Jobstown Defendants Not Guilty - The Role of the Gardai and the Judicial Process

Captain Obvious

Tony EH wrote: »

And more than likely there won't be.

Murphy will make a bit of capital out of it. FG will kick up a bit dust and try to control the damage and FF will look the other way for a bit. Everybody else will be watching the clock.

They'll all break for their summer recess and nobody will remember in September.

Why not just make one yourself?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

He joined and took part, doesn't apologise for it, in fact he has defended the protest at every opportunity. As Varadkar said in the Dail, conduct unbecoming a decent person.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2017/0713/890011-politics/

"Comments made by Paul Murphy in the Dáil yesterday have been referred to the Oireachtas Committee on Procedure by the Ceann Comhairle.

Ceann Comhairle Seán Ó Fearghaíl had referred the remarks made by the Solidarity TD to the parliamentary legal adviser last night following an initial review of the Dáil transcript.

Following consultation with the legal adviser, Mr Ó Fearghaíl sent the matter to the committee "for its consideration and decision".

During Leaders' Questions yesterday afternoon, Mr Murphy used Dáil privilege to accuse gardaí of committing perjury during his trial for the false imprisonment of former tánaiste Joan Burton and her adviser Karen O'Connell."

And rightfully so, we cannot have TDs making random accusations against named people who cannot defend themselves, especially those TDs who are too cowardly to repeat the accusations outside the Dail.

He did repeat it outside the Dail. Do your research.
And the only thing you cannot do under privledge is name somebody outside the house. He didn't name anyone.

blanch152

Tony EH wrote: »

And more than likely there won't be.

Murphy will make a bit of capital out of it. FG will kick up a bit dust and try to control the damage and FF will look the other way for a bit. Everybody else will be watching the clock.

They'll all break for their summer recess and nobody will remember in September.

Any member of the public can make a complaint and have it investigated. The real reason a complaint hasn't been made is that there is nothing to the accusation.

markodaly

For Reals wrote: »

You should get over 4% Murphy.
This is about three Garda giving the same false statement.
A request was put in for an inquiry on a very important issue and we got schoolyard level quips from the political leader of the country.

But sure the cut of Murphy...

This ain't about Murphy or his politics as much as you'd like it to be.

Any gripes about the protesters not charged should be taken up with the Garda, if you feel confident doing that of course.



The O'Sullivan thing seems to be fair and unbiased :rolleyes:

I have been on record about the Gardai before, saying they should be reform from top to bottom and that this trial shows them up to be incompetent.

Here, this my post about the trial
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103971298&postcount=67
The last paragraph being the most pertinent.

With this aside, Murphy is constantly in the headlines because that is the way he likes it. As I said, he is the Irish version of Donald Trump, he wants to blow up the system and will use means that were previously unquestionable and unthinkable that are now standard order. Tweeting from the courtroom for example, something the judge told him to stop.

I, like most Dubliners and Irish people don't care for Paul Murphy but the guy puts himself in the headlines, then you cant then expect for people to comment.

My own personal opinion is that the guy is a megalomaniac and narcissist in the vain of P Flynn and is treating all this some big game. Him versus the world a bit like Scot Pilgram.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Applying that principle - "if there is a huge leap, and there may well be nothing to it, we should still investigate" - to other situations, say the actions of Paul Murphy during the Jobstown process, then there was nothing wrong with having the Garda investigation?

What?

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

He joined and took part, doesn't apologise for it, in fact he has defended the protest at every opportunity. As Varadkar said in the Dail, conduct unbecoming a decent person.

Apologies but I would rather if the poster to whom I directed my comment to responded.

For Reals

blanch152 wrote: »

Not even Murphy is brazen enough to make that libellous accusation outside the Dail. He only makes the specific accusation when he has the protection of privilege. Online it seems that anything goes.

It is quite telling that not one complaint has been made to GSOC. If someone is interested in an investigation rather than publicity, that is where they would go.

The statements given were false. End of. In err or not is why we need an investigation.
The key issue here is people could have done time based on the testimony of three Garda, if not for video evidence.
Imagine being before a Judge and three Garda give evidence against you?

Leo should man up and say he doesn't give two damns rather then talk ****e about his view of the protest.

Captain Obvious

markodaly wrote: »

I have been on record about the Gardai before, saying they should be reform from top to bottom and that this trial shows them up to be incompetent.

