Home > Uncategorized > Corrupt Irish Elite

Corrupt Irish Elite

Fine Gael Minister of State for the Diaspora and International Development, Ciarán Cannon says that he cannot afford Euro 5,600 per year in rates on his Pub

https://wp.me/pKzXa-17e

The Fine Gael TD earns €129,854 per annum as a junior minister, and the State pays his wife Niamh, as his secretarial assistant, a  salary of up to €44,726 a year. This comes to a total family  income of  Euro 174,580 not counting profit from the pub.

Galway County Council obtained a judgment against  the Minister and his wife for a commercial rates bill of Euro 15,800 on their PUB https://wp.me/pKzXa-17e

Mr Cannon explained that they “simply couldn’t afford” the rates bill that was accrued during the economic recession, but said they remain committed to paying the money owed.

—————————————————————————————————————–Comment Below From Frank Buttimer, solicitor for Ian Bailey 

Blood Spattered Gate From Murder Scene of Sophia Toscan Du Plantier Gone missing also pages from murder file missing!!

https://wp.me/pKzXa-17e

No Garda Corruption -you understand!-Garda Síothchána Ombudsman Commission Report

Wouldn’t it be strange if Experienced Senior Gárdaí left evidence of Corruption?
What a misgoverned country!!!

GSOC investigation: Du Plantier evidence tampered with 

Irish Examiner Friday, August 03, 2018 – 12:01 AM

By Dan Buckley and Noel Baker

The policing watchdog has voiced “serious concerns” over the deliberate tampering with key documents held by gardaí relating to the investigation into the 1996 murder in West Cork of French woman Sophie Toscan du Plantier.

In a report published yesterday, the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) found no evidence of any high-level corruption by gardaí, as alleged by journalist Ian Bailey, his partner Jules Thomas, and witness Marie Farrell.

The report also found that other important garda exhibits connected with the case went missing, including a blood-spattered gate taken from close to where Ms Toscan Du Plantier’s body was found, a wine bottle found four months after the murder in a field near the scene, and a black overcoat belonging to Ian Bailey.

advertisement

Mr Bailey told the Irish Examiner he is “disappointed, but not surprised” at the findings of the GSOC report.

“My initial reaction, having not studied the report in detail, is clearly that I am disappointed, but I am not surprised,” Mr Bailey said.

Also speaking to this paper, Mr Bailey’s solicitor, Frank Buttimer, said: “The reality of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission as an organisation is that it is powerless, in any meaningful way, to carry out any form of proper investigation into garda corruption.

“I believe it was never intended to be properly resourced or to have proper investigative powers. Accordingly, nothing in the report is anything other than as expected. The lack of any meaningful outcome in the report will not deter Mr Bailey from continuing to seek whatever remedies are available to vindicate his position.”

In the report, GSOC says its deliberations had been hampered by the refusal of a number of garda detectives involved in the case to co-operate with them and the fact that some of the gardaí who investigated the murder have since retired or died.

In relation to this, Mr Bailey said: “It is interesting to note that a number of members of the guards were able to shield behind their retirement as a way of refusing to co-operate.”

In its report, GSOC says it is most concerned with pages that went missing from the original garda ‘jobs book’ while in the custody of gardaí.

Garda jobs books are meant to contain an entire record of the progress of a major investigation, outlining all actions undertaken by gardaí and the reasons that these actions were raised.

“This concern is compounded further by the fact that the specific pages missing are from an area of the book when Ian Bailey seems to have first been identified as a potential suspect in the murder by gardaí — and, as such, they are potentially very significant,” says the report.

It notes that while the name of Ian Bailey appeared in Jobs Book 1 at a relatively early stage of the investigation, the first formal nomination of him as a suspect was contained at Job number 166 in Book 2 on page 9. The next two pages of the book had been seemingly ripped (or cut) out of the book and had left a rough torn stub.

GSOC said it was unable to clarify when the interference may have taken place other than believing it was likely to have occurred since a review of the file in 2002, but possibly as far back as the 1990s.

The commission said it had considered whether the interference with the Jobs Book warranted sending a file to the DPP, but they had chosen not to on the basis that one of the main gardaí who had responsibility for the documents had since died.

