Gangland Shootings part 4 - Read OP before posting - updated 30/12/23

Rows Grower

glenfieldman wrote: »

In other words, "we are covertly listening to what people of interest to us are saying and they are now in the process of trying to plan your murder."

I doubt that came from the major players
Id say its some small fry working for them that thinks will get them kudos[/QUOTE]

If that was the case it wouldn't be a credible threat.

You are aware that Gardai have foiled dozens upon dozens of murder plots associated with this gang yeah?

glenfieldman

Rows Grower wrote: »

I doubt that came from the major players
Id say its some small fry working for them that thinks will get them kudos

If that was the case it wouldn't be a credible threat.

You are aware that Gardai have foiled dozens upon dozens of murder plots associated with this gang yeah?[/QUOTE]

Yes I do know they have, but nothing has been as this much publicized since the Regency attack
Does it not smack as a publicity stunt on the 5th anniversary, the documentary and now the well publicized death threat

PLATOBONG

This Newspaper says the threat came from criminal elements in the north.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/6520557/panorama-team-threatened-daniel-kinahan-boxing-documentary/

BaySide

Very quiet about Danny mcclean murder up north, just dissidents killing each other ?

LastODC

Threat originated from unspecified intelligence from psni, and just happens to keep the story front and centre in the media. Lol. If thats down to anyone but cancers enemies they're simple

stingrayed

Rows Grower wrote: »

I doubt that came from the major players
Id say its some small fry working for them that thinks will get them kudos

If that was the case it wouldn't be a credible threat.

You are aware that Gardai have foiled dozens upon dozens of murder plots associated with this gang yeah?[/QUOTE]


If a so called small fry decided to do this himself to get kudos, it would be the other way around, he would get shot for bringing even more heat, but let us go back in time and we can see DK is used to making very silly decisions just for his own personal ego, he is far from his dad, DK has an ego because the media play him up, and he thrives on it, but then so did many others, and they are all either dong life in a supermax or talking with the ants.

MelvinWagstaff

stingrayed wrote: »

If that was the case it wouldn't be a credible threat.

You are aware that Gardai have foiled dozens upon dozens of murder plots associated with this gang yeah?

If a so called small fry decided to do this himself to get kudos, it would be the other way around, he would get shot for bringing even more heat, but let us go back in time and we can see DK is used to making very silly decisions just for his own personal ego, he is far from his dad, DK has an ego because the media play him up, and he thrives on it, but then so did many others, and they are all either dong life in a supermax or talking with the ants.[/quote]

How many sugars does Dan take in his tea? Does he keep the tea bag in? Would he be a fan o Tubs on the late late or would he prefer Pat Kenny? Forgive me for being intrusive I'm just curious and I feel you are the right person to ask considering you know Dan and his dad so well to describe their personality traits.

Noseygit

Gardai have sent a file to the dpp asking for the monk to be charged for the regency attack

tobeme2020

MaryLouMacari wrote: »

Correct, born 25/06/1977 but that's not the real reason, now is it?

What's the real reason

tobeme2020

BaySide wrote: »

Very quiet about Danny mcclean murder up north, just dissidents killing each other ?

He was taxing drug dealers and is an ex British solider plus showing signs of wealth. Either works for Mi5 abd the dissies picked up on it or the DD took him out for taxing them

Ash.J.Williams

MelvinWagstaff wrote: »

If a so called small fry decided to do this himself to get kudos, it would be the other way around, he would get shot for bringing even more heat, but let us go back in time and we can see DK is used to making very silly decisions just for his own personal ego, he is far from his dad, DK has an ego because the media play him up, and he thrives on it, but then so did many others, and they are all either dong life in a supermax or talking with the ants.

