Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Jobstown Defendants Not Guilty - The Role of the Gardai and the Judicial Process
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
oscarBravo wrote: »Hang on a second.
Weren't they protesting against the idea of paying for water?
You're going to claim with a straight face that the idea of paying for water has no place in a civilised society?!
We are well and truly through the looking glass here.
I recall Labour being vehemently against the concept a few years previous.
(I think that's why they chose to picket Joan)
More recently?
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
johnnyskeleton wrote: »Yes, and there was a grant to assist people in paying their water charges. So water charges put people on a level playing field, and the water protesters objected because they were losing their special privilege of the kept men and women of Ireland.
That's another bit of a red herring, you're obviously referring to the conservation grant.
Little more than a bribe, in a vain attempt to get people to volunteer their details to Irish Water, paid out by the SWO, which eurostat called out on being the Con-job it was.
However, it's quite apt you brought that up, because obviously you didnt necessarily have to be connected to the public supply, in order to qualify for the bribe grant.
Ask ask those aforementioned people already availing of annual grants and subsidies from the tax payers to go towards their GWS/PWS Wells etc, because those that applied, got another €100 on top of that again.
Did someone mention paying twice?
And I believe you mentioned poor farmer's in Leitrim....
EU grants? Who's funding that do you think?0 -
Advertisement
-
Numerous articles - and right-wing politicians - have claimed that the false imprisonment charges were 'over-the-top' and they should have been charged with public order offences because they would have been easier to get a conviction. It is utterly disgraceful - and they made no such claims prior to the verdict, no such claims when a teenager who was 15 at the time of the protest was found guilty in a judge only court of false imprisonment and they have made no demand that the false imprisonment charges against some of the remaining Jobstown defendants be dropped.johnnyskeleton wrote: »Which articles in particular are you referring to? Do people not have a right to express their opinions as to what is or is not socially acceptable? Is this a sign of things to come in the socialist paradise where any criticism of the socialists is a smear campaign but when they criticise others, often based on incorrect understanding of the law, that is fair comment?
As one of the barristers said during the trial the only form of protest acceptable to the establishment is this -johnnyskeleton wrote: »Who opposes the right to legal protest? And what do you mean by "effective" protest. If people break the law in a protest, then one of three things should happen:
1. They should respect the law and keep within it during the protest;
2. They can campaign to repeal that law or change it so that it doesn't affect the right to protest; or
3. If they believe in their cause so strongly, they should go before a court like Gandhi and state:
Furthermore - any time a protest is successful and the establishment cannot contain or control it - they try and change the 'law' to make it more restrictive - as they are now talking about doing now (including banning the recording of gardai to prove their testimony in court is false).
Already - changing the laws of contempt - changing the law about gardai being video recorded - plus they want to reverse the ruling by the judge in the trial that gardai have a legal responsibility to protect the right to protest.johnnyskeleton wrote: »Those are the options and I haven't seen anyone suggest that legal protesting should be banned, or that we should change the laws,
Now you are spouting nonsensejohnnyskeleton wrote: »More importantly, however, is that the only people who I've seen criticising the legal system were the #jobstownnotguilty people, and when they didn't get the verdict that they desired i.e. the invidious and oppressive forces of the state cruelly convicting innocent martyers, they continued to criticise it in this ridiculous fashion.
Furthermore - many people outside the #JobstownNotGuilty campaign have raised serious questions about the conduct of the gardai in the investigation and on the witness stand - including 50 academics who signed a letter calling for a public inquiry yesterday.
In fact - as a result of the judges directions to the jury - the not guilty verdict actually means that the jury considered the protest peaceful.johnnyskeleton wrote: »Most people accept the jury's verdict. That doesn't mean that they can't have opinions on issues of public importance such as the right to peaceful protest, the right not to be intimidated, the right to go about your business unmolested etc. And no matter how much you want it to be, the verdict that the specific defendants are not guilty of all wrongdoing does not mean that the protest as a whole was peaceful.johnnyskeleton wrote: »In response to Paul Murphy TD raising an issue in the Dail that there should be a public inquiry into why the prosecution was brought. When you look at it in context, what else was he supposed to say? So it's not a smear campaign, it's an honest answer as to why he doesn't think a public inquiry should be held, much like people on here have been trying to explain to you.
Do you have any problem with Enda Kenny claiming that Burton was 'effectively kidnapped', Alex White calling for charges of false imprisonemnt to be brought against protesters, Leo Varadkar falsely accusing Paul Murphy of 'organised and orchestrated... thuggery' or the false allegations by David Begg that Karen O'Connell was 'badly beaten and kicked' on the protest?