Here, this my post about the trial
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103971298&postcount=67
The last paragraph being the most pertinent.

With this aside, Murphy is constantly in the headlines because that is the way he likes it. As I said, he is the Irish version of Donald Trump, he wants to blow up the system and will use means that were previously unquestionable and unthinkable that are now standard order. Tweeting from the courtroom for example, something the judge told him to stop.

I, like most Dubliners and Irish people don't care for Paul Murphy but the guy puts himself in the headlines, then you cant then expect for people to comment.

My own personal opinion is that the guy is a megalomaniac and narcissist in the vain of P Flynn and is treating all this some big game. Him versus the world a bit like Scot Pilgram.

This paragraph seems to ignore the fact that the DPP decides on what charges to bring and the chief state solicitor takes on cases above the District Court level.

markodaly wrote: »

If they had been charged with public order offenses they would more than likely have been found guilty but it also an indictment on the Gardai that their old way of doing things and pursuing prosecutions don't hold water anymore (their prosecution rate is actually terrible for some crimes), hence the need to reform. If it had been the MET, as a much more professional policy body they would have slammed dunked this case.

Tony EH

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Why not just make one yourself?

I have better things to do. :pac:

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He did repeat it outside the Dail. Do your research.
And the only thing you cannot do under privledge is name somebody outside the house. He didn't name anyone.

No he didn't. As the article says "Mr Murphy used Dáil privilege to accuse gardaí of committing perjury during his trial for the false imprisonment of former tánaiste Joan Burton and her adviser Karen O'Connell."

As for naming people, you don't have to name their names, it is sufficient to give enough information to allow them to be individually identified. For example, if you said " the businessman who won the first mobile licence", then you have named Denis O'Brien, if you said "the manager of the Dublin GAA team", then you have named Jim Gavin. Similarly, if you say "the three gardai who gave evidence", you have named them.

Like all bullies, Murphy is inherently a coward, and made sure not to name them outside the Dail.

markodaly

Does anyone else think of the hypocrisy when Solidarity supported (the only party to do so) the Gardai to Strike (which is illegal by the way) but then complain that there was an act of indiscipline within the Gardai testimony?

Supporting one act of indiscipline but complain about another.

blanch152

For Reals wrote: »

The statements given were false. End of. In err or not is why we need an investigation.
The key issue here is people could have done time based on the testimony of three Garda, if not for video evidence.
Imagine being before a Judge and three Garda give evidence against you?

Leo should man up and say he doesn't give two damns rather then talk ****e about his view of the protest.

The judge did not say the statements give were false. The only person who has said that is Murphy and he stated it under privilege because he was afraid of being sued.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

No he didn't. As the article says "Mr Murphy used Dáil privilege to accuse gardaí of committing perjury during his trial for the false imprisonment of former tánaiste Joan Burton and her adviser Karen O'Connell."

As for naming people, you don't have to name their names, it is sufficient to give enough information to allow them to be individually identified. For example, if you said " the businessman who won the first mobile licence", then you have named Denis O'Brien, if you said "the manager of the Dublin GAA team", then you have named Jim Gavin. Similarly, if you say "the three gardai who gave evidence", you have named them.

Like all bullies, Murphy is inherently a coward, and made sure not to name them outside the Dail.

Mr Murphy said he believes officers gave incorrect evidence to the trial. He was speaking to reporters just hours after Social Democrats TD Catherine Murphy said some gardaí should potentially face perjury charges over their evidence.

He said the issue amounts to perjury but said this should be investigated by a Government inquiry first in order to ensure wider conspiracy claims are also examined.

“I think perjury was committed by gardaí in this case. That is a criminal offence,” he said.

“Criminal prosecutions can be brought against gardaí in relation to that but, at this stage I’m not planning to go and make a criminal complaint of perjury because I think if you do that the Government’s answer the next day is to say ‘well we can’t answer any of those questions because there’s criminal investigations proceeding’.

“So our focus is on a governmental and political response.”

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/paul-murphy-accuses-gardai-of-perjury-454092.html

markodaly

Captain Obvious wrote: »

This paragraph seems to ignore the fact that the DPP decides on what charges to bring and the chief state solicitor takes on cases above the District Court level.

I agree but the actual investigation and collection of evidence is carried out by the Gardai. Perhaps they over egged the pudding. Regardless the DPP and the Gardai do not come good from this. I truly believe that if this happened in London, Paul Murphy and Co would have criminal convictions for public order offenses. In Ireland we seem to botch what should be slam dunk cases. Look at Seanie Fitz as another example.

