• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Latest lunacy from our learned friends. Do we need new constitution and new judges?


leftsoc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
2,848
Supreme Court: Correct to acquit woman who had cough and chest infection - Independent.ie

This verdict is so daft it needs no analysis from me. It is just the latest in a long line of mad judgements.

This woman (and thousands more are free to give the same explanation in the future) may have got off with driving while plastered because the judges accepted the view of a doctor that she had a chest infection on the day previous to his examination (for which he seems to have no first hand evidence) . No expalanation seems to have been adduced that any chest infection could prevent one from giving a breath test in any case.


Only in Ireland.
 
Last edited:

emulator

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
10,262
Supreme Court: Correct to acquit woman who had cough and chest infection - Independent.ie

This verdict is so daft it needs no analysis from me. It is just the latest in a long line of mad judgements.

This woman (and thousands more in the future) will get off with driving while plastered because the judges accepted that a doctor asserted she had a chest infection on the previous day (for which he seems to have no first hand evidence) . No evidence seems to have been adduced that any chest infection could prevent one from giving a breath test.

Instead our learned friends put all faith in the evidence of their learned medical friend.

Only in Ireland.
Maybe they should've slammed her into a radiator ?

Seriously though this is an unbelievable judgement. As you pointed out there will be people with permanent chest infections driving around our Country. Although, I'd like to see the outcome of someone from Drimnagh trying this.... :shock: (No offence Drimnagh)
 

Con Gallagher

Well-known member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
2,413
A story from the indo
This verdict is so daft it needs no analysis from me.
Code: I didn't read the judgment, I don't understand the law and I'm not bothered finding out.

It is just the latest in a long line of mad judgements.
Daily Mail type cliche. Please provide links to the ten maddest judgments (not the press report, the judgment find them here Courts Service of Ireland)


Instead our learned friends put all faith in the evidence of their learned medical friend.
You appear to think that being "learned" is a put down.

Only in Ireland.
And every other country which applies the rule of law, fair procedures, presumption of innocence, burden of proof on the prosecution.
 

Aindriu

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
8,702
More fool the gardaĆ­ for not requesting blood or urine at the time and not calling in the duty doctor. More fool the DPP too for trying to convict on a technicality.
 

Warrior of Destiny

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
2,503
Maybe they should've slammed her into a radiator ?

Seriously though this is an unbelievable judgement. As you pointed out there will be people with permanent chest infections driving around our Country. Although, I'd like to see the outcome of someone from Drimnagh trying this.... :shock: (No offence Drimnagh)
None taken. :)
 

Researchwill

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
4,779
Supreme Court: Correct to acquit woman who had cough and chest infection - Independent.ie

This verdict is so daft it needs no analysis from me. It is just the latest in a long line of mad judgements.

This woman (and thousands more are free to give the same explanation in the future) may have got off with driving while plastered because the judges accepted the view of a doctor that she had a chest infection on the day previous to his examination (for which he seems to have no first hand evidence) . No expalanation seems to have been adduced that any chest infection could prevent one from giving a breath test in any case.


Only in Ireland.

Can you point out the bits of the judgement that is mad, as you must have read it in detail, a direct link follows. DPP v Cagney

BTW Justice Clarke is an excellent judge.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,845
It's the right call.

Mr Justice Frank Clarke, on behalf of the three-judge Supreme Court, rejected the DPP's argument that the natural and ordinary meaning of the words in Section 23 meant that for a person to avail of the defence, they must offer to give blood or urine and do not have to be "called upon" (by the garda) to do so.
This is a Garda muck up. If you say you can't give breath, then you bring them to the station immediately and take blood/urine. The DPP's position is that she should have offered to do and her failure to do this was an indication of guilt. It's not.

Don't know what the DPP are talking about that this will lead to a large number of cases. If there are a large amount of people being prosecuted on the basis that the gardai stuffed up, then that's not the people's fault.
 

Hitch 22

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2011
Messages
5,220
Urine tests are the way to go.

To save on money they should be taken by the road side.
 

Researchwill

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
4,779
Maybe they should've slammed her into a radiator ?

