This Feudal Democracy section is a set of 9 chapters explaining why present political systems are not, and can NEVER be, truly democratic. The flaws are embedded within the design of the system itself. The only solution is true Democracy.

Feudal Democracy eBook

Chapter 6 - The Justice System

Original document date: September-December 2011

A major section of this chapter isn't very relevant to anyone who is not Irish, and so I have put links where necessary which will let non-Irish citizens skip ahead.

I have tried to ensure all the information regarding any individual, both criminal and victim are as anonymous as possible, except for a few specific instances. I have named some of the victims who were murdered because I felt it would be wrong and a further injustice to have them nameless.

ALL of the examples in this chapter are true - only the names have been changed.

If ever anyone needed proof that this so-called democratic political system (in this case in Ireland) is nothing more than a feudal system in disguise then this feudal elite group, the judiciary, are the ones to provide it. The judicial hierarchy is a direct continuation of the feudal elite system and its purpose is very different from that which most citizens would wish for, would condone, or would support - that is, if they had a choice.

The problem with the legal and justice system is that it is a system inhereted from the British legal system which in itself was a mish-mash of laws going back to Norman and Saxon times and then further back to Roman times. The problem with that is that most of the periods from which these laws, regulations, and the judicial organisation and authority stem from were not periods with democratic systems.

Most of the period from Roman times to the relative recent so-called democratic period was one of an elite ruling class controlling the wealth generators - the serfs and peasants, who were, naturally enough, at the bottom of the hierarchy. For the most part the regulations and laws which were put in place were to control and continue the status quo - to maintain the feudal power structure along with its feudal elite and to guarantee that the wealth would continue to flow generously, in the right direction!

The laws of the land were never put in place to control the feudal lord. They were, in fact, HIS laws. They were in place to control the peasants. Likewise the laws were focused on those who acted against the property of the feudal lord etc. For the most part, the laws were in place to protect the feudal lord - NOT the peasant.

Today, in so-called democratic political systems, most laws are in place not to control the criminals but to control the 97% of the population - the peasants, who are the wealth generators. (I am just taking a number at random for the percentage of criminals in society in Ireland - the exact figure is not relevant here). Those at the top of the feudal pyramid rely on this captive majority - the citizens, to maintain their feudal positions of wealth and comfort and thus it is those serfs and peasants, at the bottom, who must be controlled.

One would expect that the regulations and laws in a true democracy would be focused on controlling those elite at the top who abuse the system and also those 3% or so who are criminals and who threaten the wellbeing and safety of the citizens. The present justice system (in Ireland) does the exact opposite - it protects those at the top who abuse the system, for as we all know well, those at the top are NEVER prosecuted for anything, they just retire with enormous pensions and golden handshakes, and it also thoroughly fails to protect the 97% of the citizens from the 3% of criminals.

The Judiciary

In many so-called democracies, the judiciary, in effect, do not answer to anyone. They truly are a law onto themselves. As mentioned in the chapter on the feudal monopolies, this monopoly has the most safeguarded and secure battlements in place, which seem to the ordinary servile peasant, unassailable, even in a so-called democracy. That part of Chapter 3 - Feudal Monopolies should be read in conjunction with this chapter

This elite group of people not only apply the law but mould it, define it, interpret it, rule on it, and thoroughly control every aspect of it, especially the enormous cost of it - according to their wishes. These aren't individuals equal ‘one among the citizens’ but are part of the feudal hierarchy system of those ‘betters’ who are treated with incredible deference, reverence and respect - merely because of their office - not their ability. And what can we say about their ability?

Their ability can never be queried. They make decisions from their lofty thrones which can effect every citizen of this Nation without the citizens having any say whatsoever, in any slightest way at all and their ability is not only seen as not open to investigation but also that it should remain utterly unquestioned, as if their appointment itself guarantees god-like perfection - merely because of that appointment.

Not only that, but in Ireland, Britain and I presume other so-called democratic countries, the legal system with its ceremony and procedures only goes to reinforce this idea of the select few - the elite untouchables - who have the power of incarceration and punishment - and leniency, as if it was THEIR RIGHT, as if it was THEIR LAW. And the amazing aspect to all of this is that it actually is THEIR LAW with THEIR RIGHT, and theirs alone, to dictate its meaning and definition.

As usual, the passive peasants are expected to meekly bow their heads and be thankful for the wisdom of their betters, though the quality of that wisdom can never be measured, evaluated, or questioned. It must merely be accepted as being ‘god given’ correct, handed down from above - from those who know the secrets of the profession.

We may live in a so-called democracy but the very foundations for that democracy was given to us by the British. The language used by the judiciary is archaic and the interpretation of the language is different than that of the citizens. This is very similar to another elite authority who still use Latin phrases and terminology - another feudal hierarchy - the Roman Catholic Church. (Would this mean that the Romans, two thousand years ago, used phrases from another civilisation preceding them by two thousand years?)

As the general understanding is that the judiciary are the god-like elite, any decisions made by them is seen as unquestionably true - ‘ex cathedra’, and thus cannot and must not be questioned by the lowely citizens. Admittedly it would be very dangerous for politicians to attempt to influence decisions made by a judge, but a political system where the citizens have no say whatsoever in any manner at all is astounding - if that political system is even pretending to be a democratic one.

