IT only takes 8 years to say sorry...

Villain

I'm no legal expert but I think you'll find they are entitled to early release, and I believe they are going to go to the european courts.

The Government may have said they were excluded but it was not stated in the GFA, the supreme court used the basis I quoted earlier as their reason to refuse their release but as I have pointed out that ruling was incorrect.

Mighty_Mouse

I don't think any of them deserve brownie points for being brave little kiddies and admitting that they might be a little bit sorry though. Not that most of them have.

Would you prefer if no apology was offered so? Fair enough!

Would it of been better if:
a) they hadn't apologised
b) removed the issue of their release from future negotiations


p.s
it's petty to say it would of been better if McCabe had not been killed.

Again for the anti-republicans in here can we deal with reality and what helps establish in the north.

Personally I believe the statement by the Castlerea prisoners is a good thing as it removes yet another stumbling block.

sceptre

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

So the argument is that it would of been better if:
a) they hadn't apologised
b) removed the issue of their release from future negotiations

No, that's not what was said at all. Whoever posted the comment you posted said that they didn't deserve anything for apologising. The argument you're constructing as a straw-man is entirely new.

Mighty_Mouse

Ok; so "The Castlerea prisoners don't deserve gratitude but it is a good thing for the north"

Personally, I think to remove it as a stumbling block to the northern negotiations was a brave decision because it was there best chance for release.

The apology. Is it not better to express regret that not to? There's many Irish people waiting more than 8 years for similar apologies from the killers of their own family members by the british.

sceptre

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Ok; so "The Castlerea prisoners don't deserve gratitude but it is a good thing for the north"

Very good. I believe that's infinitely closer to what was posted.

Personally, I think to remove it as a stumbling block to the northern negotiations was a brave decision because it was there best chance for release.

That's their own business. I'd rather they served their full sentences.

The apology. Is it not better to express regret that not to?

Yup. Doesn't get you any extra cheese though. And it shouldn't. Which is what was posted above. So what's your actual point?

There's many Irish people waiting more than 8 years for similar apologies from the killers of their own family members by the british.

Ah, the point - the diversion. There's a thread on British army accountability started somewhere. Might be better off putting the diversion in there where it's not a diversionary tactic.

A Dub in Glasgo

sceptre wrote:

Yup. Doesn't get you any extra cheese though. And it shouldn't.

Speaking in a general sense then, why is the expression of regret enshrined in the legal system as a means to a lesser sentence? Also for parole purposes?

sceptre

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Speaking in a general sense then, why is the expression of regret enshrined in the legal system as a means to a lesser sentence? Also for parole purposes?

Because the view of some is that it should get you extra cheese if the relevant authorities feel like giving it to you. As you may notice, the original poster's opinion is that it shouldn't (or at least not in this case) and I have the same view. It might get them extra cheese some day but not today.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

I'm no legal expert but I think you'll find they are entitled to early release, and I believe they are going to go to the european courts.

Your statement seems to imply that you are given that you are second guessing what the European Court might say.

The Government may have said they were excluded

Theres no "may" about it, they definitely said it and clarified it on several occasions.
Have you any cognizance at all to the fact that it was made clear to the voters in the 26 counties at the time that they were not to be included?
And that the tool to impliment that fact is in the legislation, ie the ministers discretion.
I notice you have ignored alltogether my point regarding yours on the release of prisoners in the North who committed their crime post GFA. I outlined for you in dealing with your example the relevance of the difference between what we voted on in the 26 counties and what people voted on in the north.

Villain

Earthman wrote:

Your statement seems to imply that you are given that you are second guessing what the European Court might say.

Nope I never said anything about what the European court would decide.

Earthman wrote:

Theres no "may" about it, they definitely said it and clarified it on several occasions.
Have you any cognizance at all to the fact that it was made clear to the voters in the 26 counties at the time that they were not to be included?
And that the tool to impliment that fact is in the legislation, ie the ministers discretion.
I notice you have ignored alltogether my point regarding yours on the release of prisoners in the North who committed their crime post GFA. I outlined for you in dealing with your example the relevance of the difference between what we voted on in the 26 counties and what people voted on in the north.

Earthman, it did not say anywhere in the GFA that these men were excluded, what the government said doesn't really make much of a difference in my mind.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Earthman, it did not say anywhere in the GFA that these men were excluded, what the government said doesn't really make much of a difference in my mind.