The report says: “While there was general co-operation from garda members during the course of the GSOC investigation, a number of garda members were less than co-operative and thus it was not possible for GSOC to fully establish some of the details pertaining to the arrests of Ian Bailey and Jules Thomas. Other garda members who may [or who may not] have had information of relevance to the GSOC investigation, are deceased.”

There was no explanation offered by gardaí for the missing pages. GSOC concluded that there was “a lack of administration and management of the incident room” during the murder investigation, but found no evidence of malpractice or corruption.

The report says: “The significant amount of missing original garda documentation, witness statements, suspect files and physical exhibits in the garda murder investigation suggest to GSOC that there was a lack of administration and management of the incident room [even when viewed through the lens of the time] as opposed to clear evidence of malpractice or corruption.”

Among the missing exhibits outlined by GSOC are:

  • A blood-spattered gate taken from close to where Ms Toscan du Plantier’s body;
  • A French wine bottle found four months after the murder in a field next to the scene;
  • A black overcoat belonging to Ian Bailey;
  • The original memo of interview of Jules Thomas following her arrest in 1997;
  • An original witness statement from Marie Farrell provided on March 5, 2004;
  • An original witness statement from Jules Thomas dated February 19, 1997.

“A number of factors led to Ian Bailey being identified as a suspect at an early stage of the murder inquiry — his subsequent arrest and the arrest of his partner, Jules Thomas, therefore could not, as the complainants allege, have been construed as unlawful or illegal,” says the report.

“GSOC found no evidence that Marie Farrell was coerced or intimidated [as alleged by Ian Bailey and Marie Farrell] into making false statements against Ian Bailey; in fact, a phonecall from the Gsoc at the completion of the investigation into the complaints of Ian Bailey, Catherine ‘Jules’ Thomas and Marie Farrell listened to in the course of the investigation could be seen as evidence of a relationship between Marie Farrell and an investigating garda that was not coercive.

“While it does certainly appear that journalists were in possession of information in advance of Ian Bailey’s arrests, Gsoc was unable to establish the source of the media’s information.”

The report also notes contact by phone between journalists reporting on the case and Bandon Garda Station. While it concludes that no specific inappropriate disclosure of information by garda members to journalists was found by Gsoc in the phonecalls, “conversations between garda members indicated a concern that there were members of the press being briefed”.

Garda watchdog draws 10 conclusions in complaints report

The 10 conclusions made in the Garda Ombudsman’s report into complaints by Ian Bailey, Jules Thomas, and Marie Farrell:

  1. It is GSOC’s view, formed after an extensive investigation, that while there was evidence of a lack of administration and management of aspects of the investigation into the murder of Sophie Toscan Du Plantier, there was no evidence of the high-level corruption by gardaí alleged by the complainants Ian Bailey, Jules Thomas, and Marie Farrell.

A number of factors led to Ian Bailey being identified as a suspect at an early stage of the murder inquiry — his subsequent arrest and the arrest of his partner, Jules Thomas, therefore could not, as the complainants allege, have been construed as unlawful or illegal.

[timgcap=]Sophie Toscan Du Plantier]SophieToscanduPlantiernew_large.jpg[/timgcap]

  1. GSOC found no evidence that Marie Farrell was coerced or intimidated (as alleged by Ian Bailey and Marie Farrell) into making false statements against Ian Bailey; in fact, a phone call listened to in the course of the investigation could be seen as evidence of a relationship between Marie Farrell and an investigating garda that was not coercive.

While it does certainly appear that journalists were in possession of information in advance of Ian Bailey’s arrests, GSOC was unable to establish the source of the media’s information.

  1. It is a matter of grave concern to GSOC that a large number of original statements and exhibits relating to the murder investigation are missing. It is GSOC’s view that a lack of administration and management are the likely explanation for this state of affairs. GSOC found no evidence of corruption.
  2. As a result of the examination of material conducted during this investigation, it is GSOC’s view that it does appear that journalists were in possession of sensitive information about the murder at the time of the Garda murder enquiry.
  3. While there was general co-operation from Garda members during the course of the GSOC investigation, a number of Garda members were less than co-operative and thus it was not possible for GSOC to fully establish some of the details pertaining to the arrests of Ian Bailey and Jules Thomas. Other Garda members who may (or who may not) have had information of relevance to the GSOC investigation are now deceased.