Part of this personal authority of the judges is the process whereby they can make a ruling which sets a precedent where subsequently that personal ruling becomes the standard, as such. As it is arranged at present, judges can make decisions which are frighteningly detrimental to the wellbeing of the citizens and the citizens have no say whatsoever. A judge makes bes ruling and so be it.

The following examples speak for themselves.

The Present State Of Justice In Ireland

Non-Irish can skip these Irish example of judicial incompetence and lack of any consideration for the Irish citizens, though you may find it interesting, and frustrating, and you may also find many parallels with the justice system in your country. To skip click here: Skip The Examples.

Sentencing Examples

These are examples of judicial decisions which I came across, mostly on the national news. I didn't search for them, except to find extra details etc. Getting full details, especially any previous convictions, is very difficult. Such is the nature of State secrecy in Ireland 2012 as regards our justice system.

There are 19 examples in all. (non-Irish readers could skip these examples without losing the purpose of this chapter).

Example 1:

On the 3rd September 2008 two men raided a Jewellers shop at the Dundrum Town Centre and got away with €1.2 million worth of jewellery. During the robbery, a double-barrelled sawn-off shotgun was pointed at one of the jewellery store staff.

Mr X, a 24 (or 22, depending which media you check) year old man from Crumlin, was picked out from a line up by witnesses who were in the store at the time of the robbery, as the person who held the shotgun and threatened the staff.

At first Mr X pleaded not guilty to the robbery. However, he changed his plea during the trial at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court. For a crime of this nature he could have received a life sentence.

The judge, Judge Gerard Griffin, adjourned the case to later on in the month and ordered a victim impact report. Later, in July 2011, he sentenced Mr X to 12 years imprisonment, with the final two years suspended.

According to one newspaper, Mr X had 67 previous convictions.

Example 2:

On December 13th 2009, Mr G, 25 years of age, after having taken alcohol, got into his car and drove off in it, in a dangerous manner, despite the fact he had no insurance, and he was at the time disqualified from driving because of a previous drink-driving conviction. After driving at speed from a petrol station he was followed by an unmarked patrol car. It is said that at times he was driving at speeds of 180km/hr (approximately 110 mph).

He was followed by the unmarked police patrol car along the main Letterkenny to Derry road at around 1.15am on December 13th. A second Garda car was requested to get the registration of the car and as they drove towards Letterkenny at Lisfannon near Burt the car being driven by Mr G “came like a rocket” and crashed into their car.

Garda Gary McLoughlin (aged 24), the driver of the Garda patrol car, died the next day in hospital.

Mr G was sentenced, by Judge John O'Hagan, to eight years in prison, with the last year suspended, for the manslaughter of Garda Gary McLoughlin in December 2009. He was also sentenced to five years for endangering the life of Garda Bernard McLoughlin and five years for dangerous driving causing death. He also received six months sentences for each of the charges of drink driving, driving with no insurance and driving while disqualified. All sentences will run concurrently. He was also disqualified from driving for 20 years.

During sentencing the court heard that Mr G had 91 previous convictions including dangerous driving, drink driving, drugs, forgery and aggravated burglary. There were two bench warrants out for his arrest at the time that he crashed into Garda McLoughlin's patrol car. Previously, he had committed an offence while out on bail.

Example 3:

In 2002, Mr K, a 55 year old man, from Gweedore, was convicted of 2 counts of sexually abusing a pupil in a local Donegal school, between 1985 and 1986. He received a six month sentence which was suspended in full, and was put on the sex offender register for five years. The District Court judge at the time ordered that Mr K remain anonymous. This convicted child rapist then returned to work as a caretaker in the same school.

In 2011 he was tried for abusing young boys aged between 10 and 17 in that school. Mr K, pleaded guilty at the Central Criminal Court to 38 sample charges which included 17 oral and anal rapes, 18 sex assaults, one indecent assault and two charges of production of child pornography on dates between 1990 and 2005.

Mr K used cigarettes, alcohol and money to groom his young male victims who he raped and abused at the school on an almost weekly basis. On some cases he used alcohol to drug his intended victims before raping them.

Mr Justice Paul Carney said the disturbing feature of this case was that the outrages were perpetrated by the caretaker at a time that predated and postdated a previous conviction from 2002 for abusing a pupil in the same school in the 1980s.

Each of the young male victims, now aged between 24 and 30, stated in victim impact statements that they turned to alcohol, drug and solvent abuse to escape from the reality of their situation. Some of them had tried to take their own lives, with one saying he had deliberately crashed his car and later his motorbike.

Mr Justice Carney acknowledged Mr K's 'genuine remorse' and guilty pleas but he noted also the systemic grooming and the premeditated nature of the offences and he imposed an 18 year sentence with the last 4 years suspended.

The local Gardaí at the time of the first conviction expressed concern that Mr K had any further connection with the school, and approaches to the local health service and the owners of the school were made.