How many sugars does Dan take in his tea? Does he keep the tea bag in? Would he be a fan o Tubs on the late late or would he prefer Pat Kenny? Forgive me for being intrusive I'm just curious and I feel you are the right person to ask considering you know Dan and his dad so well to describe their personality traits

Tubs obviously

MaryLouMacari

tobeme2020 wrote: »

What's the real reason

I would've thought it's because cancer kills?

theballz

MaryLouMacari wrote: »

I would've thought it's because cancer kills?

Because he’s an overweight disease and horrible weasel

stingrayed

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Tubs obviously

Tubs of onions would be more adequate.

Stingrayed aka waffler

Stingrayed aka waffler wrote: »

If a so called small fry decided to do this himself to get kudos, it would be the other way around, he would get shot for bringing even more heat, but let us go back in time and we can see DK is used to making very silly decisions just for his own personal ego, he is far from his dad, DK has an ego because the media play him up, and he thrives on it, but then so did many others, and they are all either dong life in a supermax or talking with the ants.

Melvin Wagstaff wrote:

How many sugars does Dan take in his tea? Does he keep the tea bag in? Would he be a fan o Tubs on the late late or would he prefer Pat Kenny? Forgive me for being intrusive I'm just curious and I feel you are the right person to ask considering you know Dan and his dad so well to describe their personality traits.

That hasnt been reported in the s*n yet but he'll report back when it has

Titzon Toast

Noseygit wrote: »

Gardai have sent a file to the dpp asking for the monk to be charged for the regency attack

Where did you read that?

stingrayed

sucioguapo wrote: »

That hasnt been reported in the s*n yet but he'll report back when it has

29 posts from Bill, Ben the will be along soon surely, feeling humbled at the moment, the truth is certainly hurting, a lot more to come soon, in many news outlets.

stingrayed

stingrayed wrote: »

29 posts from Bill, Ben the will be along soon surely, feeling humbled at the moment, the truth is certainly hurting, a lot more to come soon, in many news outlets.

thats hilarious ye, whatever it is youre talking about. Im absolutely anti dk but youre a voyeur, banging on with fantasies about stuff that u know nothing about.. the standout waffler on this website. I grew up in finglas west with people that u have waffled about before and the stuff that u have said about them makes it crystal clear tht ye dont have a scoobies mate, weirdo

stingrayed

thats hilarious ye, whatever it is youre talking about. Im absolutely anti dk but youre a voyeur, banging on with fantasies about stuff that u know nothing about.. the standout waffler on this website. I grew up in finglas west with people that u have waffled about before and the stuff that u have said about them makes it crystal clear tht ye dont have a scoobies mate, weirdo

Anti Dk Ear Ear lol, 30 posts and everytime the Kocg pops up you are on the ball, but might agree you are from Finglas hey, you are all ears it seems, you might want to pay your bills soon.

Difficult to believe that u could be that simple.. proper clueless

The kocg u clown, i knew several hutches as well, i dont fantasise about seeing young men getting hurt like u

hatrickpatrick

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that applies to membership of proscribed illegal organisations. I dont think the KOCG have been proscribed.

I've never understood why it isn't, TBH. Ireland needs something akin to the US's RICO law in which simply being a "known associate" of a convicted organised gangster makes one a legitimate target for various law enforcement warrants and operations.

P.Walnuts

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I've never understood why it isn't, TBH. Ireland needs something akin to the US's RICO law in which simply being a "known associate" of a convicted organised gangster makes one a legitimate target for various law enforcement warrants and operations.

We did have a specific any gang law brought in several years ago but it was barely enforced, I cant remeber the exact name of it, i think its defunct now

Only prosecution of it was two lads (brothers?) from Galway

Edit : Link to article https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/first-men-to-be-jailed-under-anti-gang-legislation-have-sentences-reduced-1.2022830

hatrickpatrick

This won't be a popular view in this thread but I do actually think that Kinahan and his boxing associates have a point. Whatever we say colloquially or whatever is known by "the barking dogs on the street", the presumption of innocents until conviction is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of living in a free society, and I must admit it really doesn't sit well with me to have senior politicians and officials contacting foreign governments to pressure them into penalising an Irish citizen because the Gardaí say he or she has done something wrong.

