Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

James Brown

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

It proves that she's unsuitable for govt, if something so absolutely memorable could just slip her mind.

TBF she'd be perfect. How often does something come to light in a department and we get 'Nobody told me', 'I didn't know', 'I don't recall' etc? It's how Fine Gael rolls. Got Francis a nice job in Europe.

The Bishop Basher

She can claim whatever she likes..

But she’s a blatant liar and she’s fooling no one.

Odyssey 2005

Is this report being written with a quill and unicorns piss ??. What's the hold up.?

InTheShadows

Embarrassing she hasn't been kicked out. She must have some fierce juicy stuff on FG

Odyssey 2005

InTheShadows wrote: »

Embarrassing she hasn't been kicked out. She must have some fierce juicy stuff on FG

If she goes,I'd say others will have to also. Veruka cant afford that. Hes wishing his life away till the holliers. This green bollixology is just what the doctor ordered

Plumbthedepths

BattleCorp wrote:

But that doesn't mean/prove that she purposely lied on her Affidavit. She can claim it was a mistake and that's something that will never be proven one way or another.

One mistake I can accept, but she made many mistakes all in her favour I may add.

Auguste Comte

BattleCorp wrote: »

That's the magic word, mistake. Mistakes do happen. Courts can and do often acknowledge this and make changes accordingly.

If you personally were driving your car and I drove into the back of your car which resulted in you being paralised from the waist down as a result of that accident, do you think you should be penalised/have your claim thrown out because you said the incident happened on the 25th instead of the 26th? There is plenty of scope to rectify mistakes in court.

I was thinking more about a "mistake" on your proposal form, "I have never had an accident."

BattleCorp

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

One mistake I can accept, but she made many mistakes all in her favour I may add.

I don't think too many people think that she made genuine errors. I don't think she did. All I'm saying is that it's a possibility and it's something she might have claimed to be an error if she got called on it in court.

But that said, I can't prove if she lied or made a mistake and neither can anybody else so in the eyes of the law, she is innocent until proven guilty.

Auguste Comte wrote: »

I was thinking more about a "mistake" on your proposal form, "I have never had an accident."

I agree with you Auguste, you would be penalised for making a mistake on an insurance form but the courts are different. If you hold your hand up in court and admit you made a genuine mistake on an Affidavit at the earliest opportunity, if the Judge believed you the mistake could easily be rectified and you wouldn't be punished for it.

Auguste Comte

BattleCorp wrote: »

I don't think too many people think that she made genuine errors. I don't think she did. All I'm saying is that it's a possibility and it's something she might have claimed to be an error if she got called on it in court.

But that said, I can't prove if she lied or made a mistake and neither can anybody else so in the eyes of the law, she is innocent until proven guilty.



I agree with you Auguste, you would be penalised for making a mistake on an insurance form but the courts are different. If you hold your hand up in court and admit you made a genuine mistake on an Affidavit at the earliest opportunity, if the Judge believed you the mistake could easily be rectified and you wouldn't be punished for it.

For the appropriate legal fee no doubt.A legal system designed by lawyers for the benefit of lawyers, scammers and the wealthy it would seem.

Thanks for your insight.

JeffKenna

BattleCorp wrote: »

JeffKenna wrote: »

I took this from an American site so the legal people might correct if I'm on the wrong track:

In an affidavit, you swear under penalty of perjury that the facts you set out in the document are true to the best of your knowledge. Lying in an affidavit is the same as lying in court testimony, and it constitutes a crime called perjury.

Not the same in Ireland as I've witnessed with my own two eyes Affidavits being corrected during evidence in court. That 'best of your knowledge' thing is important. There is the possibility that mistakes can be made and genuine errors can happen. Do I think Bailey made a genuine error - I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that it's a possibility.

So the issue is to prove whether Maria lied or whether she made a mistake. I presume all the evidence that points to her lying as opposed to making a mistake would be collated and a criminal charge would be made based on that?

Has a case like this been brought to the courts?

And proving whether Bailey told a lie or made a mistake is something that will not be proven. You can't prove something like that. Especially since the case is no longer proceeding to court. If it went to court, the Judge could make a ruling as to whether she lied or not, but we'll never know the answer to that now.

If you are suggesting that Bailey can be brought before the courts for this, you are away with the fairies.