An official statement from the directors of the school explained how Mr K had been dismissed after the first conviction. He had done some repairs in the school but was accompanied at all times. All the teachers had been notified of his conviction. He did help out, under supervision with some aspects of adult courses (a section of the school provides Irish language courses for part of the year).

Example 4:

In September 2007 Garda T filed a report of a traffic accident as having taken place on the Newtown Road. Two days later he filed a Pulse (Garda Central database system) report which was subsequently input into the Garda database.

As a result of making this fraudulent claim friends of Garda T received two cheques from the AXA Insurance company totalling over €23,000.

Mr T, aged 53, was convicted of three counts of making fraudulent claims. By the time of the trial he had been suspended from the Garda police force two years previously, and then had subsequently retired from the force.

Judge Alice Doyle sentenced him to three years in prison on each of the three offences, to run concurrently, with two years suspended.

Jailed Garda, Mr T, was let retire on a full pension that could be worth up to €1 million while he waited to be tried on corruption charges - even though senior local Gardai had recommended he be sacked from the force.

The Garda Commissioner, having taken legal advice, allowed the then suspended Mr T to retire as he had completed 30 years of service. This entitled him to a lump sum of some €80,000 and an annual pension of around €28,000 - which he will still receive while he is spending the next year behind bars. The index-linked pension, which 55 year-old Mr T has already been drawing for two years, could add up to some €1 million if he continues to draw it for another 25 to 30 years.

Had he been sacked, as some colleagues sought, he would have lost out on all those payments.

A spokesman for the Department of Justice said they cannot comment on individual cases, but pointed out that “there are legal precedents in place which establish a person's right to a pension irrespective of other issues”. (This was a ruling by the Supreme Court on an issue of constitutionality - not certain what case.)

Example 5:

On the 9th January 2010 some men took part in an aggravated burglary at the home of a Carrick arms dealer. The victims of the robbery were woken in the middle of the night in their home and told they would be shot if they did not cooperate with the thieves. He and his family were held at gun and knife point. The gang stole 42 rifles, shotguns and handguns.

The three men who have been charged with the are Mr Za, with an address in Clondalkin, Dublin, his brother Mr Zb, of Tipperary Town, and Mr D, from Lisadobber, Carrick.

Mr Za, of Clondalkin, Dublin, is believed by Gardaí to have been a leading member of the gang which stole the 42 rifles, shotguns and handguns. Some of the firearms were later sold to one of the drugs gangs operating in Limerick. Gardaí recovered around half of the guns stolen in the raid in a number of separate operations but the remainder were never traced.

Mr Za pleaded guilty to four counts of false imprisonment and a charge of aggravated burglary and received an 11 year sentence.

In 2002, eight years before that burglary, Mr Za was convicted of being involved in an armed bank robbery in Co Tipperary.

~~~~~

One of his brothers, Mr Zc (24) was jailed for six years in 2008 for stabbing another man, a 40 year old father, who had refused to allow him admission to a 21st birthday party. Mr Zc was high on cocaine at the time. After being refused entry to the party, he returned with a five inch blade and stabbed the victim in the arms and thighs.

He has several previous District Court convictions, including possession of a firearm and drugs.

~~~~~

Mr Zb (30) (see above), was previously convicted of taking part in a bank robbery on the 13th February 2004. at the Bank of Ireland, Rathdowney, Co Laois, during a terrifying raid in which guns and sledgehammers were used. He had only used the sledgehammer, in order to break the security glass at the bank counter.

The gang stole approximately €10,000 in cash but were arrested 45 minutes later. He co-operated with the Gardaí and repaid the €10,000 to the bank out of money he had received from a personal injury settlement, and showed them where the firearms were hidden.

