Judgement day for Maria Bailey.

No dig up stupid ... she really wants to make herself unemployable as well as unelectable doesn’t she

beakerjoe

F34 wrote: »

Have to wonder is the bold Maria trying to line up a case for a payout?

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/data-commission-investigates-complaint-from-maria-bailey-40218386.html

All.depends who her DPC complaint is against?

Shes definitely building a case for something legal in the future.

WishUWereHere

F34 wrote: »

Have to wonder is the bold Maria trying to line up a case for a payout?

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/data-commission-investigates-complaint-from-maria-bailey-40218386.html

One really has to wonder just who is advising Bailey. Whoever it is isn’t aware just what a blight on society this greedy ( my description of her )human is.

IRE60

I hope its the same advisor that told here to go on Monday morning Radio!!!

beakerjoe

WishUWereHere wrote: »

One really has to wonder just who is advising Bailey. Whoever it is isn’t aware just what a blight on society this greedy ( my description of her )human is.

Doesnt matter who os advising her.... what matters is that shes taken it.

She believes her personal data rights have been infringed, she may be right depending on who her complaint is against. Shes building a legal case of some sort and looking for a decison from the DPC to strengthen her legal action.

Could be against the papers, could be against her party, or teh hotel....

Penn

I'd say it's a case of if she can prove she was wronged in some way, regardless of what effect that had, she can use it to say she was treated unfairly over the situation as a whole.

It's not a coincidence that this is happening at the same time she starts doing interviews about how hard it's all been for her.

F34

F34 wrote: »

Have to wonder is the bold Maria trying to line up a case for a payout?

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/data-commission-investigates-complaint-from-maria-bailey-40218386.html

Likely. She is some dose this one. Does not do herself any favours whatsoever.

VinLieger

WishUWereHere wrote: »

One really has to wonder just who is advising Bailey. Whoever it is isn’t aware just what a blight on society this greedy ( my description of her )human is.

Would love someone to ask Joseph Madigan again if she's still advising her, previously she said she couldn't answer if she was giving her advice which means she absolutely was behind the whole thing from the beginning

Pintman Paddy Losty

Everyone is entitled to their privacy. If personal information of hers was accessed in contravention of GDPR both INM and perhaps the Dean will be in serious bother.

Predictable that people decide to continue the pile on her though. She is more than entitled to make a complaint to the DPC, when private personal information was published by the media. If successful the payout will dwarf the personal injury claim.

McMurphy

VinLieger wrote: »

Would love someone to ask Joseph Madigan again if she's still advising her, previously she said she couldn't answer if she was giving her advice which means she absolutely was behind the whole thing from the beginning

You might be on to something there....

Leo's in a spot of bother, ref being the subject of a criminal investigation.

Josepha comes out a few days after this announcement with distractory comments about Kerryman becoming Kerry People.

Maria Bailey back in the headlines.

FG equivalent of "oh look a squirrel"! >>>

McMurphy

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their privacy. If personal information of hers was accessed in contravention of GDPR both INM and perhaps the Dean will be in serious bother.

Predictable that people decide to continue the pile on her though. She is more than entitled to make a complaint to the DPC, when private personal information was published by the media. If successful the payout will dwarf the personal injury claim.

Personally speaking I'd be more interested in my "good name" being restored if I was Maria, as you cannot put a monetary value on something like that.


Always about the €€€€€ with some.

It's all 'bout the money
It's all 'bout the dum dum da da dum dum

banie01

I wonder how Ms Bailey publicly sharing the photo and info that undermined her injury claim on Facebook and other public channels are going to be a breach of her privacy?

I also am really looking forward to how this latest example of her acumen and it's effect on the discourse surrounding her actions is going to amount to further misogyny?

dontmindme

McMurphy wrote: »

Personally speaking I'd be more interested in my "good name" being restored if I was Maria, as you cannot put a monetary value on something like that.


Always about the €€€€€ with some.

The narrative will shift to a claim of how unfairly she was treated - vindicated by a legal settlement. She might save her good name yet.

VinLieger

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their privacy. If personal information of hers was accessed in contravention of GDPR both INM and perhaps the Dean will be in serious bother.

Predictable that people decide to continue the pile on her though. She is more than entitled to make a complaint to the DPC, when private personal information was published by the media. If successful the payout will dwarf the personal injury claim.

Why would the dean be in trouble? Also it's publicly available she ran a 10k sure she posted it on social media and the fact she was at the time involved in a court case isn't private info either.

I'm at a loss to what info you think was accessed that brings GDPR into this tbh?

McMurphy

banie01 wrote: »

I wonder how Ms Bailey publicly sharing the photo and info that undermined her injury claim on Facebook and other public channels are going to be a breach of her privacy?

I also am really looking forward to how this latest example of her acumen and it's effect on the discourse surrounding her actions is going to amount to further misogyny?

This, 110%.

She was the author of her own demise when she placed pictorial evidence in her own publicly accessible social media pages.

What an absolute numbnut.

beakerjoe

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their privacy. If personal information of hers was accessed in contravention of GDPR both INM and perhaps the Dean will be in serious bother.

Predictable that people decide to continue the pile on her though. She is more than entitled to make a complaint to the DPC, when private personal information was published by the media. If successful the payout will dwarf the personal injury claim.

It is predictable. She left a bad taste in a lot of peoples mouths with her fraudulent claims. Cant blame people.

