The strange affair of Dimmy Tooley

bladespin

blanch152 wrote: »

I can imagine laws too, but I am more interested in what real-life laws you believe were broken.

Eh, I explained above thanks, glad you have an active imagination, it's important to keep a balance.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

I can imagine laws too, but I am more interested in what real-life laws you believe were broken.

Charlie Flanagan (even though admitted to doing similar) seems to think what happened was illegal. What would be know though, he's only the justice minister.

Flanagan writes to Ceann Comhairle over ‘illegality’


I suspect charlie might wind his neck in a bit now though, seeing as it's alleged a few minister's from his own team are alleged to have done the same thing.

Plumbthedepths

Regina Doherty getting sucked into the controversy according to the Examiner. It's spreading beyond FF.

marieholmfan

Pathetic whataboutery from FF. Regina Doherty is clearly in the chamber.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Charlie Flanagan (even though admitted to doing similar) seems to think what happened was illegal. What would be know though, he's only the justice minister.

Flanagan writes to Ceann Comhairle over ‘illegality’


I suspect charlie might wind his neck in a bit now though, seeing as it's alleged a few minister's from his own team are alleged to have done the same thing.

Unlike the Dooley/Collins and Chambers incidents, there hasn't really been any hard evidence about those others, but feel free to indulge in the usual whataboutery.

As for the "illegality" mentioned by Flanagan, something may be illegal but not a crime (defamation being one clear and obvious example). Under the Constitution a TD is required to be present to cast a vote. Dooley wasn't present, so there was illegality, but the question I am asking relates to why people think the Gardai should be called as that requires a criminal infringment of the law.

I don't think you have yet called for the Gardai to be involved, but if you could shed light on this mysterious crime, I would be interested.

marieholmfan

blanch152 wrote: »

Unlike the Dooley/Collins and Chambers incidents, there hasn't really been any hard evidence about those others, but feel free to indulge in the usual whataboutery.

As for the "illegality" mentioned by Flanagan, something may be illegal but not a crime (defamation being one clear and obvious example). Under the Constitution a TD is required to be present to cast a vote. Dooley wasn't present, so there was illegality, but the question I am asking relates to why people think the Gardai should be called as that requires a criminal infringment of the law.

I don't think you have yet called for the Gardai to be involved, but if you could shed light on this mysterious crime, I would be interested.

The crime is treason!

Plumbthedepths

marieholmfan wrote: »

Pathetic whataboutery from FF. Regina Doherty is clearly in the chamber.

Save your outrage for Daniel McConnell of the Examiner. No comment from Doherty as to why she is not on the footage but her vote was recorded.

bladespin

blanch152 wrote: »

Dooley wasn't present, so there was illegality, but the question I am asking relates to why people think the Gardai should be called as that requires a criminal infringment of the law.

That's for me, I think; I asked if the gardai were involved yet.

Simply to investigate 'if' there had been criminal activity, that's part of their mandate, not just to intervene after someone else has proven there was a crime.

Proxy voting is fine elsewhere, I'm not sure if it's ok here or the specific rules and laws involved, hence I ask.

I don't think I'm on my own in thinking there should be an investigation at least, hopefully to prove our system is not broken and abused, I believe we need trust in our system of government and anything that brings it into question should be properly handled, after all out political history (on pretty much all sides) isn't exactly virtuous.

Calhoun

I don't think it would be hard given the security in leinster house to figure out when votes took place and who was present or who was absent.

thebourke

why would they do that...the we would all know that the politicians are never there!

Same old same old..they can't be trusted...

lola85

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Charlie Flanagan (even though admitted to doing similar) seems to think what happened was illegal. What would be know though, he's only the justice minister.

Flanagan writes to Ceann Comhairle over ‘illegality’


I suspect charlie might wind his neck in a bit now though, seeing as it's alleged a few minister's from his own team are alleged to have done the same thing.

You really hate FG Johnny don’t ya!!

FG, FF are both the same. Wouldn’t trust as far as could throw.

Brock Turnpike

blanch152 wrote: »

Unlike the Dooley/Collins and Chambers incidents, there hasn't really been any hard evidence about those others, but feel free to indulge in the usual whataboutery.

As for the "illegality" mentioned by Flanagan, something may be illegal but not a crime (defamation being one clear and obvious example). Under the Constitution a TD is required to be present to cast a vote. Dooley wasn't present, so there was illegality, but the question I am asking relates to why people think the Gardai should be called as that requires a criminal infringment of the law.