Judge Desmond Hogan handed down an eight year prison sentence, all of which was suspended.

~~~~~

Mr Za's father is the veteran armed robber Mr Zd (55) who is currently serving a 12-year-sentence for his role in a tiger kidnapping in Co Galway. (The term ‘tiger kidnapping’ is used when a gang kidnap a family and force a member of that family, who usually works in a bank or post office, to go and take the money from the safe.)

He masterminding a terrifying raid on the home of a businessman and his family at Co Galway, on February 15th 2009. Wearing balaclavas and carrying a sawn-off shotgun and a hatchet, they burst into the home of the victim and family.

They were tied up three children, aged seven, five and four, with cable ties and were screamed at by the masked raiders, who took them upstairs. The parents were tied up downstairs.

The raiders demanded money from the family and searched the house before finding €3,000. Gang leader Mr Ze (54), found the owner's semi-automatic shotgun and loaded it with three cartridges in the owner's presence.

The Gardaí were alerted and arrived on the scene while the raiders were still in the house. Mr Ze and two other raiders, Mr V (43) of Tallaght, Dublin, and Mr Y (23), of Ballymun, Dublin, were arrested. However, two other raiders had fled the scene.

Judge Raymond Groarke imposed four prison sentences of 12 years and two of 10 years on Freeman. Mr V was sentenced to five terms of eight years, all sentences to run concurrently. Mr Y was given a six-year term with the final year suspended.

Detective Inspector Roche described Mr Zd as one of the country's most active and high-profile criminals. He had a string of convictions, including a 10 year sentence in 1998 for robbery and false imprisonment of a family in Co Tipperary.

Example 6:

Mr W, aged 32, pleaded not guilty at the Central Criminal Court to rape, oral rape, two charges of sexual assault and one of false imprisonment on August 25th, 2010.

During the trial the jury heard details of how Mr W stayed overnight in the house of his 55 year old aunt, and that during the night he grabbed her by the hair and pushed her up against the jamb of a door before he threatened her and told her he was going to rape her. She told him that would be incest.

She said that over the course of two hours he sexually assaulted her twice, made her perform oral sex, and then raped her. He threatened to kill her. Before leaving the house he made her swear on her granddaughter’s life she would not call the Garda, and then left. She contacted he niece and the Gardaí were called.

After the trial, in July 2011, it took the jury two and a half hours to reach a guilty verdict.

Mr Justice Paul Carney described the way in which Mr W ran his defence as "the most despicable and dishonourable I have seen in my 20 years in this court". He said Mr W had claimed that his aunt had been "the sexual predator" and instigated the encounter.

He said the inherent gravity of the offence, the effect on the victim, the breach of trust, the fact he had used a knife and the conduct of his defence warranted a 15-year sentence. Mr Justice Carney ordered Mr W to undergo 10 years' post-release supervision and registered him as a sex offender.

Detective Garda David Leslie told the court Mr W had 67 previous convictions for robbery, burglary, theft, road traffic offences, assault causing harm, blackmail and extortion, and false imprisonment.

Example 7:

Rebecca French’s body was found in the boot of her burning car in October 2009. The State believes she was beaten to death beforehand in the house of one of the defendants at Ard Na Dara, Clonard.

Four men were arrested and tried. At the Central Criminal Court, Justice Barry White said one or more of the men were responsible for “brutally and savagely” killing the mother-of-two. There were two Lithuanians, one Polish man and one Irish man.

During the investigation two of the men pleaded guilty to impeding the investigation into the killing. Mr Q (28), and Mr A (26), of Goodtide Harbour and formerly of Davitt Road South, both in Wexford, were on trial for her murder when they made the pleas. However, the murder charges were dropped after a technicality meant their confessions while in Garda custody could not be allowed.

Mr S (41), of Clonard and Mr B (27), living in Wexford, had also pleaded guilty.

Justice Barry White imposed a sentence of 10 years for each of the men. According to reports the judge said “In my view, 10 years is inadequate as a maximum punishment for this type of offence, but I am bound by the law,”

He then suspended two year of each of the sentences for three of the men, and suspended the fourth man sentence by two and a half years, because he had no previous convictions. The sentences were suspended on condition that the non-nationals left Ireland on their release. The suspended sentence was also given to the Irish man.

Example 8:

On July 4th 2001 Mr N, an off-duty hotel porter, crept into a guest's room with masking tape to stop the woman screaming before trying to sexually dominate her, Cork Circuit Court heard yesterday, 4th July 2002.

Mr N (31) of Cork, pleaded guilty to attempting to sexually assault a female cabin crew member staying at a Hotel in the city on July 4 last year.

Sgt Tim Sullivan said the accused was not working on the night of incident but had come to the hotel for a few drinks in the bar. Shortly before 2am Mr N got a master key which allowed him access to all the bedrooms in the hotel.

He made his way to the woman's room and approached her holding masking tape in his hands. She got out of her bed when she became aware that somebody else was in the room. The man pushed her back on the bed and put his hands to her throat. However, when the woman screamed for assistance, Mr N ran from the room and left the hotel.

In a statement read out in court the woman said she has been deeply traumatised by the incident.

The judge adjourned sentencing until February 2003 and Mr N was remanded on continuing bail. He received a suspended sentence.