The Gardai and other investigative units and bureaus need a huge overhall.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

You accepted the principle that even if there is a huge leap (e.g. from an unpeaceful protest involving public disorder to an accusation of false imprisonment) and that there may well be nothing to it (e.g. the accused may be found innocent), then it is worth investigating (e.g. the Jobstown trial).

To be fair, the leap involved in the Jobstown case is a far smaller leap than the leap you are taking based on the judge's conclusions.

For Reals

markodaly wrote: »

I have been on record about the Gardai before, saying they should be reform from top to bottom and that this trial shows them up to be incompetent.

Here, this my post about the trial
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103971298&postcount=67
The last paragraph being the most pertinent.

With this aside, Murphy is constantly in the headlines because that is the way he likes it. As I said, he is the Irish version of Donald Trump, he wants to blow up the system and will use means that were previously unquestionable and unthinkable that are now standard order. Tweeting from the courtroom for example, something the judge told him to stop.

I, like most Dubliners and Irish people don't care for Paul Murphy but the guy puts himself in the headlines, then you cant then expect for people to comment.

My own personal opinion is that the guy is a megalomaniac and narcissist in the vain of P Flynn and is treating all this some big game. Him versus the world a bit like Scot Pilgram.

And Leo doesn't do anything for pure notoriety and PR :rolleyes:
So you've criticisms of the Garda and Murphy. Grand.
I'm more interested in the stink from this trial.

Arguably the most peaceful, but of most note, among the protesters were arrested in dawn raids. No moves on the lady who said the 'all night' thing or the other alleged blaggards people keep purposefully referring to because they've nothing on those charged.

For Reals

For Reals wrote: »

The statements given were false. End of. In err or not is why we need an investigation.
The key issue here is people could have done time based on the testimony of three Garda, if not for video evidence.
Imagine being before a Judge and three Garda give evidence against you?

Leo should man up and say he doesn't give two damns rather then talk ****e about his view of the protest.

The statements were factual in that someone did say keep her here all night, or words to that affect, just not Paul Murphy. I believe it was a female voice.

Paul Murphy acted like a little school boy being refused sweeties in the Dail.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

The statements were factual in that someone did say keep her here all night, or words to that affect, just not Paul Murphy. I believe it was a female voice.

Yet part of the prosecution rested on these words being attributed to Murphy which could have upon conviction seen him sentenced to life imprisonment. You believe he is being juvenile in seeking an inquiry?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You accepted the principle that even if there is a huge leap (e.g. from an unpeaceful protest involving public disorder to an accusation of false imprisonment) and that there may well be nothing to it (e.g. the accused may be found innocent), then it is worth investigating (e.g. the Jobstown trial).

To be fair, the leap involved in the Jobstown case is a far smaller leap than the leap you are taking based on the judge's conclusions.

Sorry, you are not making any sense.

To my mind there are serious questions to be asked here and they should be asked if you have any interest in a proper police force. And we don't have one. This may be another instance of improper use of power.

markodaly

For Reals wrote: »

So you've criticisms of the Garda and Murphy. Grand.
I'm more interested in the stink from this trial.

What stink? That the Gardai are incompetent? I think the Irish public have copped onto that over the past 2-3 years given what has come out.

The other stink? That Paul Murphy is the Irish version of Donald Trump. Yes, most Irish people have also copped onto that too.

You do know that its possible to criticise both the Gardai and Paul Murphy at the same time, without being some shill for FG or whomever you hate at this moment in time.

Some want to buy into the narrative that Paul Murphy is some victim here, while excusing or ignoring calling two women Knuts and Whores while banging aggressively on their car. The sexist, mysoginistic behaviour from that protest was disgusting and they never received an apology from anyone.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Yet part of the prosecution rested on these words being attributed to Murphy which could have upon conviction seen him sentenced to life imprisonment. You believe he is being juvenile in seeking an inquiry?

I believe that the Gardai heard the words, but connected them to the wrong person. I believe that Murphy is really pi**ed off that he wasn't jailed! His Revolution has no hope of succeeding now!

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sorry, you are not making any sense.

To my mind there are serious questions to be asked here and they should be asked if you have any interest in a proper police force. And we don't have one. This may be another instance of improper use of power.

