Leo Varadkar story in The Village??? - Mod Notes and banned Users in OP updated 16/05

seamus

"avoid a prison sentence". That's a fun use of words.

I avoided a prison sentence after burning the toast this morning. I know I didn't actually commit any crimes, but technically it is true that I avoided a prison sentence.

Jinglejangle69

And to think some people demanded his resignation.

Thank god the grown ups and level heads let justice take its course.

FrancieBrady

seamus wrote: »

"avoid a prison sentence". That's a fun use of words.

I avoided a prison sentence after burning the toast this morning. I know I didn't actually commit any crimes, but technically it is true that I avoided a prison sentence.

Was there a Garda criminal investigation into you burning the toast? Were multiple witnesses interviewed? Which pieces legislation is burning the toast covered under?

skimpydoo

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Nail on the head Dr. Phil. Couldn't have put it better myself.


There will be an awful lot of anger when this gets dropped!

And if it doesn't get dropped?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Was there a Garda criminal investigation into you burning the toast? Were multiple witnesses interviewed? Which pieces legislation is burning the toast covered under?

Weren't there four men who avoided a prison sentence for the alleged kangaroo court trial of a rape victim?

Wasn't there another man who avoided a perjury trial because the authorities couldn't figure out if he lied on TV or in court?

Are they other examples of the type of thing you condemn?

There was no crime in this case, Francie.

skimpydoo

Didn't certain people on here claim the journalist who authored yesterdays story was not to be trusted or words to that effect?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

There was no crime in this case, Francie.

We don't know that yet blanch. Currently the file is being assessed by the only person that matters - the DPP. If the DPP assesses there was no crime in the wrongdoing that Leo confessed to, Leo Varadkar will have avoided a court trial and a possible jail sentence.

Not a word I said was untrue.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Was there a Garda criminal investigation into you burning the toast? Were multiple witnesses interviewed? Which pieces legislation is burning the toast covered under?

I could report Seamus to the Gardaí as his next door neighbour saying that was my toaster,its been missing a while along with a lot of other things (I'm a bit forgetfull) and maybe that'll get an investigation going untill its all cleared up

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We don't know that yet blanch. Currently the file is being assessed by the only person that matters - the DPP. If the DPP assesses there was no crime in the wrongdoing that Leo confessed to, Leo Varadkar will have avoided a court trial and a possible jail sentence.

Not a word I said was untrue.

In laughing at your post, I also avoided a court trial and a possible jail sentence.

jimmycrackcorm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's one in a now long line of controversies this coalition has embroiled itself in.

If you got genuinely angry at them all you'd be in the padded cell.

Varadkar may very well avoid a prison sentence for what he confessed to, but he will never be able to wipe the slate clean, nor hide under it.

Meanwhile we await the DPP decision, and it hasn't gone away.

As they say, you can drag a dead horse to water, but you've absolutely no chance of getting it to drink.

Pintman Paddy Losty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We don't know that yet blanch. Currently the file is being assessed by the only person that matters - the DPP. If the DPP assesses there was no crime in the wrongdoing that Leo confessed to, Leo Varadkar will have avoided a court trial and a possible jail sentence.

Not a word I said was untrue.

Has a file been sent to the DPP, and is being assessed by them. News to me. Thought the gardaí were still investigating? No?

Pintman Paddy Losty

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

There'll be great mileage to be had from all the misplaced anger this will generate. The tinfoil hats will taken out and dusted off. Lots and lots of Tweets that go something along the lines of "This is indicative of the deep levels of corruption in FG. Let me briefly explain (1/72)"

Wonder how many weeks the loons will get out of it.

I posted this minutes after the story broke. I'm even surprised myself about the amount of mileage that people got out of it.



My prediction that it would go absolutely no where was spot on. Even the head honchos in Sinn Feinn have dropped it as they realise it's not really a "hit" with people, and only attracts the pirate flag variety on twitter.

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

I could report Seamus to the Gardaí as his next door neighbour saying that was my toaster,its been missing a while along with a lot of other things (I'm a bit forgetfull) and maybe that'll get an investigation going untill its all cleared up

You do that.

Of COURSE it would become a criminal investigation once you confessed to wrongdoing. What is the penalty for that under the legislation?

The penalty for breaking the OSA is up to 12 years in jail...hardly nicking a toaster levels of seriousness, in fairness.

Varadkar is still on the hook for that btw. Until the DPP sings, so to speak.

Pintman Paddy Losty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You do that.

Of COURSE it would become a criminal investigation once you confessed to wrongdoing. What is the penalty for that under the legislation?

The penalty for breaking the OSA is up to 12 years in jail...hardly nicking a toaster levels of seriousness, in fairness.

Varadkar is still on the hook for that btw. Until the DPP sings, so to speak.

What are you on about lad?


Varadkar gave a statement of the facts. It was only the online legal eagles from the Village and Paddy Cosgrave that were spouting on about breaches of the Officials Secrets Act.


Go back and read the first few pages of this thread and you'll see what I did from the start. Nothing illegal occurred. Varadkar apologised for the manner that he passed the doc. He didn't confess to a crime. That was all in the fantasy built up by the ones pumping this story.

FrancieBrady

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

What are you on about lad?


Varadkar gave a statement of the facts. It was only the online legal eagles from the Village and Paddy Cosgrave that were spouting on about breaches of the Officials Secrets Act.


Go back and read the first few pages of this thread and you'll see what I did from the start. Nothing illegal occurred. Varadkar apologised for the manner that he passed the doc. He didn't confess to a crime. That was all in the fantasy built up by the ones pumping this story.

The DPP is assessing if that 'passing of a document' was A) A breach of OSA legislation and if it was a breach of the Corruption legislation.