November 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr N, 39 years old, is an unemployed, married man with no children. On 18 June, 2007 he made contact with a 14 year old boy through a social web site. The boy, who was at home on his own, gave Mr N his phone number. Mr N rang the boy; got his home address and he went to his house where he sexually assaulted him. The boy made a complaint to Gardaí.

Detective Garda Gary Duggan told how Mr N was identified and traced through phone records. In evidence today the victim described the time since the assault as the worst years of his life. He said his relationships suffered and he still has difficulty dealing with his anger and he gets panic attacks.

Mr N was convicted by a jury following a two-day trial. He was described by Judge Seán O'Donnabhain as behaving in a predatory manner in his use of the social web site.

Judge Seán O'Donnabhain said he had no doubt that the victim presented (looked) to Mr N as a child. He jailed Mr N for 18 months with another 18 months suspended on condition that he remains under the supervision of the Probation and Welfare Service for three years after his release. Mr N will also be placed on the register of sex offenders.

Example 9:

On the 13th December 2006, a random act of senseless, gratuitous, and extreme violence was perpetrated by Mr P and others leaving two men injured. Both men subsequently died.

The court had been told that two cars were hijacked by a group of young men in Dundalk on the evening before the killing. The gang was armed with a machete and the driver of the first car to be hijacked was slashed with it, leaving him needing 45 stitches. In the second car, a woman and young child were forced out of their car by the gang wielding the machete.

That night Aidan Myers had been collected from his sister's home by his friend, Gearoid O'Donnell. As they were driving towards the town they were rammed from behind and their car was forced into the ditch.

When they got out to find out what was going on, they were attacked with a machete. They ended up on the ground, being hit by the machete. Mr Myers was still on the ground when Mr P got into a car, pushing the other car over him. Detective Garda Charlie Geoghegan told the court that a friend to whom Mr P had confessed said he could hear Mr Myers screaming under the car as he kept driving.

Mr Myers died around five hours later from his injuries. Mr O'Donnell later died of natural causes although his family believe his death was hastened by the injuries he received in the attack.

The court was told that the defendant had consumed alcohol, cocaine, cannabis and other drugs on the night in question. During his trial Mr P pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of Aidan Myers. He also pleaded guilty to assaulting Gearoid O'Donnell on the same occasion.

He had a list of previous convictions including dangerous driving and reckless endangerment.

Judge Patrick McCarthy said the details of the case were quite shocking. He sentenced Mr P to ten years in prison and suspended the last year. He also backdated the sentence to May of last year when the defendant was arrested on this matter.

Example 10:

On 13 February 2005, Mr L, was part of a armed four-man gang that broke into the home of an Athlone businessman, assaulted him with bars and a baseball bat and threatened to sexually assault him.

The court heard that during the two-hour raid, the gang forced the victim, who runs the a Service Station with his wife, to show them where a safe was. When he said the keys had been lost, he was threatened with rape.

The three children, ranged in age between nine and fifteen at the time, and their first cousin, were tied up, along with their mother and grandfather in a downstairs bathroom.

After failing to fit the safe into the boot of the victim’s BMW, the raiders made their escape in a BMW 4x4, taking the safe containing €107,000 in jewellery and more than €11,000 in cash. Blood found on the boot of the car was later matched to Mr L.

Judge Anthony Kennedy described the case as very serious, “this four-man gang bursting in by the back door, all masked having balaclavas and armed with a variety of weapons”. Although serious violence was not used on the family, “there was for instance the disgusting threat to bugger the victim,” Judge Kennedy remarked.

After the trial, in November 2010, the 38 year old Mr L was sentenced, at a sitting of the Circuit court in Tullamore, to ten years in jail.

One of the victims, the father, was emotional as he read a victim impact statement to the court. No member of his family had slept properly for two years after the attack, he said. My family were now living in fear.” he added.

Example 11:

On 26th December 2009, Brian Casey, a 26 year old teacher from Lisseycasey in Co Clare, was punched in the face by Mr H1 in an unprovoked attack. The blow from Mr H1 broke Mr Casey’s jaw in two places and the Lissycasey man hit the ground with the back of his head.

Mr H2 struck Mr Casey in the face and head, with four or five punches, as he lay unconscious on the ground. Mr Casey never regained consciousness and died two days later, from head injuries he received during the attack in O'Connell Square in Ennis that December night.

Mr H1, 29 years old, and his 23 year old nephew Mr H2, pleaded guilty to the unlawful killing of Brian Casey and both men were convicted. Judge Carroll Moran passed sentence.

Mr H1, who has 64 previous convictions and who was on temporary release from prison at the time of the incident, was given a five-year prison sentence.

Mr H2, who has 17 previous convictions and who was on bail at the time of the offence, and awaiting sentence having pleaded guilty to a burglary charge, was given a four year prison sentence, to commence on the expiry of his current sentence (of two years) for burglary in November of next year (2011).

November 2010:
THE Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is to appeal against the leniency of sentences handed down to two men jailed earlier this month for "a cowardly and unprovoked attack" that killed Clare schoolteacher Brian Casey.