You are the one who originally put forward the idea that there may well be a huge leap that may have nothing to it, but that huge leap doesn't diminish the need to find out:

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It may well be a huge leap and there may well be nothing to it only human frailty. But that doesn't diminish the need to find out why there were inconsistencies and inaccuracies.

blanch152 wrote: »

So even if there is a huge leap, and there may well be nothing to it, we should still investigate? Is that what you are saying?

All I did was apply your principles to another case:

blanch152 wrote: »

You accepted the principle that even if there is a huge leap (e.g. from an unpeaceful protest involving public disorder to an accusation of false imprisonment) and that there may well be nothing to it (e.g. the accused may be found innocent), then it is worth investigating (e.g. the Jobstown trial).

To be fair, the leap involved in the Jobstown case is a far smaller leap than the leap you are taking based on the judge's conclusions.

Hitman3000

markodaly wrote:

Some want to buy into the narrative that Paul Murphy is some victim here, while excusing or ignoring calling two women Knuts and Whores while banging aggressively on their car. The sexist, mysoginistic behaviour from that protest was disgusting and they never received an apology from anyone.

I asked already you may have missed it, but was Murphy engaged in any of the behaviour you have mentioned and what makes you feel he is responsible for the individual behaviour of others. Despite the fact he did not organise the protest.

For Reals

markodaly wrote: »

What stink? That the Gardai are incompetent? I think the Irish public have copped onto that over the past 2-3 years given what has come out.

The other stink? That Paul Murphy is the Irish version of Donald Trump. Yes, most Irish people have also copped onto that too.

You do know that its possible to criticise both the Gardai and Paul Murphy at the same time, without being some shill for FG or whomever you hate at this moment in time.

Some want to buy into the narrative that Paul Murphy is some victim here, while excusing or ignoring calling two women Knuts and Whores while banging aggressively on their car. The sexist, mysoginistic behaviour from that protest was disgusting and they never received an apology from anyone.

The stink:

For Reals wrote: »

And Leo doesn't do anything for pure notoriety and PR :rolleyes:
So you've criticisms of the Garda and Murphy. Grand.
I'm more interested in the stink from this trial.

Arguably the most peaceful, but of most note, among the protesters were arrested in dawn raids. No moves on the lady who said the 'all night' thing or the other alleged blaggards people keep purposefully referring to because they've nothing on those charged.

Your intent to make this all about your view of Murphy is very telling. You've issue with the Garda, but not in this regard, because Murphy...
The Irish people expecting an unbias legal process are the possible victims here and yes Murphy was too. Dawn raid for sitting. My word.

Deleted User wrote: »

The statements were factual in that someone did say keep her here all night, or words to that affect, just not Paul Murphy. I believe it was a female voice.

Paul Murphy acted like a little school boy being refused sweeties in the Dail.

But they stated Murphy said it and he was on trial. Pretty straightforward one would have thought. Video showed a woman saying it quite clearly.
He acted like a man nearly went to prison based on the false statement of three Garda.

blanch152

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I asked already you may have missed it, but was Murphy engaged in any of the behaviour you have mentioned and what makes you feel he is responsible for the individual behaviour of others. Despite the fact he did not organise the protest.

Pontius Pilate's defenders have nothing on Paul Murphy's when it comes to washing the hands and denying responsibility for their actions.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You are the one who originally put forward the idea that there may well be a huge leap that may have nothing to it, but that huge leap doesn't diminish the need to find out:





All I did was apply your principles to another case:

What relevance has this?

I never said the Gardai should not investigate.

markodaly

For Reals wrote: »

And Leo doesn't do anything for pure notoriety and PR :rolleyes:

Leo is not referred to the Oireachtas Committee by the Ceann Comhairle, Paul Murhpy is. Now you may complain about Leo's socks, fine but to equate Paul Murphies actions in the Dail and Leo's as morally the same then you have lost the argument there and then.

Arguably the most peaceful, but of most note, among the protesters were arrested in dawn raids. No moves on the lady who said the 'all night' thing or the other alleged blaggards people keep purposefully referring to because they've nothing on those charged

There are still many people due before the courts on Public Order offenses. Throwing rocks at Gardai, calling Joan Burton a ****ing Kunt and a Whore b ut guess what, Paul Murphy says these guys are innocent regardless.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

I believe that the Gardai heard the words, but connected them to the wrong person. I believe that Murphy is really pi**ed off that he wasn't jailed! His Revolution has no hope of succeeding now!