Facts Paddy. No amount of you speculating whether it was a crime or not, will take away those 'facts'.

Pintman Paddy Losty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The DPP is assessing if that 'passing of a document' was A) A breach of OSA legislation and if it was a breach of the Corruption legislation.

Facts Paddy. No amount of you speculating whether it was a crime or not, will take away those 'facts'.

I'll come back to this post after the DPP rules on it. If they decide that there was no evidence of a crime, you'll presumably be fully on board in agreement. Yes?

Shebean

Didn't he apologise for leaking a confidential document to his friend? I think that's bad on it's own. Unfortunate for him if it also turns out to be a crime.

FrancieBrady

Weepsie wrote: »

He can ask dessie Ellis for tips on that one

Have a look across these forums..Ellis has never been able to 'wipe the slate clean'.

Leo won't be able to either.

Pintman Paddy Losty

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

I'll come back to this post after the DPP rules on it. If they decide that there was no evidence of a crime, you'll presumably be fully on board in agreement. Yes?

We're withnessing Custers last Stand on this one
New meaning to the phrase ' to the bitter end'
Pointless really
Teesh Leo at the end of next year for another 2 years is coming

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

We're withnessing Custers last Stand on this one
New meaning to the phrase ' to the bitter end'
Pointless really
Teesh Leo at the end of next year for another 2 years is coming

Have to laugh.
There have been several poster handwaving this away through all the stages it has gone.

They're still here. While we are all waiting for where this was going from the day the thread opened - a decision from the DPP on whether he is answerable under two pieces of legislation.

blanch152

Shebean wrote: »

Didn't he apologise for leaking a confidential document to his friend? I think that's bad on it's own. Unfortunate for him if it also turns out to be a crime.

Eh, no he didn't. He apologised for the manner in which he shared an unclassified document with a legitimate interested party and said he should have done it more formally.

The spin on this has got to you.

skimpydoo

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

What are you on about lad?


Varadkar gave a statement of the facts. It was only the online legal eagles from the Village and Paddy Cosgrave that were spouting on about breaches of the Officials Secrets Act.

Online legal eagles? You do know that Michael Smith the owner of Village has a law degree and also qualified as a barrister. That qualifies him to make the legal arguments in Village magazine along with having various barristers comment on it too.

But hey I guess your non legal background/education knows better?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Eh, no he didn't. He apologised for the manner in which he shared an unclassified document with a legitimate interested party and said he should have done it more formally.

The spin on this has got to you.

Mr Martin told the Dáil he had asked his coalition partner on Saturday morning a question as to whether he had been involved with other leaks of sensitive State documents.

“The answer was ‘no,’” Mr Martin said. “He hasn’t done something like this before, and since.”

He leaked blanch, in the eyes of the Taoiseach, who rounded the wagons to protect him and to not sanction him.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Have to laugh.
There have been several poster handwaving this away through all the stages it has gone.

They're still here. While we are all waiting for where this was going from the day the thread opened - a decision from the DPP on whether he is answerable under two pieces of legislation.

And you have had your opinion from the start, despite your high moral ground stance elsewhere of innocent until proven guilty.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

In my opinion he broke the law.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He leaked blanch, in the eyes of the Taoiseach, who rounded the wagons to protect him and to not sanction him.

Straw-clutching Francie. Varadkar never said he leaked the document. You have inferred that he admitted to leaking it from responses to rhetorical questions. The whole thing is living in your head so much that you have lost sight of the reality.

blanch152

skimpydoo wrote: »

Online legal eagles? You do know that Michael Smith the owner of Village has a law degree and also qualified as a barrister. That qualifies him to make the legal arguments in Village magazine along with having various barristers comment on it too.

But hey I guess your non legal background/education knows better?

Being a barrister doesn't save you from being a fool.

If barristers were always right, why do cases go to court? Surely both sides have been advised by their barristers that they can win the case.

That means that an average barrister is right half the time. If you are a below average barrister that can only get a job as a low-paying journalist rather than a barrister, you must be right less than half of the time.

As a result, I wouldn't pay much attention to whatever Smith says.

skimpydoo

skimpydoo wrote: »

Online legal eagles? You do know that Michael Smith the owner of Village has a law degree and also qualified as a barrister. That qualifies him to make the legal arguments in Village magazine along with having various barristers comment on it too.

But hey I guess your non legal background/education knows better?

My late fater told me a story about how the neighbour got out of jury duty,it clashed with race day in Wexford
He got a taxi to bring him to the courthouse and told the driver to wait
He went in anyway..sat down for jury selection and kept shouting GUILTY YOUR HONOUR
Now..as the story goes the judge sent him out and home,so he got back into the taxi and instructed the driver to head for the races
Lot of parallels with the village there,except a longer process

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Straw-clutching Francie. Varadkar never said he leaked the document. You have inferred that he admitted to leaking it from responses to rhetorical questions. The whole thing is living in your head so much that you have lost sight of the reality.

Varafkar was asked in the Dàil if had ever leaked before. He said 'no, not a document like this'.

He tried to avoid the word, as you are on his behalf.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Varafkar was asked in the Dàil if had ever leaked before. He said 'no, not a document like this'.

He tried to avoid the word, as you are on his behalf.

He did avoid the word, that's the problem for you. He never said he leaked any document, he never said he leaked this document.

At best you can construe his answer to that question as being that he may have leaked documents before, but they were not in anyway confidential or classified. It certainly does not have the meaning you ascribe to it as an admittance of leaking.

It is quite preposterous the way you are trying to spin this into meaning something other than it is.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Have a look across these forums..Ellis has never been able to 'wipe the slate clean'.

Leo won't be able to either.

Ellis is linked with at least 50 murders. Not exactly a like-for-like comparison, Francie.