Yesterday, a spokesman at Ennis Garda Station stated the DPP had confirmed it is lodging appeals against the leniency of the sentences handed down. A spokesman for the DPP declined to comment, stating the office did not comment on individual cases. The appeals are expected to be heard in the Court of Criminal Appeal next year.

Example 12:

THE dismayed co-owner of a car dealership set ablaze in a €280,000 arson attack said last night the justice system had ignored his plight after one of the perpetrators received a suspended sentence. The damage was compounded by long-term damage to the viability of the business.

The victim, who co-owns the 50-year-old family dealership with his brother, said there were "uninsured losses of about another €100,000" that were not included in that estimate. There was also €46,348 worth of damage to the building. He said the dealership, which employs 50 people, suffered a total loss of €284,202 and its insurance cost has since risen to €250,000. The business which had been the victim of four arson attacks over a two-year period.

Garda Sgt Barry Butler said 11 vehicles had been completely destroyed in the blaze, while 17 others were damaged.

CCTV footage showed Mr O, who has 12 previous convictions, arriving outside the dealership in a car just minutes before the attack at midnight on March 12, 2007. One of his passengers emerged from the car with a petrol container, before returning from the premises minutes later and fleeing the scene.

Sgt Butler told prosecutor Pat McGrath that investigating Gardai tracked down Mr O using CCTV footage of his car's registration details. They also placed him at the scene through cell-site analysis on a mobile phone seized during a raid on his home.

Mr O (22), of Dublin 1, pleaded guilty to causing "damage by fire" to vehicles at the car sales garage, Walkinstown in Dublin, and was given a three-year suspended sentence at the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.

Judge Patricia Ryan said the court took into account the serious nature of the charge and the dire financial consequences that it had for the garage. ?????

She also said the court noted Mr O's personal circumstances, in that his drug-addicted mother died in 2001, leaving his sister, who was 15 years old at the time, to raise him.

In suspending the sentence, Judge Ryan said the court had taken into account Mr O's good employment record, his standing in the community, his early plea of guilty and testimonials to his good character.

Example 13:

In the early hours of 29th May 2009 Charles Sinapayen was shot through the bedroom window of his apartment at Richmond Hill in Bray while he slept. Mr Sinapayen, a 33 years old musician and juggler, and had lived in Bray for several years and was originally from Bordeaux, France.

In June 2011, Mr S, 24 years old, and Mr J, 28 years old, were found guilty by unanimous verdict, of the murder of Mr Sinapayen.

It seems to have been a random shooting with no motive at all. Evidence was also before the court that DNA matching that of Mr S was present on a shotgun cartridge and a tracksuit top recovered by Gardai in a cemetery close to the scene of the shooting. Forensic scientist Dr Linda Williams told the court that DNA found on a pair of runners and a jacket found at the cemetery also had traces of DNA matching that of Mr J.

The judge sentenced them to the mandatory term of life imprisonment on Mr S (24) and Mr J (28) after a jury at the Central Criminal Court found them guilty by unanimous decision of the murder

Mr S, had 34 previous convictions
Mr J had 41 previous convictions, including two for assault on a Garda.

Example 14:

In September 2011, Polish authorities have sought the extradition of a man serving a six-year sentence here for two vicious attacks on women during break-ins. 33-year-old Mr D formerly of Santry, Dublin, is also wanted in Poland to answer up to 20 charges, some involving violent crime.

He was jailed earlier this year at the Circuit Criminal Court after pleading guilty to two break-ins. In one he targeted two women and slashed one of them with a knife while demanding money. Mr D also admitted breaking into the home of a Dublin couple and punching a woman in the face before leaving empty-handed.

He was sentenced to nine years for both offences with the final three years suspended. He was arrested this morning under a European Arrest Warrant and was remanded in custody for a week.

Example 15:

On the morning of 20th January 2011, Mr Y, a 33 year old man, hijacked a car which had 3 children in it. The 9 year old boy, sitting in the back of the car, managed to get out. His 12 year old sister, who was sitting in the front seat of the car was forced out of the car while it was moving, when Mr Y jabbed a screwdriver into her back. She was injured as she fell out while Mr Y drove the car away. A 3 year old boy was left alone in the back seat of the hijacked car. Later, Mr Y abandoned the 3 year old boy on an isolated country road. The temperature that morning was minus four degrees.

He was then pursued by Gardai of the Regional Armed Support Unit as he drove at high speed on a number of icy country roads narrowly missing groups of parents and children on their way to school. He drove recklessly at Gardai a number of times, who had to fire a number of shots to finally put a stop to his reckless driving.

He was eventually arrested and was described as completely out of it on drink and drugs. He said he did not remember many of the events which lead to his arrest. Mr Y pleaded guilty to a number of charges of reckless endangerment, to false imprisonment and to assault. Passing sentence at Limerick Circuit court, Judge Carrol Moran said this was one of the worse cases of car hijacking he had ever come across.

Limerick Circuit Court heard that the family had been put through an extremely traumatic and horrific ordeal.