Before anyone jumps in and suggests that this is unreasonable, consider Ian Bailey for one obvious example. The French regard him as a de facto convicted murderer, if the Irish government took that at face value because of diplomatic approaches his life would be even more f*cked up than it already is.

Point being, for politicians to state under Dáil privilege that citizens should not be free to engage in work or business deals in legitimate industries, despise those individuals having no convictions, is simply a precedent we don't want as a society. It's easy to say "everyone knows Kinahan is a scumbag" but the fact remains that we "know" this from media reports and Garda comments, not rulings by a court of law. That should not be enough to strip a person of their business, in my view.

Again, not defending him specifically or denying the allegations against him. Merely stating that as far as I'm concerned, if the man has no convictions, he should be free to conduct business with sporting organisations and boxers should be free to work with him without being "cancelled". Politicians should not be dictating the lives of people without criminal convictions and nor should the media. It was fundamentally wrong that he lost his sponsorship deals last year just because politicians said things about him - we can argue about a business having the right to decline service and etc etc etc, but at the end of the day, the spirit of the law is not being honoured if innocent until proven guilty is circumvented in this manner.

If they can do it to him, they can do it to anyone they don't like, for any reason. The next time it happens, it could be tomorrow's Maurice McCabe. It could be tomorrow's Ian Bailey.

Our government should not have stepped in in this manner and leaned on a foreign government to disrupt an innocent man's business dealings, and unless he is found guilty in court, in the eyes of the law he is exactly that - an innocent man.

gangstergossip

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This won't be a popular view in this thread but I do actually think that Kinahan and his boxing associates have a point. Whatever we say colloquially or whatever is known by "the barking dogs on the street", the presumption of innocents until conviction is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of living in a free society, and I must admit it really doesn't sit well with me to have senior politicians and officials contacting foreign governments to pressure them into penalising an Irish citizen because the Gardaí say he or she has done something wrong.

Before anyone jumps in and suggests that this is unreasonable, consider Ian Bailey for one obvious example. The French regard him as a de facto convicted murderer, if the Irish government took that at face value because of diplomatic approaches his life would be even more f*cked up than it already is.

Point being, for politicians to state under Dáil privilege that citizens should not be free to engage in work or business deals in legitimate industries, despise those individuals having no convictions, is simply a precedent we don't want as a society. It's easy to say "everyone knows Kinahan is a scumbag" but the fact remains that we "know" this from media reports and Garda comments, not rulings by a court of law. That should not be enough to strip a person of their business, in my view.

Again, not defending him specifically or denying the allegations against him. Merely stating that as far as I'm concerned, if the man has no convictions, he should be free to conduct business with sporting organisations and boxers should be free to work with him without being "cancelled". Politicians should not be dictating the lives of people without criminal convictions and nor should the media. It was fundamentally wrong that he lost his sponsorship deals last year just because politicians said things about him - we can argue about a business having the right to decline service and etc etc etc, but at the end of the day, the spirit of the law is not being honoured if innocent until proven guilty is circumvented in this manner.

If they can do it to him, they can do it to anyone they don't like, for any reason. The next time it happens, it could be tomorrow's Maurice McCabe. It could be tomorrow's Ian Bailey.

Our government should not have stepped in in this manner and leaned on a foreign government to disrupt an innocent man's business dealings, and unless he is found guilty in court, in the eyes of the law he is exactly that - an innocent man.