I know we have a difference of opinion between me and you on this, that much we can agree on.
You think they should be released under the GFA and I know when I voted for it, I was told that the goverment told us, the voters that the McCabe killers were excluded.
I'm given to understand that this is because of the IRA's denial and then reclaim of them and the fishyness of same.

Nope I never said anything about what the European court would decide.

Could I have taken any other meaning out of you saying and I quote

I'm no legal expert but I think you'll find they are entitled to early release, and I believe they are going to go to the european courts.

They are not entitled to early release unless the minister deems it so under his discretion.
Thats what the law says and I've said what the government told us what we were voting for.
The governments yes campaign in the North didnt specify any one in particular but in the south they did.
It's the governments decision and they made their mark-end of story.
Of course the lawyers will get paid anyway

Villain

Earthman wrote:

I know we have a difference of opinion between me and you on this, that much we can agree on.
You think they should be released under the GFA and I know when I voted for it, I was told that the goverment told us, the voters that the McCabe killers were excluded.
I'm given to understand that this is because of the IRA's denial and then reclaim of them and the fishyness of same.

Could I have taken any other meaning out of you saying and I quote

They are not entitled to early release unless the minister deems it so under his discretion.
Thats what the law says and I've said what the government told us what we were voting for.
The governments yes campaign in the North didnt specify any one in particular but in the south they did.
It's the governments decision and they made their mark-end of story.
Of course the lawyers will get paid anyway

The Liars will certainly get paid, it will be interesting to see what does happen.

We'l just agree to disagree on this one

BuffyBot

Does that mean anything to people?

Not when you consider the extremely convenient timing...

Slutmonkey57b

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

p.s
it's petty to say it would of been better if McCabe had not been killed.

I'm sure his family will send you an apology for their "pettiness" in thinking it would have been better had he not been killed. And in any case, I didn't say that so I really have no idea what you mean by that. In fact it's one of the most strange comments on the thread.

Personally I believe the statement by the Castlerea prisoners is a good thing as it removes yet another stumbling block.

A stumbling block that they put there in the first place! They demanded that they should be included, caused the stumbling block, and now you want us to give them credit for dropping their claim? Give me a break.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Speaking in a general sense then, why is the expression of regret enshrined in the legal system as a means to a lesser sentence? Also for parole purposes?

In order to get the cheese in that case, you have to plead guilty AND express regret at the time of the trial. Not 8 years later when you're getting bored of free range chicken. They didn't do that, so no cheese for them.

irish1 wrote:

I'm no legal expert but I think you'll find they are entitled to early release, and I believe they are going to go to the european courts.

The Government may have said they were excluded but it was not stated in the GFA, the supreme court used the basis I quoted earlier as their reason to refuse their release but as I have pointed out that ruling was incorrect.

Classic. So you're "no legal expert", but you know that the supreme court was incorrect. Well, I suppose it's not like the Supreme Court are legal experts so you're probably right! :rolleyes:

Cork

These people have no entitlement to early release.

If they have - Why are they still in prison??

Their apology was hollow.

Villain

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

Classic. So you're "no legal expert", but you know that the supreme court was incorrect. Well, I suppose it's not like the Supreme Court are legal experts so you're probably right! :rolleyes:

That quote I posted was taken from the original thread I provided a link to, that quote was not mine it was Vincent Browne's. Read the thread this was discussed in great great detail.

Slutmonkey57b

Aaahh so it was Vincent Browne.

And we all know that Vinnie's never lost a court case with his great legal expertise.

I suggest that the Supreme Court, by its very nature, is probably the highest legal body of expertise in the land. I would veer (controvertially!) towards the view that they know more about it than anybody else.

on the other hand,

Vincent Browne is an editor of failed magazines.
Both you and I are sad b@stards posting rubbish on an internet site at weird hours.
So maybe we know better than them. Or not.

Mighty_Mouse

Very good. I believe that's infinitely closer to what was posted.

So their decision is of benefit to the north. my point.

A stumbling block that they put there in the first place!

Depends how you view it really. I would argue that if the government thought the release of prisoners would be a stumbling block, why did they sign the agreement?

Or why didn't they include a clause excluding the Castlerea prisoners? Again it doesn't really matter now as it's not an obstacle to peace negotiations. Looks like the Irish government may actually have to start supporting nationalists/republicans in the north.

These people have no entitlement to early release. If they have - Why are they still in prison??

Read up on Guilford 4, Birmingham 6, Nelsom Mandela, Martin Luther King, Muhammad Ali......... feckin Rapunzel if you like!