The judge referred to the horror experienced by the mother of the little boy who was abandoned and the fact that Mr Y had driven recklessly at high speed on icy roads through villages where parents were dropping their children to school. He said it was by the grace of god that nobody was killed.

The court heard that Mr Y had a number of previous convictions including a 10 year sentence for an arson attack.

Judge Carrol Moran imposed a seven year sentence on Mr Y, suspending the last two years, and banned him from driving for 20 years.

Mr Y's previous conviction for an arson attack.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On 17th May 2001 Mr Y (25), Limerick and Mr D, threw petrol bombs into a house in Co Clare, Ireland.

One of the bombs hit the owner on the forearm before it bounced into a corner of the room and exploded into flames. His wife, his two daughters, his 12 year old son and a family friend were also in the house at the time of the attack.

The trial was held in 2003. It was revealed that Mr Y, an unemployed father of one, had more than 10 previous convictions dating back to 1995. These included an arson attack on the car of an off-duty Garda, assaulting a Garda, possession of a firearm, and drugs offences.

Mr D, also an unemployed father of one, had convictions including car theft and fraud, the court heard.

Judge Carroll Moran described the offence as "outrageous" and said the community could not tolerate such behaviour. "This is as serious a case as I have come across and it would not be an exaggeration to say that someone could have been killed or seriously injured," he said.

He sentenced both men to 12 years in prison and refused leave to appeal. Yet in January 2011, eight years after this sentence, Mr Y was hijacking the car as above.

Example 16:

On 2nd September 2009 Mr C, wearing a balaclava broke into an apartment and pushed past the woman who lived there. He tied her up and gagged her. He then used a knife and a machete on the woman. He stabbed her in the face, neck, chest and abdomen. Some of her fingers were amputated at the joints. It was described how he used the knife like a butcher.

The woman, an artist, is now unable to hold a pen. She still has facial scars.

The trial was held in March 2011, where he was found guilty. In October 2011 Mr C was sentenced to 16 years imprisonment.

Mr C has a number of previous convictions for theft. He also had a conviction for a serious assault in 1998. In that incident he broke into the home of a man and tied him up. When the man tried to escape he stabbed him repeatedly. When the man did escape Mr C then stabbed the man’s partner 10 times. He received a four-year sentence for that offence.

Example 17:

On the 22nd July 2010, James Joyce, a 21 year old man, was stabbed to death in Swords, Co Dublin by 23 year old Mr I, in front of Mr Joyce's pregnant partner.

The accused was armed with knives because another man, had travelled from Meath to beat him, but could not find him. After a trial the jury acquitted Mr I of the murder but found him guilty of the manslaughter of Mr Joyce.

Mr Joyce's parents said Mr I had over 50 previous convictions, three of which were for knife attacks. They said it was a "disgrace that he would be free in five years" and have called on the Director of Public Prosecutions to appeal the leniency of the sentence.

Mr Joyce was the innocent victim of a row between Mr I and another man. Mr I said he had armed himself with two knives to protect himself from another man, but stabbed Mr Joyce three times instead. Mr Justice Carney sentenced him to ten years in prison with the final three years suspended.

The judge said he viewed the crime as in a category of the most grave knife crimes and could not take the defendant’s previous good character into account as he had 14 relevant convictions and imposed a 10 year sentence, backdating it to his arrest. He suspended the final three years due to his remorse !!!!!!!, his guilty plea and his age, on condition Mr I keep away from the Joyce family in perpetuity.

However, the Joyce family were extremely distressed afterwards at what they felt was a very short sentence.

Example 18:

Mr E of Bangor Erris, Ballina, Co Mayo, was convicted by a jury last month of 30 counts of sexual assault and 27 counts of rape against the two girls, who were aged eight and nine at the time.

The court was told Mr E threatened the girls in order to keep the abuse a secret and would give them sweets and soft drinks. Mr Justice Garrett Sheehan noted the suffering endured by the two young girls. He said they had displayed great courage and resilience.

Mr E was sentenced to nine years in jail for the rape and sexual assault of two girls, and the judge suspended the last two years of the sentence.

His victims said they felt the sentence was not long enough for what he had done to them.

Example 19:

A 16 year old boy was waiting for his mother just before 10pm on the 23rd of July 2010 at a petrol station in Co Clare.

Mr F, a stranger to the victim, approached the victim while he was sitting on a window sill, and began an unprovoked, sustained and ferocious attack on him. He inflicted 65 kicks and stamps on the boy as well as two stamps to his chest and 26 punches. He repeatedly punched him in the face, stamped on his head and kicked his head as he lay motionless on the ground.

The assault continued for more than four minutes after the boy stopped moving. Mr F briefly left the scene, leaving the younger teenage boy lying on the ground. He then returned and began stamping on the boy's head again.

The court was told that the victim suffers from weakness on his right side, deafness, as well as memory and speech problems. The victim has been left with permanent brain damage.

The Judge warned anyone who was squeamish to leave the courtroom before the footage, captured on CCTV, lasting around five minutes, was shown.

Mr Justice Carney said the appropriate sentence was 15 years but he suspended the final three years having regard to the 18 year old's guilty plea, his lack of previous convictions and his young age.