Quite a lot of Garda even ones that weren't close by made that mistake. Yeah I'm sure Murphy is p*ssed he was denied a potential sentence of 25 years. Revolution? Has he called for one, I must have missed it.

For Reals

For Reals wrote: »

But they stated Murphy said it and he was on trial. Pretty straightforward one would have thought. Video showed a woman saying it quite clearly.

And Murphy was rightly acquitted because of it. (Imagine them mistaking a female voice for Murphys!)

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Leo is not referred to the Oireachtas Committee by the Ceann Comhairle, Paul Murhpy is. Now you may complain about Leo's socks, fine but to equate Paul Murphies actions in the Dail and Leo's as morally the same then you have lost the argument there and then.

You are gonna jump the gun and convict him again, before the case ends. Brilliant.

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

Pontius Pilate's defenders have nothing on Paul Murphy's when it comes to washing the hands and denying responsibility for their actions.

Murphy didn't organise the protest so please explain why you feel he should be responsible for the actions of other adults?

For Reals

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are gonna jump the gun and convict him again, before the case ends. Brilliant.

The deflection is strong here. There's an issue being twisted to block any suggestion of an inquiry. People got something to hide?
'Leo can say what he likes, because Murphy etc.'. What a load. It's like they built a see-saw and put the pair of them on it. Gas.

markodaly

Your intent to make this all about your view of Murphy is very telling. You've issue with the Garda, but not in this regard, because Murphy...
The Irish people expecting an unbias legal process are the possible victims here and yes Murphy was too. Dawn raid for sitting. My word.

I have called the Gardai incompetent, called for a Patten style reform of the entire Irish police force, yet you read this as saying that this is all about Paul Murphy? My, your reading of my posts is rather puzzling. It is very telling you cant read my posts and comment back in an honest respectful way.

You can defend Paul Murphy all you want, I think he is a fool and an idiot, sooner or later someone will give him a noose in which he hangs himself with.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are gonna jump the gun and convict him again, before the case ends. Brilliant.

Did I say he was guilty? No I did not. Again read before writing.

For Reals

blanch152 wrote: »

Pontius Pilate's defenders have nothing on Paul Murphy's when it comes to washing the hands and denying responsibility for their actions.

This is amazing.

Folks are asking for an investigation, translates as Murphy fanboys? Keep pitching that, it's becoming most amusing.

Since when is the law and order of the state being brought into question down to what you or others think of a politician with 4% in the polls? Maybe Leo will wear that, but not I.

markodaly wrote: »

I have called the Gardai incompetent, called for a Patten style reform of the entire Irish police force, yet you read this as saying that this is all about Paul Murphy? My, your reading of my posts is rather puzzling. It is very telling you cant read my posts and comment back in an honest respectful way.

You can defend Paul Murphy all you want, I think he is a fool and an idiot, sooner or later someone will give him a noose in which he hangs himself with.

It's of no issue to you? The court case, the testimonies? Fine. Your view on Murphy is your business and not really relevant.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

And Murphy was rightly acquitted because of it. (Imagine them mistaking a female voice for Murphys!)

Funny how the Garda present couldn't distinguish Murphy's well known voice from that of a female whom was inciting false imprisonment. A suggestion of a crime such as that surely would not pass unnoticed unless for reasons unknown certain unknown people wanted to attribute this to someone else at a later stage.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Did I say he was guilty? No I did not. Again read before writing.

The committee may well find that Murphy did not breech Dail privilege, but you have already decided that he was morally wrong.

Now you may complain about Leo's socks, fine but to equate Paul Murphies actions in the Dail and Leo's as morally the same then you have lost the argument there and then.

Dail privilege is a very important thing and should be protected.

markodaly

For Reals wrote: »

The deflection is strong here. There's an issue being twisted to block any suggestion of an inquiry. People got something to hide?
'Leo can say what he likes, because Murphy etc.'. What a load. It's like they built a see-saw and put the pair of them on it. Gas.

An inquiry would achieve nothing. I would rather time and money spent into reforming the Gardai instead of another inquiry (I heard on the radio there were 8 seperate inquiries and investigations) into the Gardai which will just be used for political purposes by the Irish Donald Trump, rather for the greater good of creating a better police force.

Leo cannot say what he wants, Leo does not say what he wants as he has far far greater responsibility then worrying about Paul Murphy and his stupid comments in the Dail.