Shes entitled to make a complaint, but its a very hard thing to prove that her rights were infringed depending on what she is alleging.

beakerjoe

VinLieger wrote: »

Why would the dean be in trouble? Also it's publicly available she ran a 10k sure she posted it on social media and the fact she was at the time involved in a court case isn't private info either.

I'm at a loss to what info you think was accessed that brings GDPR into this tbh?

Theres many faucets to GDPR. It may not be concerning a breach. Hard to tell at this stage.

Dav010

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their privacy. If personal information of hers was accessed in contravention of GDPR both INM and perhaps the Dean will be in serious bother.

Predictable that people decide to continue the pile on her though. She is more than entitled to make a complaint to the DPC, when private personal information was published by the media. If successful the payout will dwarf the personal injury claim.

Most parents explain to their kids at a young age, don’t post personal information on social media that you don’t want the world to see. If she made a claim for injuries that is available to the public, then posted on social media of her athletic prowess, she should be looking closer to home for someone to blame if it was reported on.

Penn

banie01 wrote: »

I wonder how Ms Bailey publicly sharing the photo and info that undermined her injury claim on Facebook and other public channels are going to be a breach of her privacy?

I also am really looking forward to how this latest example of her acumen and it's effect on the discourse surrounding her actions is going to amount to further misogyny?

I think it's going to be about the information included in the court documents, eg. her saying she couldn't run for three months, whereas it was her own public info which disproved that.

That's what I think her strategy will be for this. Not about the payout if there was a data breach, but using the data breach to claim victimhood over the entire scenario and dismissing criticism of her false claims and her own actions as stemming from a data breach she was the victim of.

Likewise with her recent interviews about the abuse she received (and comparing herself to a woman who committed suicide in an entirely different set of circumstances) while allowing no mention of why she had received that abuse in the first place.

At this stage it's all about painting the picture she's been wronged, she's the real victim in all this, and she should be given a second chance.

I'd be more willing to give her a second chance if she owned up to her mistakes, stopped making excuses and pledged to do better. But that's not going to happen at this stage.

Dav010

Dav010 wrote: »

Most parents explain to their kids at a young age, don’t post personal information on social media that you don’t want the world to see. If she made a claim for injuries that is available to the public, then posted on social media of her athletic prowess, she should be looking closer to home for someone to blame if it was reported on.

This is the same woman who was taking a claim against the hotel because their swing wasn't supervised. Maybe it's just a case of bad parenting!

Fann Linn

Clown puts in dodgy claim & when found out cries the victim. I hope this story continues until the next election.

Dav010

Fann Linn wrote: »

Clown puts in dodgy claim & when found out cries the victim. I hope this story continues until the next election.

She has proved her stamina in matters of poor PR, it’ll take a while for any court case relating to her recent action, can’t see Indo backing down so this could still be ongoing in 2 years. Either way, she’s done as a creditable candidate for any elected office.

banie01

Penn wrote: »

I think it's going to be about the information included in the court documents, eg. her saying she couldn't run for three months, whereas it was her own public info which disproved that.

GDPR doesn't apply to court filings, so I fail to see what her angle her will be?
Apart from family court, and certain other matters primarily criminal and commercial the courts operate in public.
It's one of the prime tenets of justice and is constitutionally provided in 34.1.

Her court filing and associated documentary evidence is a matter of public record.
Her posting her successful run and info on the time, was also made public by her.

I'm completely at a loss as to what angle she has here.
My own experience on GDPR is more than just passing, I wrote and implemented the policy for a major Irish Telco in cooperation with our DPO(who's a barrister) but this screams to me of a desperate effort to at least throw any action she might take subsequent to this into the realm of an administrative justice action.
Yet even at that?

Her decision not to progress her claim was a personal one, it was not forced upon her.
Her issues with FG, well if she pursued an action there I'd have no doubt that the SC report will be made public and do her even more reputational harm.

None of this makes sense, unless there is some angle she is pushing that is not yet public?
And that would be at odds with her claim IMO.

WishUWereHere

Garrett Tangy Hedgehog wrote: »

Likely. She is some dose this one. Does not do herself any favours whatsoever.

Doesn’t do the Irish public any favours either.

WishUWereHere

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their privacy. If personal information of hers was accessed in contravention of GDPR both INM and perhaps the Dean will be in serious bother.

Predictable that people decide to continue the pile on her though. She is more than entitled to make a complaint to the DPC, when private personal information was published by the media. If successful the payout will dwarf the personal injury claim.

Sorry Pat, Bailey was off the radar until SHE went public a few weeks ago by doing that BO’C interview.

Nobody but herself to blame. I’m just amazed she has people coming on here defending her.

WishUWereHere

dontmindme wrote: »

The narrative will shift to a claim of how unfairly she was treated - vindicated by a legal settlement. She might save her good name yet.

GOOD name? Lol

Rothko

VinLieger wrote: »

Why would the dean be in trouble? Also it's publicly available she ran a 10k sure she posted it on social media and the fact she was at the time involved in a court case isn't private info either.

I'm at a loss to what info you think was accessed that brings GDPR into this tbh?

He won't reply

Dav010

dontmindme wrote: »

The narrative will shift to a claim of how unfairly she was treated - vindicated by a legal settlement. She might save her good name yet.

I really can’t see that happening, insurance fraud is to emotive an issue. Even if she wins a privacy case, it won’t change the fact that she made a fraudulent claim.

notsoyoungwan

beakerjoe wrote: »

Theres many faucets to GDPR. It may not be concerning a breach. Hard to tell at this stage.

Well Bailey certainly seems to think there’s money available on tap for compo claims