I don't think you have yet called for the Gardai to be involved, but if you could shed light on this mysterious crime, I would be interested.

Regardless of the nGardai becoming involved or not, I believe anyone found guilty of this should have their seat put up as part of a snap election, to allow voters to determine if they still want these snakes representing them, when they are committing these kind of acts.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Don't expect most of the people commenting on this to have any knowledge of Dail procedures.

Most of them can't see the difference between pushing a button for someone who is in the Chamber and calls across to vote for them and pushing a button for someone who isn't in the Chamber.

Some of them bend over backwards to support their team even when it's the height of hypocrisy. Nobody has ever had a genuine reasoned gripe with government. Biased faux outrage wha? You're right to be snippy about them having opinions contrary to yours

James Brown

Look you either vote or you maybe make an official recorded request to have someone vote for you, if in circumstances beyond your control, you can't be present.

The proximity defence is bollocks.

lola85 wrote: »

You really hate FG Johnny don’t ya!!

FG, FF are both the same. Wouldn’t trust as far as could throw.

You insist on making this about sides. Nobody has defended FF. Criticising FG isn't defending FF. Two showers of chancers.

Gru

Does this classify as forgery?

Cant link here but section 25 of the criminal justice (theft and fraud offences) act 2001.

"A person is guilty of forgery if he or she makes a false instrument with the intention that it shall be used to induce another person to accept it as genuine and, by reason of so accepting it, do some act, or to make some omission, to the prejudice of that person or any other person"

Would voting in someone else name count here? Whether they asked or not? Could anybody walk around the chamber and press any button if they so chose to? Is that not just ridiculous?

James Brown

Gru wrote: »

Does this classify as forgery?

Cant link here but section 25 of the criminal justice (theft and fraud offences) act 2001.

"A person is guilty of forgery if he or she makes a false instrument with the intention that it shall be used to induce another person to accept it as genuine and, by reason of so accepting it, do some act, or to make some omission, to the prejudice of that person or any other person"

Would voting in someone else name count here? Whether they asked or not? Could anybody walk around the chamber and press any button if they so chose to? Is that not just ridiculous?

More like false representation or something but one of the status quo legal bright lights will be along to tell us once again that while it 'seems' wrong, it's likely legit. That's why we get the quality politicians and procedural mechanisms we do.

McMurphy

lola85 wrote: »

You really hate FG Johnny don’t ya!!

FG, FF are both the same. Wouldn’t trust as far as could throw.

Do you have severe memory lapse or what?

I told you this on Saturday evening, yet you're now the one telling me what I told you.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Deflection ? Do you think I gave a flying flute for either FF or FG? Maybe you think I'm a FFer shill, is that it lol?

I'm simply stating theres not a fanny hair between either of them vote one out and the other in, all you do is change tweedle dee to tweedle dum. They're two cheeks of the one arse.

lola85

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Do you have severe memory lapse or what?

I told you this on Saturday evening, yet you're now the one telling me what I told you.

Yeah true sorry had forgot that. General election badly needed.

McMurphy

The Regina Doherty story is starting to gain traction, and so too is that of Cowen, and English.

I suspect all will use the defence that they are merely out of shot, as opposed to out of the chamber, if theirs irrefutable evidence that contradicts that, they'll go with the "I never told anyone else to vote for me" line.

It will suit each other not to pursue it too much, depending on the score, and it'll all be forgotten about.

James Brown

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

The Regina Doherty story is starting to gain traction, and so too is that of Cowen, and English.

I suspect all will use the defence that they are merely out of shot, as opposed to out of the chamber, if theirs irrefutable evidence that contradicts that, they'll go with the "I never told anyone else to vote for me" line.

It will suit each other not to pursue it too much, depending on the score, and it'll all be forgotten about.

If I forge your name and you're nearby, it's no big deal, however if you aren't even in the building, whoa!

osarusan

Simplest solution seems to be to forget about allowing somebody else to vote for you when you are somewhere else in the chamber, and just make it a rule that everybody present must vote by themselves, and for themselves, at their own position.

I don't have an issue with at TD or Senator submitting something like a formal notification of absence and a list of voting preferences on votes scheduled to be held that day.

But what's happening now is fairly haphazard stuff.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

The Regina Doherty story is starting to gain traction, and so too is that of Cowen, and English.

I suspect all will use the defence that they are merely out of shot, as opposed to out of the chamber, if theirs irrefutable evidence that contradicts that, they'll go with the "I never told anyone else to vote for me" line.

It will suit each other not to pursue it too much, depending on the score, and it'll all be forgotten about.