The fact is that Leo is not referred to a Committee by an Ceann Comhairle by things he said in the Dail. This is a fact. I must say though you have an obsession in defending by proxy Paul Murphy and also have a say on what Leo does or does not.

For Reals

markodaly wrote: »

An inquiry would achieve nothing. I would rather time and money spent into reforming the Gardai instead of another inquiry (I heard on the radio there were 8 seperate inquiries and investigations) into the Gardai which will just be used for political purposes by the Irish Donald Trump, rather for the greater good of creating a better police force.

Leo cannot say what he wants, Leo does not say what he wants as he has far far greater responsibility then worrying about Paul Murphy and his stupid comments in the Dail.

The fact is that Leo is not referred to a Committee by an Ceann Comhairle by things he said in the Dail. This is a fact. I must say though you have an obsession in defending by proxy Paul Murphy and also have a say on what Leo does or does not.

Fair enough. I'm uncertain about what transpired and would like to see one. If it were one Garda I'd maybe understand.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The committee may well find that Murphy did not breech Dail privilege, but you have already decided that he was morally wrong.

Where did I say this? Again, reading and writing, it is a useful excercise now and again to read words rather then making something up in your head.

Dail privilege is a very important thing and should be protected.

I agree but with such privilege also has responsibility. Paul Murphy seems to be throwing out the rule book in terms of Dail privilege, without caring about consequences.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

An inquiry would achieve nothing.

For those who cannot take their political beliefs out of the equation maybe it wouldn't.

I have very little time for Murphy's brand of politics but I recognise the principle here.

Hitman3000

markodaly wrote:

Leo cannot say what he wants, Leo does not say what he wants as he has far far greater responsibility then worrying about Paul Murphy and his stupid comments in the Dail.

Martin accused Leo of jeprodising an on going court case by his comments regarding Garda evidence during a Prime time interview.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Where did I say this? Again, reading and writing, it is a useful excercise now and again to read words rather then making something up in your head.






I agree but with such privilege also has responsibility. Paul Murphy seems to be throwing out the rule book in terms of Dail privilege, without caring about consequences.

There is NO decision yet on whether Murphy abused Dail privilege but you have decided that he was morally lesser than Leo in raising the issue. It's all there in what you wrote. Read it again.

Now you may complain about Leo's socks, fine but to equate Paul Murphies actions in the Dail and Leo's as morally the same then you have lost the argument there and then.

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

I believe that the Gardai heard the words, but connected them to the wrong person.

So, THREE separate Gardai heard a female voice and attributed it to a man called Paul Murphy.

Tony EH

Tony EH wrote: »

So, THREE separate Gardai heard a female voice and attributed it to a man called Paul Murphy.

It would seem so.

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

It would seem so.

I don't think even you could be that naive to believe such a thing.

No. More than likely what happened here was that someone heard "something" and tried to pin it on Murphy, in the same way the whole show trial was an effort to pin something on him and a game of Chinese Whispers ensued amongst the other Gardai who, in all likelyhood, heard nothing at all of the sort. But, who then subsequently went and swore on oath that they did.

All rather embarrassing really.

At best, it's appalling fact checking on behalf of AGS. At worst, it's lying on the stand.

For Reals

The woman even said where she was from as she introduced herself. You couldn't make it up, but possibly some could.
One of the accused actually arguing against her view of keeping them all night, as did another.

dense

blanch152 wrote: »

So even if there is a huge leap, and there may well be nothing to it, we should still investigate? Is that what you are saying?

How do we determine if it's a huge leap without investigating it?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

For those who cannot take their political beliefs out of the equation maybe it wouldn't.

I have very little time for Murphy's brand of politics but I recognise the principle here.

So what would another inquiry into the Gardai achieve? Before answering remember there is the guts of a dozen investigations already under way.

FrancieBrady

dense wrote: »

How do we determine if it's a huge leap without investigating it?

Somebody on the internet said it isn't worth investigating, nothing to see here.
Leo Varadkar has said on the Dail record that the defendant wasn't 'a victim' of Garda perjury and received a fair trial before the internal Garda inquiry is even complete.
There is a pattern here. A failure and fear to face the facts (that there may have been organised perjury) for political reasons.

Leo had no problem pressuring the Garda commissioner (for political reasons) on television last week by remarking on the 'inconsistencies and inaccuracies' and what they might mean.