What are the politicians meant to do he's been named in the high court as the leader of an international crime group involved in drug and gun trafficking and murder in Ireland and other countries. The Spanish Court named him as the person who ordered Gary's murder and the Americans put him and his mates on a list of narco terrorists so it's not just the gárda and the dogs on the street. He's wanted here for questioning in 3 murder plots against patsy Gary Hanley and mago what else can the state do but put pressure on dubai he won't come back to Europe because he knows he will be lifted so by getting dubai to deport him he can be arrested. He used bogey papers to get residency in dubai as well ye need a letter from a country ye lived for 5 years before of good character and he wasnt getting that in Ireland and Spain couldn't give it to him because he was on bail ye want the politicians to do nothing and hope he comes back to be arrested while he's ordering murders and importing drugs from his base in the desert

fantaiscool

gangstergossip wrote: »

What are the politicians meant to do he's been named in the high court as the leader of an international crime group involved in drug and gun trafficking and murder in Ireland and other countries. The Spanish Court named him as the person who ordered Gary's murder and the Americans put him and his mates on a list of narco terrorists so it's not just the gárda and the dogs on the street. He's wanted here for questioning in 3 murder plots against patsy Gary Hanley and mago what else can the state do but put pressure on dubai he won't come back to Europe because he knows he will be lifted so by getting dubai to deport him he can be arrested. He used bogey papers to get residency in dubai as well ye need a letter from a country ye lived for 5 years before of good character and he wasnt getting that in Ireland and Spain couldn't give it to him because he was on bail ye want the politicians to do nothing and hope he comes back to be arrested while he's ordering murders and importing drugs from his base in the desert

Did Gary try to have Kinahan killed at his house? Thats what is said in reports. We never really hear much about Gary. Was there any justification for trying to have Kinahan killed at his house? Both sides underestimated the other side. It's sheer luck that Kinahan didn't get shot then or in the regency and a few others from that side.

Real Donald Trump

For anyone who didn't see it

Kaisersosay

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This won't be a popular view in this thread but I do actually think that Kinahan and his boxing associates have a point. Whatever we say colloquially or whatever is known by "the barking dogs on the street", the presumption of innocents until conviction is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of living in a free society, and I must admit it really doesn't sit well with me to have senior politicians and officials contacting foreign governments to pressure them into penalising an Irish citizen because the Gardaí say he or she has done something wrong.

Before anyone jumps in and suggests that this is unreasonable, consider Ian Bailey for one obvious example. The French regard him as a de facto convicted murderer, if the Irish government took that at face value because of diplomatic approaches his life would be even more f*cked up than it already is.

Point being, for politicians to state under Dáil privilege that citizens should not be free to engage in work or business deals in legitimate industries, despise those individuals having no convictions, is simply a precedent we don't want as a society. It's easy to say "everyone knows Kinahan is a scumbag" but the fact remains that we "know" this from media reports and Garda comments, not rulings by a court of law. That should not be enough to strip a person of their business, in my view.

Again, not defending him specifically or denying the allegations against him. Merely stating that as far as I'm concerned, if the man has no convictions, he should be free to conduct business with sporting organisations and boxers should be free to work with him without being "cancelled". Politicians should not be dictating the lives of people without criminal convictions and nor should the media. It was fundamentally wrong that he lost his sponsorship deals last year just because politicians said things about him - we can argue about a business having the right to decline service and etc etc etc, but at the end of the day, the spirit of the law is not being honoured if innocent until proven guilty is circumvented in this manner.

If they can do it to him, they can do it to anyone they don't like, for any reason. The next time it happens, it could be tomorrow's Maurice McCabe. It could be tomorrow's Ian Bailey.

Our government should not have stepped in in this manner and leaned on a foreign government to disrupt an innocent man's business dealings, and unless he is found guilty in court, in the eyes of the law he is exactly that - an innocent man.

The presumption of innocence until proven guilty is a bedrock..I agree.
CAB submitted a "sworn on" affitdavit to the High Court in which Gardai named DK as the leader of the KOCG. The High Court accepted this affitdavit and he was named. That is all allowed under the 1996 Proceeds of Crime Act.
If DK, or anyone for that matter, wanted to challenge that finding he was perfectly entitled to do so under our legal system.( and many have appealed against CAB). I'd imagine he still could.
So as far as I am concerned his right to innocence hasn't been violated. Its been stated that he is the leader of the group... based on evidence submitted by the Gardai...which is legal under the act.... and Sin e.