Apparently Regina's "distinctive boots" are in view, according to one of the news reports.

Keep going through the footage though Johnny, sooner or later you will find what you are looking for.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Apparently Regina's "distinctive boots" are in view, according to one of the news reports.

Keep going through the footage though Johnny, sooner or later you will find what you are looking for.

Aside from the FG culprits not being as bad as the FF culprits, what do you think of the practice of having others vote for you? Charlie seems to take it serious even though he indulges himself.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If I forge your name and you're nearby, it's no big deal, however if you aren't even in the building, whoa!

What a load of nonsense once again.

Have often been at reception in buildings and signed in everyone in the group I was with, or had it done for me. If the person is in the Dail chamber, and calls over to someone, and asks someone to vote for them, it is sloppy practice, but little more than that.

However, if the person you are voting for is not in the Dail chamber, that is illegal under the Constitution. It is not a crime, unless one of the bright sparks has found the relevant piece of legislation, so the Gardai can't get involved.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Aside from the FG culprits not being as bad as the FF culprits, what do you think of the practice of having others vote for you? Charlie seems to take it serious even though he indulges himself.

Once again, you are being fast and loose with the truth.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/voting-controversy-flanagan-writes-to-ceann-comhairle-over-illegality-1.4057669

"Mr Flanagan described what had happened as a really, really serious misdemeanour in our parliamentary system where it is alleged that somebody arranged a vote inside in the chamber and had absented themselves from the chamber when the doors are firmly locked,” he said.

“That to me is prima facie very suspect behaviour and totally unacceptable.”"

Flanagan was not talking about the situation I described, neither was he talking about the Regina Doherty situation.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

What a load of nonsense once again.

Google Translate: I disagree and infer you often make errors although I've zero proof other than the stuff I make up.

blanch152 wrote: »

Have often been at reception in buildings and signed in everyone in the group I was with, or had it done for me. If the person is in the Dail chamber, and calls over to someone, and asks someone to vote for them, it is sloppy practice, but little more than that.

Fair enough. You just think it's sloppy.

blanch152 wrote: »

However, if the person you are voting for is not in the Dail chamber, that is illegal under the Constitution. It is not a crime, unless one of the bright sparks has found the relevant piece of legislation, so the Gardai can't get involved.

Ah, now you're being a hypocrite. The legality is what it is, but proximity doesn't mean anyone is less or more voting for you.
If it turns out Charlie was in another part of the country while a pal voted for him, no doubt you'll change your tune.

blanch152

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

Regardless of the nGardai becoming involved or not, I believe anyone found guilty of this should have their seat put up as part of a snap election, to allow voters to determine if they still want these snakes representing them, when they are committing these kind of acts.

Sure, put your name forward yourself.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If it turns out Charlie was in another part of the country while a pal voted for him, no doubt you'll change your tune.

Nope.

In fact it should be clearest for the Ministers, because their diaries are pretty accurate as to where they are nearly every minute of the day, so if one of them voted in absentia, it should be known pretty quickly.

I think you are all missing the point here. Dooley and Collins have admitted to arranging this. All of the other cases being quoted, including those of Chambers and Cowen, could be put down to genuine mistakes and errors.

Colonel Claptrap

blanch152 wrote: »

I think you are all missing the point here. Dooley and Collins have admitted to arranging this. All of the other cases being quoted, including those of Chambers and Cowen, could be put down to genuine mistakes and errors.

Chambers lied about it when asked.

She's not without fault.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Sure, put your name forward yourself.

So ongoing, anytime anyone criticises any politician we should use this stock answer? Not very conducive to discussion nor practical also considering we vote others in in good faith to to the job, pointless.

blanch152 wrote: »

Nope.

In fact it should be clearest for the Ministers, because their diaries are pretty accurate as to where they are nearly every minute of the day, so if one of them voted in absentia, it should be known pretty quickly.

I think you are all missing the point here. Dooley and Collins have admitted to arranging this. All of the other cases being quoted, including those of Chambers and Cowen, could be put down to genuine mistakes and errors.

I dunno Blanch. There was that communications lad out for diners, invited the chap into the Dail etc. and forgot to keep a list or misplaced it. People are open to errors, giving the benefit of the doubt.

Could be. However Chambers admits not bothering to tell anyone she knowingly voted twice using both a colleagues and her own button. She should be formally reprimanded IMO. Also anyone trying to shrug it off should be firmly told it's not acceptable.
If these people are taking such things so lightly they should find a career they can be responsible in.