Do you have any problem with the vicious smear campaign against Paul Murphy, other Solidarity elected representatives and protesters in Jobstown in the national media?
Do you have any problem with the fact that the Gardai made zero effort to find evidence that could prove the innocence as well as the guilt of the accused?
Do you have any problem with the Gardai dropping an investigation into the injury to a protester by a Garda?
Do you have any problem with the fact that the defendants were arrested in dawn raids by teams of armed Gardai, placed in handcuffs in front of children and hauled off like hardened criminals?
Do you have any problem with a 71 year old man being threatened in Garda custody with been thrown into prison for the rest of his life?
Do you have any problem with a superintendent illegally signing off on the extension of custody for a Jobstown defendant on spurious grounds that resulted in the charges against Ken Purcell being thrown out of court?
Do you have any problem with the fact that a Gardai claimed that he saw Paul Murphy directing and instructing people where to stand and what to do whenJoan Burton left the church when video proved that Paul Murphy didn't do these things and the Garda was situated in a position where he couldn't possibly see Paul Murphy and then when he was confronted with the video evidence he replied 'I stand over my statement'?
Do you have any problem with the fact that two Gardai claimed that Mick Murphy threatened Joan Burton and when video evidence was produced that proved Mick Murphy did no such thing and they were asked to withdraw their allegation they replied 'no comment"?
Do you have any problem with the fact that Garda witnesses repeatedly claimed that there was no agreement with Paul Murphy to withdraw the POU and bring the protest to an end and then the (now retired) officer in charge of the POU on the day confirmed that an agreement was in fact made, naming the Gardai involved, resulting in the officer in command on the ground being recalled to the witness box and admitting this time around under cross-examination that an agreement did actually happen?
Do you have any problem with the fact that three senior Gardai up to the rank of superintendent all claimed that Paul Murphy said to the crowd 'will we keep her here all night' using exactly the same phrase, the same terminology, yet video evidence proved that Paul Murphy never uttered those words and the judge told the jury that they had to consider if these Gardai had 'an agenda against Paul Murphy'?
Do you have any problem with the fact that Gardai wrote their sworn statements months after the protest while viewing video evidence in the company of the Garda charged with reviewing the video evidence?
Do you have any problem with Garda witnesses changing their testimony from the trial last year of a teenage boy to the trial of the seven men acquitted last week?
I could go on - but, if you have such a concern about what happened on the day of the Jobstown protest to Joan Burton I would argue that you should have a similar or greater concern about what happened subsequently - after all Joan Burton may have been subjected to abuse and delayed for a couple of hours - these defendants faced life imprisonment if convicted as a result of the Garda investigation and testimony in court.
GSOC is a toothless tiger with gardai investigating garda - large numbers of complaints have been submitted to GSOC about garda policing of anti-water charges protest and nothing has been done about any of them.johnnyskeleton wrote: »It's not so serious an issue that it requires a public inquiry. Paul Murphy has a legal redress which is to go to the Garda Ombudsman or take any civil case he feels is necessary. I'm not sure you can say he dismissed it out of hand either. Paul Murphy raised it in the Dail and the Taoiseach refused it in the Dail. I'm not sure what else he could have done.
And actually Paul Murphy is not considering taking a civil case - he is considering making a criminal complaint. The reason it hasn't happened yet is because Varadkar and the government would hide behind legalities to refuse to address the need for a public inquiry.
the defendants were found NOT GUILTY.johnnyskeleton wrote: »Yes but it's still illegal:0 -
johnnyskeleton wrote: »Yeah, she did things like keep social welfare levels from being cut, increased minimum wage and advocated, insofar as is possible as the minority centre left party in a centre right government and prevented any futher cuts to unionised workers.
I can see why she is public enemy no. 1 in socialists eyes.
I was responding to a direct question pertaining to protest.
As with charging people twice for water, (three if you count motor tax) and Labour sitting on it's hands while Reilly handed out clinics and FG cranked up the crony machine to 'look after our own', that's for another thread.
As someone who attended marches with Joan while a member of the Labour party, I was disappointed. You should try see beyond absolutes. You can be disappointed with Labour, (seemingly too busy pushing FG around and blocking FG enacting their manifesto) and not be a Stalinist.
To get back on thread topic, it seems nobody is very happy with the performance of the Garda. It's odd, although reasons may vary, that people aren't concerned enough to want the authorities to look into it officially.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 13694
It wouldn't have gotten "better" under Irish Water either. Unless, of course, they were to massively up their bills.
Too many pockets to fill in the quango.
Well perhaps not. There are many problems with Irish Water, which were lost in the fuzz of the "no way we won't pay" crowd. But one thing is for sure, the system wouldn't magically get better if the socialists come to power.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement