballot. When she was campaigning for the election it was the first time she didn't call to my house with the campaigners, I didn't see her at the train station when she used to be camped out there in opposition.

The campaigners called to my house, one must have been Joan's daughter, she was the image of her. I opened with I have always given Joan my number 1 vote and then said because of this false imprisonment farce she will only ever get the last possible vote on my ballot.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

Has the cost of this case been published? I cannot believe my f***ing tax money has paid for this ridiculous court case. :mad::mad::mad:

wpd

Will the defendents in this case now be able to sue the state for damages??

Zebra3

Captain Obvious wrote: »

This has been mentioned a few times. What are ye referring to?

The judge pretty much told the jury to ignore all the statements from members of AGS, and instead to focus on video evidence.

The judge basically calling them liars.

FrancieBrady

Zebra3 wrote: »

The judge pretty much told the jury to ignore all the statements from members of AGS, and instead to focus on video evidence.

The judge basically calling them liars.

They probably could sue based on that, but it will be made prohibitively expensive to do so.

McCrack

I'm disappointed with the jury decision I have to say

RustyNut

McCrack wrote: »

I'm disappointed with the jury decision I have to say

Why?

Sleeve of wizard

McCrack wrote: »

I'm disappointed with the jury decision I have to say

You should really direct that disappointment towards the clowns in the DPP and AGS that conspired to bring the shambles to court.

Terrible decision, Murphy and co are a total disgrace and should have been punished. Pure scum with plenty of idiots supporting them.

Skylinehead

golfball37 wrote: »

Political show trial falls flat on its arse. What a terrible waste of our money. The Gardai who committed a crime by perjuring themselves should really be sanctioned, and would be in a proper country.

Have you any idea what a show trial is?

red ears

I must admit i haven't followed this but was it not the case that they blocked someone in their car for a couple of hours. How is that legal?

lolokeogh

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Peaceful protest my ass, it was an attempt to intimidate a democratically elected TD.

When it happens again, the guards should just send in the public order unit.

goes to show how much you know...they did...lol..

Are Am Eye

Theyre making a movie about these guys now.
'In the Name Of The Father 2'

Sleeve of wizard

Brooklyn Yummy Cookbook wrote: »

Terrible decision, Murphy and co are a total disgrace and should have been punished. Pure scum with plenty of idiots supporting them.

Maybe they should change the legal definition for false imprisonment so?

No matter what your opinion of Murphy and Co, punishing them for a crime a jury have deemed them innocent of isn't advisable in a western democratic country.

A Dub in Glasgo

red ears wrote: »

I must admit i haven't followed this but was it not the case that they blocked someone in their car for a couple of hours. How is that legal?

Irish Times wrote:

Earlier on Thursday, the jury asked to view video footage taken by a Garda helicopter on the day to consider the question of whether an SUV containing the former tánaiste Ms Burton could have reversed away from water charges protesters.

The trial has heard that at one stage gardaí in the helicopter suggested that the SUV might be able to reverse out of where it was being obstructed by an angry crowd of protesters.

In her charge to the jury, which she completed early yesterday afternoon, the judge said there were three possible exit routes which the jury might consider when assessing whether Ms Bruton, and Ms O’Connell, were falsely imprisoned during the Jobstown protest.

In her charge the judge told the jury that in order for an offence of false imprisonment to occur, the persons affected must have no reasonable route available to them to exit where they are allegedly being detained.

The detention must be “total,” she explained.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/jobstown-trial-six-cleared-of-burton-false-imprisonment-1.3137761

lazybones32

Shemale wrote: »

The DPP should be sacked for sending this to trial, complete political posturing of the highest order.

No matter what you do wrong in this country, sit tight and it will blow over. "Something" will come up in the news tomorrow to distract the sheeple.

Shred important bank documents - that's fine.
Place a whistleblower on a sex-offenders list - that's fine.

DPP probably won't even address it.

Wheeliebin30

lazybones32 wrote: »

No matter what you do wrong in this country, sit tight and it will blow over. "Something" will come up in the news tomorrow to distract the sheeple.

Shred important bank documents - that's fine.
Place a whistleblower on a sex-offenders list - that's fine.

DPP probably won't even address it.

Sheeple?

Jaysus that's embarrassing.