I'm sure his family will send you an apology for their "pettiness" in thinking it would have been better had he not been killed

I took away the easy answer, did I?

Seth Brundle

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Read up on Guilford 4, Birmingham 6, Nelsom Mandela, Martin Luther King, Muhammad Ali......... feckin Rapunzel if you like!

There is a big difference there. The ones listed above were innocent and had not committed viscous crimes!

Slutmonkey57b

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Depends how you view it really. I would argue that if the government thought the release of prisoners would be a stumbling block, why did they sign the agreement?

Or why didn't they include a clause excluding the Castlerea prisoners? Again it doesn't really matter now as it's not an obstacle to peace negotiations.

They signed the agreement knowing that the McCabe case would not be covered by the GFA release. Therefore they knew that the only reason it would become a problem is if SF decided to campaign for their release. As posted above, the GFA does not require a clause exempting them as their release is up to the minister for justice - it would require a clause including them.

And again, I (and I think most others) are not going to give these people credit for creating a problem, then removing it. We'd prefer they didn't create problems in the first place.

it's petty to say it would of been better if McCabe had not been killed.

I took away the easy answer, did I?

What you posted was not a question, so there was no need for anybody to answer it. It was a completely inexplicable comment. You seem to imply by your comment that there was some positive benefit from the killing of Gda McCabe - if there was no positive benefit, then naturally it would have been better for a man not to have been killed. Perhaps you could furnish us with an analysis of the fallout from Gda McCabe's murder and a summary of how the situation has any positive bearing on anything.

You also state that it is "petty" to suggest that it is not "better" for an innocent man to be killed by bank robbers. Since I still don't understand this comment, I require an explaination of how a desire not to see policemen killed by bankrobbers is "petty", please.

Mighty_Mouse

You seem to imply by your comment that there was some positive benefit from the killing of Gda McCabe

I dont. But run that theory by me again!

Let me explain - I made the point that the apology etc was a brave decision and "was better" for the north IMO. My experience of boards saw the typical reply of "it would of been better had the garda not been killed". I basically didn't see the point in the discussion going down this route. I wont pre-empt you again and we can take this baby steps from now on, if you like

There is a big difference there. The ones listed above were innocent and had not committed viscous crimes!

"Cork stated: if there entitled to be released, why are they in prison" I stated with examples of a number of people who shouldn't of been in prison or entitled to release for many years.

Cork

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Read up on Guilford 4, Birmingham 6, Nelsom Mandela, Martin Luther King, Muhammad Ali......... feckin Rapunzel if you like! I took away the easy answer, did I?

The Guilford 4 & Birmingham 6 were a mis carriage of justice. They were wrongly jailed for IRA bombings.

But those who killed Gerry McCabe are no victims of any mis-carriage of justice.

I certainly would not compare them to either Nelsom Mandela, Martin Luther King.

These people killed a member of the Gardai whilst trying to committ armed robbery.

Was there another person involved who fled?

cdebru

Cork wrote:

These people have no entitlement to early release.

If they have - Why are they still in prison??

Their apology was hollow.

they fulfill all the qualifications for early release under the GFA

the legislation enacted by leinster house to give effect to the early release program gave discretion to the minister for justice in the final say on who should be released

they have used this discretion to prevent their release

chances are that they will have been released or close to it before a final settlement has been agreed the way things are going

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

they fulfill all the qualifications for early release under the GFA

Fulfilling the qualifications and being entitled to something though are two different things.
I might be qualified for a train driving job, but out of say ten applicants who are equally qualified,I'm not entitled, thats up to the discretion of the interviewers.

The referendum put to the people left it up to the oireachtas to draft the legislation for to impliment the GFA, it did not put any condition on the oireachtas as to what the legislation was to be.

One thing is certain though,the very vast majority of parties that have been elected to the Dáil dont disagree with that legislation and our democracy have elected representatives from those parties(more than 90% of the Dáil) several times over since that referendum-ergo theres grounds to say theres general agreement that both the discretion given in the legislation and the way the discretion has been used vis á vis the McCabe killers has been right.

The decision of course to use that discretion to keep them behind bars probably arises out of a deep suspicion that the IRA only claimed them(after initially denying them) because if they didnt, then they wouldnt have qualified at all-in other words if you're not in you can't win.

So basically, it's tough titty for the McCabe killers as they haven't ever had a leg to stand on really.