Irishphotodesk

@hattrickpatrick .... if Daniel believes the “lies” about him are untrue, would he not have initiated a legal action against the gardai for defamation ?

If anyone called me out publicly and I was a legit international businessman, I would be doing everything imaginable to ensure my name was good, if my name is sullied internationally that is a massive claim and could be worth millions if he sued, at worst he donates the court award to charity and clears his name ...at best he would be able to join multiple publications and even BBC/panorama in the suit, that would surely be worth taking a legal action and ensuring his name is clean.

Maybe ask yourself, why this has not been done ?

Businessmen such as denis o brien have been in the courts to ensure their reputation is good internationally, they have sued when they believed their character was damaged.,.... if denis o brien is willing to do it, why can’t daniel ?

Mr.burgess

fantaiscool wrote: »

Did Gary try to have Kinahan killed at his house? Thats what is said in reports. We never really hear much about Gary. Was there any justification for trying to have Kinahan killed at his house? Both sides underestimated the other side. It's sheer luck that Kinahan didn't get shot then or in the regency and a few others from that side.

His brother done that on his own accord because he thought he was making a fool of gary and the money he investment in a shipment that went wrong gary didnt want to do anything so his brother did

Rows Grower

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This won't be a popular view in this thread but I do actually think that Kinahan and his boxing associates have a point. Whatever we say colloquially or whatever is known by "the barking dogs on the street", the presumption of innocents until conviction is one of the most fundamental cornerstones of living in a free society, and I must admit it really doesn't sit well with me to have senior politicians and officials contacting foreign governments to pressure them into penalising an Irish citizen because the Gardaí say he or she has done something wrong.

Before anyone jumps in and suggests that this is unreasonable, consider Ian Bailey for one obvious example. The French regard him as a de facto convicted murderer, if the Irish government took that at face value because of diplomatic approaches his life would be even more f*cked up than it already is.

Point being, for politicians to state under Dáil privilege that citizens should not be free to engage in work or business deals in legitimate industries, despise those individuals having no convictions, is simply a precedent we don't want as a society. It's easy to say "everyone knows Kinahan is a scumbag" but the fact remains that we "know" this from media reports and Garda comments, not rulings by a court of law. That should not be enough to strip a person of their business, in my view.

Again, not defending him specifically or denying the allegations against him. Merely stating that as far as I'm concerned, if the man has no convictions, he should be free to conduct business with sporting organisations and boxers should be free to work with him without being "cancelled". Politicians should not be dictating the lives of people without criminal convictions and nor should the media. It was fundamentally wrong that he lost his sponsorship deals last year just because politicians said things about him - we can argue about a business having the right to decline service and etc etc etc, but at the end of the day, the spirit of the law is not being honoured if innocent until proven guilty is circumvented in this manner.

If they can do it to him, they can do it to anyone they don't like, for any reason. The next time it happens, it could be tomorrow's Maurice McCabe. It could be tomorrow's Ian Bailey.

Our government should not have stepped in in this manner and leaned on a foreign government to disrupt an innocent man's business dealings, and unless he is found guilty in court, in the eyes of the law he is exactly that - an innocent man.

What's your opinion on the CAB and their powers to place the onus on the person charged by them to prove their money/assets were legally earned?

What about citizens who have been convicted in court and jailed on the word of a senior Garda which is deemed enough evidence under Irish law?

Do you really think unless someone has a previous conviction for a criminal offence they should be untouchable until they are convicted?

Do you really think the Gardai would confide in senior politicians if they didn't have enough evidence to pursue charges and gain a conviction but cannot because he is outside the juristiction at the moment?

I'm not try to pretend I know more than you or anyone else because I don't, but I am genuinely interested in your opinion.