This is fascinating and thanks for your insight. Is this a common occurance that affidavits are changed in such a substantial manner? I would agree that anyone could forget or get a date wrong or minor details but changing an affidavit from I could not walk/run to I could walk/run seems utterly buzzard to me

JeffKenna

BattleCorp wrote: »

JeffKenna wrote: »

I took this from an American site so the legal people might correct if I'm on the wrong track:

In an affidavit, you swear under penalty of perjury that the facts you set out in the document are true to the best of your knowledge. Lying in an affidavit is the same as lying in court testimony, and it constitutes a crime called perjury.

Not the same in Ireland as I've witnessed with my own two eyes Affidavits being corrected during evidence in court. That 'best of your knowledge' thing is important. There is the possibility that mistakes can be made and genuine errors can happen. Do I think Bailey made a genuine error - I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that it's a possibility.

So the issue is to prove whether Maria lied or whether she made a mistake. I presume all the evidence that points to her lying as opposed to making a mistake would be collated and a criminal charge would be made based on that?

Has a case like this been brought to the courts?

And proving whether Bailey told a lie or made a mistake is something that will not be proven. You can't prove something like that. Especially since the case is no longer proceeding to court. If it went to court, the Judge could make a ruling as to whether she lied or not, but we'll never know the answer to that now.

If you are suggesting that Bailey can be brought before the courts for this, you are away with the fairies.

This is fascinating and thanks for your insight. Is this a common occurance that affidavits are changed in such a substantial manner? I would agree that anyone could forget or get a date wrong or minor details but changing an affidavit from I could not walk/run to I could walk/run seems utterly buzzard to me

Odelay

McCrack wrote: »

**** there is no handrail..

There is when walking down steps, the steps mentioned in the post I quoted.

Wheeliebin30

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I challenged wheeliebin on some shocking homeless comments in another thread and he seems to have run away.

What’ll we do now for spin?

Stop moaning ffs
Registered User

Quote: Wheeliebin30
I’m amazed two 13 year olds didn’t crack been interviewed by Gardai.

Most people would be bricking it and just admit it especially kids.


Two future FG members for sure


Mod-Yup, thats a ban.


You said the two boys who murdered Anna Kriegel are future FG members in the Anna thread all to score a political goal and get one up on me.

Seriously to me that is way below the belt.

I really have nothing to discuss with you anymore.

Fair enough we all argue and disagree here but to use that girls murder to get one up on me, well I don’t want to be involved if this has what it has come to.

Old Cellar

What actually was the date supposed to have been when Maria Bailey entered the Hotel? I am aware Maria Bailey said the date on the filings were wrong for some reason and that the incident happened on July 10th not July 13th would it make any difference if she actually entered the Dean on July 9th?

golfball37

Old Cellar wrote: »

What actually was the date supposed to have been when Maria Bailey entered the Hotel? I am aware Maria Bailey said the date on the filings were wrong for some reason and that the incident happened on July 10th not July 13th would it make any difference if she actually entered the Dean on July 9th?

Apparently she appeared on Ireland am the morning after the 13th. Broken and all as she was

McMurphy

A poster has taken the whole thing too serious, the FG member thing was in bad taste alright, but not close account worthy (imo - Especially not if you're not a scheming member in the public eye)

Sorry to see him go, no doubt he'll be back under a new name soon, where he'll continue cheerleading for the Blueshirts, dodgy Insurance claims and all - but obviously distance himself from the old account that vowed never to vote for them again whilst they've a couple of chancers in the party, playing systems that leo and his followers claim to be vehemently against.

Handy eject button all the same.

cj maxx

As to whether she lied or made a mistake the judge can decide. You see it often in the local papers of judges dismissing evidence they think are a pack lies

James Brown

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Stop moaning ffs
Registered User

Quote: Wheeliebin30
I’m amazed two 13 year olds didn’t crack been interviewed by Gardai.

Most people would be bricking it and just admit it especially kids.


Two future FG members for sure


Mod-Yup, thats a ban.


You said the two boys who murdered Anna Kriegel are future FG members in the Anna thread all to score a political goal and get one up on me.

Seriously to me that is way below the belt.

I really have nothing to discuss with you anymore.