Cork

cdebru wrote:

the legislation enacted by leinster house to give effect to the early release program gave discretion to the minister for justice in the final say on who should be released

So - they have a problem with legalislation passed by our parliament.

Hopefully they'll get to grips with this democracy thing.

Its taken them 8 years to come up with an apology.

Seth Brundle

Cork wrote:

So - they have a problem with legalislation passed by our parliament.

Hopefully they'll get to grips with this democracy thing.

Its taken them 8 years to come up with an apology.

The problem with our legislation was there long before they murdered Det. McCabe. As members of the IRA, they ignored our legislation about robbery, murder, extortion, etc..
Oh wait, what am I saying, sure our Govt. isn't entitled to pass legislation as they are not the true Govt of Ireland - the IRA Army Council is!!!

Slutmonkey57b

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

My experience of boards saw the typical reply of "it would of been better had the garda not been killed". I basically didn't see the point in the discussion going down this route. I wont pre-empt you again and we can take this baby steps from now on, if you like

No, but thatk you for the explaination - I'm finding it more and more a rule here to come straight out and ask for the "first principles" version to some of the stranger posts.


On a similar note, I see jman0 hasn't been back to explain why he thinks Gda McCabe was "an idiot", although I took the time to explain at length why I wasn't attacking his character earlier.

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

Fulfilling the qualifications and being entitled to something though are two different things.
I might be qualified for a train driving job, but out of say ten applicants who are equally qualified,I'm not entitled, thats up to the discretion of the interviewers.

The referendum put to the people left it up to the oireachtas to draft the legislation for to impliment the GFA, it did not put any condition on the oireachtas as to what the legislation was to be.

One thing is certain though,the very vast majority of parties that have been elected to the Dáil dont disagree with that legislation and our democracy have elected representatives from those parties(more than 90% of the Dáil) several times over since that referendum-ergo theres grounds to say theres general agreement that both the discretion given in the legislation and the way the discretion has been used vis á vis the McCabe killers has been right.

The decision of course to use that discretion to keep them behind bars probably arises out of a deep suspicion that the IRA only claimed them(after initially denying them) because if they didnt, then they wouldnt have qualified at all-in other words if you're not in you can't win.

So basically, it's tough titty for the McCabe killers as they haven't ever had a leg to stand on really.

under current legislation no one was entitled to early release in the 26 counties they qualified and the minister could release them or not

under the terms of the GFA they were entitled to it as qualifying prisioners
the GFA is an international agreement so it can not be unilaterally changed

if you look back you will see the IRA admitted to carrying out the adare robbery and killing of garda mccabe before the GFA and the prisioner release was negotiated

cdebru

Cork wrote:

So - they have a problem with legalislation passed by our parliament.

Hopefully they'll get to grips with this democracy thing.

Its taken them 8 years to come up with an apology.

there is nothing wrong with anyone having a problem with legislation passed by leinster house or any other parliament

people have problems with all kinds of laws passed by parliament infact our constitution requires that the president refer legislation to the supreme court if there is a doubt on its constitutionality
eg the charging of pensioners for long term care

every citizen has the right to challenge legislation in the courts there is absolutely nothing undemocratic in that

hopefully you will get to grips with the old democracy thing yourself soon

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

there is nothing wrong with anyone having a problem with legislation passed by leinster house or any other parliament

people have problems with all kinds of laws passed by parliament infact our constitution requires that the president refer legislation to the supreme court if there is a doubt on its constitutionality
eg the charging of pensioners for long term care

every citizen has the right to challenge legislation in the courts there is absolutely nothing undemocratic in that

hopefully you will get to grips with the old democracy thing yourself soon

I'm getting fed up with people announcing "I'm not a supporter of terrorists" and then demanding the Mc Cabe release.

Either you were having a fag behind the bike sheds while they were handing out the irony, or you're a hyprocrite

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

I'm getting fed up with people announcing "I'm not a supporter of terrorists" and then demanding the Mc Cabe release.

Either you were having a fag behind the bike sheds while they were handing out the irony, or you're a hyprocrite

get fed up as much as you like

if you can find anywhere in my post that i support terrorists i would love to see it

if you can also find anywhere in that post where i have demanded they be released i would love to see it

but i will give it to you in this post I think they should be released as part of the GFA and that they are qualifying prisioners
that does not mean that I think the killing of garda mccabe was acceptable or justified surely you can comprehend the difference

and just to head you of at the pass i think it was a crime