Seriously though this is an unbelievable judgement. As you pointed out there will be people with permanent chest infections driving around our Country. Although, I'd like to see the outcome of someone from Drimnagh trying this.... :shock: (No offence Drimnagh)
If you read the judgement you would see why your statement does not stand. All AGS have to do is say fine lets go for blood or urine sample.
 

Researchwill

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
4,779
It's the right call.



This is a Garda muck up. If you say you can't give breath, then you bring them to the station immediately and take blood/urine. The DPP's position is that she should have offered to do and her failure to do this was an indication of guilt. It's not.

Don't know what the DPP are talking about that this will lead to a large number of cases. If there are a large amount of people being prosecuted on the basis that the gardai stuffed up, then that's not the people's fault.
Just to clarify this s in relation to the breath test in the station, as as the accused is already in the station all AGS need to do is ring the Doctor.
 

enby

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2006
Messages
1,974
Seems an entirely logical and reasonable judgment to me.
 

NewGoldDream

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
20,929
Website
-
The OP should be thanked for highlighting when the Courts get it spot on, as they clearly have done so here.

Of course there is an element of lunacy, from the Gardai who did not invite a sick person with a chest condition to provide an alternative sample...indeed any other sample that would nt have involved the use of the chest! It is kinda remarkably stupid, and pretty stupid of the DPP to challenge the equally sensible Circuit Court ruling.
 

Crack hoe

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
1,317
they didn't want her in the back of the car to bring her to the station cause she was coughing so much
 

leftsoc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
2,848
A story from the indo



Code: I didn't read the judgment, I don't understand the law and I'm not bothered finding out.


Daily Mail type cliche. Please provide links to the ten maddest judgments (not the press report, the judgment find them here Courts Service of Ireland)



You appear to think that being "learned" is a put down.


And every other country which applies the rule of law, fair procedures, presumption of innocence, burden of proof on the prosecution.
Name another country where this judgement could be made? It would of course just be a matter of opinion , neither of us could prove the thing either way. But put it out there for others to judge? Would a British court you give such a verdict? German ? Kazakh?

Just give one example.

Are we so much nore brilliant than the rest of the world. We alone have discovered the merits of a legal system that never doubts the word of any member of the ruling class. If our legal system is so brilliant why will our grandchildren still be paying off the debts of multi-millionaire morons from the ruling class? Its not happening in places with inferior judiciaries.

'Learned' is not a put down. I know its a bit subtle for you but did you consider it might be used ironically? Maybe the boys and girls from Blackrock and Alexandria ,( the judges, doctors , and bankers ) are not as brilliant as they make out.

PS That bit about the 'inferior judiciaries' is ironic as well. I suspect the non-bankrupt countries of the world generally have legal systems that apply to the ruling class as well as the plebs, and may be the reason they are not bankrupt.
 
Last edited:

leftsoc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
2,848
The OP should be thanked for highlighting when the Courts get it spot on, as they clearly have done so here.

Of course there is an element of lunacy, from the Gardai who did not invite a sick person with a chest condition to provide an alternative sample...indeed any other sample that would nt have involved the use of the chest! It is kinda remarkably stupid, and pretty stupid of the DPP to challenge the equally sensible Circuit Court ruling.
When does the real world ever come into the law in Ireland. Nobody who was unable to blow into a bag for coughing should be behind the wheel of a car.

Medical journals should be alerted that there is a condition that is so severe one day that a breath test cannot be taken, but cannot be detected by the woman's own doctor the very next day.
 

leftsoc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
2,848
The OP should be thanked for highlighting when the Courts get it spot on, as they clearly have done so here.

Of course there is an element of lunacy, from the Gardai who did not invite a sick person with a chest condition to provide an alternative sample...indeed any other sample that would nt have involved the use of the chest! It is kinda remarkably stupid, and pretty stupid of the DPP to challenge the equally sensible Circuit Court ruling.
This defence can go into the paralell Irish legal universe where the 'hip flask defense' is acceptable.
 

Mountaintop

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2011
Messages
1,263
Would have preferred to read The Sun's article;

"Gardai punished..would've been fine if they were taking the piss"
 

leftsoc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
2,848
You should probably read the judgment, you seem to have missed the point.
Life is too short. You know and I know , this defense will not work for me, nor will the hip flask defense. The details don't matter a f--k.
 
Top