Fair enough we all argue and disagree here but to use that girls murder to get one up on me, well I don’t want to be involved if this has what it has come to.

And in your sense of fair play and disgust you felt the need to repost it in an entirely different thread.
You're a champ.

McMurphy

cjmc wrote: »

As to whether she lied or made a mistake the judge can decide. You see it often in the local papers of judges dismissing evidence they think are a pack lies

The judge can't decide on this one - because once her lies "careless mistakes" were exposed, she went and withdrew the case.

Sajid Javid

cjmc wrote: »

As to whether she lied or made a mistake the judge can decide. You see it often in the local papers of judges dismissing evidence they think are a pack lies

Maria Bailey and the solicitor must of been confused or maybe Maria supplied the solicitor with the wrong dates or maybe it was the other way around and the solicitor supplied Maria with the dates. under the circumstances its all rather bizarre unless they all had a very hard weekend.Maria did remember herself and her two friends in the toilet assessing the quality quantity of damage and got a plaster from reception so for absolute clarity on the date issue they could have just made a phone call and the reception would have supplied them the date from the accident report book.
It may have been pretty hard to gather the information required for filing considering that a once prominent member of the Party said the latter is now ran like a cult.

They should all be drug tested. Leo reckons better they fill in forms and declare them.


Q1 What date is Today? A1. Can I phone my solicitor?
You can, but she doesn't know either and even if she did she would lie.

Well that fooks Leos plan.

McMurphy

Jesus H Christ..... There's another new one, this time an MEP.

Compo claim Fine Gael MEP now says she forgets details of insurance settlement

Compo claim MEP Mairead McGuinness said she has forgotten the details of an insurance settlement, despite claiming at the time that she sustained severe and debilitating injuries.

The newly re-elected Fine Gael MEP was critical of Maria Bailey’s controversial swing compo claim, but now the Irish Mirror can reveal she had a claim of her own after a car smash.


She insisted on Tuesday that she “cannot remember the details of it” and refused to say how much she was awarded when she took the case to court.

Furthermore, she is now telling supporters she has held meetings with a European Commissioner who is “investigating the motor insurance issue in Ireland.”

Very reminiscent of the other members of the Feckin Gouger party this bit...

In the civil bill, issued on 14 May 2004, the MEP said her injuries were severe and debilitating and “interfered with her enjoyment of life and all routine and other activities”.

This was less than a month before she won a seat at the European Elections that June.

At the same time as she initiated the compensation claim, she was actively knocking doors on the campaign trail, fighting it out for a seat representing the North Midlands.

Allinall

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Jesus H Christ..... There's another new one, this time an MEP.

Compo claim Fine Gael MEP now says she forgets details of insurance settlement

Are you implying she made a fraudulent claim?

McMurphy

Allinall wrote: »

Are you implying she made a fraudulent claim?

No - why would you ask such a God dam stupid question.

Are you taking up the baton wheelie dropped for the party?

Allinall

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

No - why would you ask such a God dam stupid question.

Are you taking up the baton wheelie dropped for the party?

Because your post said there was “another new one”.

Another new what?

McMurphy

Allinall wrote: »

Because your post said there was “another new one”.

Another new what?

Because there's been numerous people from various political partys named on this thread as been taking soft insurance claims, and or taking part in activities their claim implied they were unable to do.


Would you like a Venn diagram?

Allinall

_blaaz wrote: »

Another claim...unless your saying ms baileys is fraudelent


Which in itself would laeve you liable for slander?

But it’s not new. It was 15 years ago,

And ms Bailey doesn’t have a claim, fraudulent or otherwise.

JohnnyFlash

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

No - why would you ask such a God dam stupid question.

Are you taking up the baton wheelie dropped for the party?

You haven’t been coming across all that well in this thread for the past few pages to be honest, dude. Lots of gloating about a closed account, and an almost obsessional need to keep this thread going. Especially when you closed an account yourself in a huff once upon a time.

Allinall

Allinall wrote: »

Because your post said there was “another new one”.

Another new what?

Another opportunist affected by amnesia when it suits her.

_blaaz

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

an almost obsessional need to keep this thread going..

Would have taught another claim would be relevent to the subject matter???

JohnnyFlash

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Especially when you closed an account yourself in a huff once upon a time.

You've obviously been the recipient of an irony bypass.