Ian Bailey

  1. Pages missing from the original Garda ‘Jobs Books’ in relation to the Garda murder investigation are of the most concern to GSOC. These books form a complete record of all activity undertaken in respect of a major or critical incident (or investigation) along with rationale for the decisions made.

This concern is compounded further by the fact the specific pages missing are from an area of the book when Ian Bailey seems to have first been identified as a potential suspect in the murder by gardaí — and as such, they are potentially very significant.

  1. The books are hard-backed in nature, A4 in size, and the pages are retained in the book by way of a glued-in spine. As a result, it would not be possible for pages to simply fall out of the book by accident and for them to be removed, this would have to have been a deliberate act.

The original books were seized by GSOC as part of this investigation in order that forensic tests could be conducted to try and establish if the missing pages held any information of significance (or to offer clues as to why they may have been removed). The results of these tests are discussed earlier in this report…

At the time of writing, no explanation has been found from anyone within An Garda Síochána as to when these pages were removed, how this was done, by whom, and for what purpose.

However, this may well have occurred after December 2002.

  1. The significant amount of missing original Garda documentation, witness statements, suspect files, and physical exhibits in the Garda murder investigation suggest to GSOC that there was a lack of administration and management of the incident room (even when viewed through the lens of the time) as opposed to clear evidence of malpractice or corruption.

It was not entirely clear from statements provided to GSOC who was in charge of the investigation at any particular moment in time and who was ultimately responsible for strategic decisions (including the arrest plans).

The lack of forensic material obtained from the scene, particularly given the precise nature of the murder and the state in which the body of Madame Toscan Du Plantier was discovered, is also of concern to GSOC.

  1. The review of telephone call recordings provided to GSOC during this investigation indicate that Marie Farrell had not been under pressure in her interactions with a detective garda to provide accounts.

The relationship between the detective garda and Marie Farrell appears to GSOC to not have been appropriate at times.

  1. GSOC was not able to substantiate other serious allegations such as that a witness had been provided with illegal drugs by gardaí, though the telephone calls which have been reviewed noted that drugs were mentioned by the witness himself.

The reluctance of witnesses (including the witness himself) to co-operate with Gsoc in relation to this aspect of the case has resulted in these allegations being incapable of being proven to any evidential standard.

gardaombudsman.ie

Comment on Facebook including Remarks by Frank Buttimer, solicitor for Ian Bailey

Hugh-Thomas Cavanagh 3 August 10:10

it says, – “Also speaking to this paper, Mr Bailey’s solicitor, Frank Buttimer, said: “The reality of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission as an organisation is that it is powerless, in any meaningful way, to carry out any form of proper investigation into garda corruption.

“I believe it was never intended to be properly resourced or to have proper investigative powers. Accordingly, nothing in the report is anything other than as expected. The lack of any meaningful outcome in the report will not deter Mr Bailey from continuing to seek whatever remedies are available to vindicate his position.”

In the report, GSOC says its deliberations had been hampered by the refusal of a number of garda detectives involved in the case to co-operate with them and the fact that some of the gardaí who investigated the murder have since retired or died.

In relation to this, Mr Bailey said: “It is interesting to note that a number of members of the guards were able to shield behind their retirement as a way of refusing to co-operate.”

In its report, GSOC says it is most concerned with pages that went missing from the original garda ‘jobs book’ while in the custody of gardaí.

Garda jobs books are meant to contain an entire record of the progress of a major investigation, outlining all actions undertaken by gardaí and the reasons that these actions were raised.

“This concern is compounded further by the fact that the specific pages missing are from an area of the book when Ian Bailey seems to have first been identified as a potential suspect in the murder by gardaí — and, as such, they are potentially very significant,” says the report.

It notes that while the name of Ian Bailey appeared in Jobs Book 1 at a relatively early stage of the investigation, the first formal nomination of him as a suspect was contained at Job number 166 in Book 2 on page 9. The next two pages of the book had been seemingly ripped (or cut) out of the book and had left a rough torn stub.” – very stange???

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: