Cork Solicitors Jailed

Widdensushi

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

That flies in the face of justice though.

A pregnant woman (or even a woman who may become pregnant) can do what they like as long as its not serious?

Naaa, not buying it.

Most people aren't going on crime sprees, whether pregnant or not, male or female.

How old is the child? Was it conceived before or after they were caught? The court system is so slow that it is possible it was after and its existence is a tactic to get a shorter sentence.

fryup

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40233722.html

some stand out quotes from the above ...

He also revealed that when he visited some of the credit unions from which the couple had fraudulently secured loans, they at first refused to believe they had been duped.

:eek:

Det Garda McCarthy said he felt Clarke and Flynn would have found him fair to deal with and added: "They never showed any remorse to me."

:eek: :eek:

wrmwit

Joe Duffy is raging that your man is the chef to the prison staff. Said your man did a course in Ballymaloe and it must have cost him 12K. Was it money he stole to pay for it!

I like raging Joe Duffy!

twowheelsonly

wrmwit wrote: »

Joe Duffy is raging that your man is the chef to the prison staff. Said your man did a course in Ballymaloe and it must have cost him 12K. Was it money he stole to pay for it!

I like raging Joe Duffy!

"Chef to the Prison Staff " would be a little exaggeration. Washing pots, chopping a few spuds and throwing some rashers under the grill certainly doesn't make him the Jail Chef.

Caquas

Lots of commentary on this case, mainly outrage at their use of homeless people, but no discussion of the root problem here. Our banks and credit unions have given up on bad debts for smaller loans I.e. around 10K.

The banks and credit unions realise our court procedures are too cumbersome and not worth pursuing for smaller loans so they treat these bad debts as a cost of business I.e. they pass the cost to the rest of us.

This case emerged because of a spelling error in a pre-printed form which was spotted by an investigator. I assume there are many more fraudsters out there who are getting away with this scam.

corks finest

Caquas wrote: »

Lots of commentary on this case, mainly outrage at their use of homeless people, but no discussion of the root problem here. Our banks and credit unions have given up on bad debts for smaller loans I.e. around 10K.

The banks and credit unions realise our court procedures are too cumbersome and not worth pursuing for smaller loans so they treat these bad debts as a cost of business I.e. they pass the cost to the rest of us.

This case emerged because of a spelling error in a pre-printed form which was spotted by an investigator. I assume there are many more fraudsters out there who are getting away with this scam.

Good point

fryup

Caquas wrote: »

The banks and credit unions realise our court procedures are too cumbersome and not worth pursuing for smaller loans so they treat these bad debts as a cost of business I.e. they pass the cost to the rest of us.

This case emerged because of a spelling error in a pre-printed form which was spotted by an investigator. I assume there are many more fraudsters out there who are getting away with this scam.

spot on post, and remember what the investigating garda said...

He also revealed that when he visited some of the credit unions from which the couple had fraudulently secured loans, they at first refused to believe they had been duped.

i mean if they take these matters at face value, the question is..how many more fraudulent accounts are out there?? and for how long?

*others might chance their arm after reading up on this case

Caquas

fryup wrote: »

spot on post, and remember what the investigating garda said...

He also revealed that when he visited some of the credit unions from which the couple had fraudulently secured loans, they at first refused to believe they had been duped.


i mean if they take these matters at face value, the question is..how many more fraudulent accounts are out there?? and for how long?

*others might chance their arm after reading up on this case

The Examiner today is asking similar questions

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/ourview/arid-40234019.html

My guess is that the other banks/credit unions were none to pleased to have the Gardai bringing this case to them. They probably preferred to maintain their policy of writing off bad loans. When you can pass on your losses to your customers, why bother chasing bad debts? Especially when anything you recover will be spent on legal fees. Come to think of it, isn't that the entire business model of our insurance industry?

The judge in this case, one of the most clued-in members of the judiciary, made a similar point in his judgement:

Judge Seán Ó Donnabháin said the €100,000 cash which was recovered in the garda investigation should be dispersed on a pro-rata basis between Bank of Ireland, AIB, Ulster Bank and 12 credit unions.

However, he said that should only be done only after a separate €10,000 was first given from the recovered funds to Bank of Ireland whose crime unit uncovered the scam to begin with. The judge said they did this when the other financial institutions “were asleep at the wheel.”

€100,000 will hardly cover the legal costs of this case and certainly won't pay the banks for their time and effort. Deterrence is the factor which justifies the investigation but, again, most banks and credit unions don't really care.

Caquas

Caquas wrote: »

.......

The judge in this case, one of the most clued-in members of the judiciary, made a similar point in his judgement:

Root of most problems to do with crime in this country, look at the nutty sentences they throw around........ folk with 10s of previous convictions committing more crimes whilst on suspended sentences. Great pocket liner for the legal industry.

fryup

Caquas wrote: »

Deterrence is the factor which justifies the investigation but, again, most banks and credit unions don't really care.

its not that they don't care, it's just the fact as you alluded to yourself they just don't want the hassle of going down the legal rabbit hole...not only that they don't want the negative publicity either

Caquas

There's more to this story than has yet emerged.

The Examiner has done great work on the case and Noel Baker's account is well worth reading. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/spotlight/arid-40234424.html
Two new points jump out. Firstly, it has emerged that there was a strange breakdown within the Gardai when the Law Society altered them to this pair.

Det Garda McCarthy can now reveal the dates of when the first bogus bank account was opened by the couple. It coincided almost to the day with unrelated offences which later resulted in the Law Society striking them off the roll of solicitors.

However, as the Flynn and Clarke case was being discussed on last Tuesday's Liveline on RTÉ radio, the Law Society contacted the show to say that it had passed on concerns to gardaí in April 2018, and later confirmed the same information with this newspaper.

This week, the Garda Press Office offered some clarity: "An Garda Síochána attached to the Bridewell, Dublin, carried out an assessment on certain matters coming to their attention in 2018, as a result of that assessment no further action was taken."

Another aspect that has not been commented on is the difference in sentencing. The judge said the "headline" sentence of these crimes would be eight years (which sounds about right) but he reduced that to just four years for Flynn, based on mitigating circumstances, especially his early guilty plea and cooperation with the Gardai (although 300K. is still "missing). Then he gave Clarke just two years, a mere quarter of the headline sentence. I assumed this was because Flynn was the mastermind and driver of the whole enterprise but the lead Detective Garda has told the Examiner the pair were

Very much a couple, the crimes very much a joint endeavour, there was little to suggest that one had led and the other had followed.

Incidentally, the spelling error that betrayed this couple was a howler from a Virgin Media bill.

The Irish Examiner now understands that the VM bills had the line “MEET THE TEAM” on the very last line at the bottom of the page - but on the bills linked to the accounts, it read “MEET THE TEAK”.

corks finest

Caquas wrote: »

There's more to this story than has yet emerged.

The Examiner has done great work on the case and Noel Baker's account is well worth reading. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/spotlight/arid-40234424.html
Two new points jump out. Firstly, it has emerged that there was a strange breakdown within the Gardai when the Law Society altered them to this pair.




Another aspect that has not been commented on is the difference in sentencing. The judge said the "headline" sentence of these crimes would be eight years (which sounds about right) but he reduced that to just four years for Flynn, based on mitigating circumstances, especially his early guilty plea and cooperation with the Gardai (although 300K. is still "missing). Then he gave Clarke just two years, a mere quarter of the headline sentence. I assumed this was because Flynn was the mastermind and driver of the whole enterprise but the lead Detective Garda has told the Examiner the pair were



Incidentally, the spelling error that betrayed this couple was a howler from a Virgin Media bill.

although 300K. is still "missing

Hope to God that's well and truly found or accounted for st this stage, otherwise the ****ers should rot in jail

It'll be taxpayers paying for everything in the end

roundymac

corks finest wrote: »

although 300K. is still "missing

Hope to God that's well and truly found or accounted for st this stage, otherwise the ****ers should rot in jail

It'll be taxpayers paying for everything in the end

That should have been taken into consideration when sentence being passed, like, stay in jail until you tell us where it is.

mikeym

I thought they should have got a harsher sentance.