~~~~~~~~~~ ENOUGH ! ~~~~~~~~~~

Sentencing

I think you will agree that after reading the above catalogue of astounding examples of what happens in the Irish courts the notion that we have a justice system in Ireland which has, as its core aim, the protection of the citizens, is utterly farcical.

Not only that, but I personally found the above very disturbing and filled me with despair and total frustration. It filled me with sadness. My heart goes out to all these victims who have suffered because of this feudal political and judicial system. My heart goes out to all the families of these victims who have suffered and lost loved ones directly as a result of this failed feudal political and judicial system. No words are adequate enough.

No words are also adequate enough to describe how I feel towards the loathsome, foul and vile judiciary of Ireland. To say I hold the judiciary of Ireland in utter contempt is such a gross understatement I am angry with myself for not having sufficient words to describe the level of that contempt. I despise their incompetence and their very existence.

Needless to say, the few examples as set out above is a tiny fraction of the crimes committed in Ireland. Crimes not only committed by the criminals of Ireland, but also by the judiciary of Ireland against ALL the citizens of Ireland.

If ever there was a section of individuals feeding off the citizens of this Nation which even today could be called a feudal elite, the justice system certainly falls into that category. This justice system with its feudal elite are an abomination to this Nation and to the democratic principle of justice.

These judges make decisions which effect the safety, security and quality of life of every citizen in this Nation and yet THEY ANSWER TO NO ONE. They are a ‘law’ unto themselves. Their gross incompetence is only matched by their arrogance and that is only matched by the sheer brutality and savagery of the criminals depicted.

The fact that there are psychopaths of such violence and malevolence as outlined above, who have between 30 or 40, and in some cases nearly 100 previous convictions, being free to mix in Irish society, among unsuspecting and unprotected Irish citizens, demonstrates beyond any doubt just how pathetically inadequate the justice system is.

At present we have a justice system where the citizens are seen as and treated like irrelevant passive peasants of a feudal system where they should be submissive, should just shut up and go about their business of providing the wealth for these lamentably pathetic worthless judges without the protection they require, and deserve, and let the judiciary play their games of being independent - FROM EVERYBODY.

The most outrageous aspect to this abomination of a justice system is that the citizens are paying highly for this dysfunctional farce. THE CITIZENS ARE PAYING FOR ALL THIS SHAM.

Also, on top of all this mountain of disgrace, it is important to note that it is normal for most prisoners to receive 25% off the prison sentence for ‘good behaviour’. That does not take into account the revolving door policy whereby it seems as if most prisoners never serve a sentence sufficiently long enough to protect the citizens.

So all the prison sentences above - all the lenient sentences given out above, all these will be whittled down to a lot less than we are allowed to know, and a lot less than the authorities would dare tell us. The aim, as always, is to keep the citizens from knowing just how useless the system is, for which they are paying highly.

Victim Impact Statement - A Necessity For Justice?

Over the past decade or so, the victim impact statement, has become very important in Ireland. This is where the victims, or relatives of the victim, are allowed to make a statement describing how the criminal activity perpetrated on them, their relative, or their loved ones, had effected them. This is read out in court.

The main basis for this is the general common understanding and acceptance of the reality that the judges hearing a case and passing sentence do not give full consideration to the effects these criminals had on the victim. That is no surprise, for the judges, being members of the lofty feudal elite, do NOT give consideration to the victims. They do NOT give consideration to the citizens. The ‘little people’ are of no consequence - in this glorious democracy.

On the face of it the victim impact statement seems an ideal solution - making allowances for the incompetence of the judiciary, but this in effect only reinforces this dis-connect between the justice system and justice for the citizens. In fact this continues the perceived injustice and lack of consideration. It is nothing less than the peasants pleading with a judge - a member of the feudal elite - for justice, trying to get ben to understand just how terrible the effect of that crime had on that individual.

Victim impact statements show - without doubt - that the whole notion of justice is seen by the citizens as not existing in the present judicial system in so-called democratic counties. Thus they have to plead with the local feudal lord for fair punishment for these criminals. As in the case of the citizens requesting a politician to take an interest in a problem they are having, in this case it is the citizens pleading with ‘those in charge’ - their ‘betters’, to try and have some empathy with those who are suffering. The supplication of the under-dog - ‘Pretty please, m'lord’.

Think about it. The victim impact statement is a cry for justice.

WHY THE HELL SHOULD A CITIZEN HAVE TO PLEAD FOR JUSTICE, FROM A FEUDAL LORD, IN A DEMOCRACY?

Example - The Killing of A Shop Owner

In one case Mr Justice Paul Butler said it was important that the court and the public were informed of the real consequences of crime. He described the victim as having died “while bravely defending his premises and his employee”.

The court heard that the criminal came from a hard working family and was acutely aware of the shame he had brought on them. He was extremely remorseful and apologised again to the victim's family. His barrister Michael O Higgins said it was clear from the trail that he did not set out with the intention to kill anyone that day, rather it was the unintentional outcome of an opportunistic robbery. Mr DD had owed money and that was his motive, he said. Mr DD was also sentenced to six years for robbery.

Victim impact statements on behalf of the victim’s ex-wife, and their two daughters, were read out for the court during Farrell’s sentence hearing today.

The ex-wife said the victim’s “untimely death” was a very “difficult transition” for her and her daughters. She said he was “a good dad” who had always stayed in the lives of his daughters following their divorce. She said she was reminded of the killing every time she passed the shop and her daughters found it very difficult to pass the shop, which they had to every time they visited their grandparents.

In handing down sentence, Mr Justice Paul Butler described it as a “very sad and tragic case”. Mr Justice Butler said there were other victims in the case too and he was very aware that Mr DD was from a decent family and the crime had had a very serious affect on them.

Victim Impact Statement - Demonstrates A Failure In Justice

Despite the fact that the present system of justice is nothing more than a joke - a very sad and cruel joke, the very need for victim impact statements creates a very disturbing quality to the justice system. or rather - a very disturbing IN-equality to the justice system.

If victim impact statements are required so that an individual crime receives the correct punishment, by the peasant victims pleading to the judge, then this leads to the conclusion that if a victim impact statement is not made then it is presumed that the correct punishment will not be given by the judge.

For example, take the killing of a shop owner as mentioned just above. This was the killing of an individual by stabbing, during a robbery. Did that criminal receive the correct sentence - life? The important question is this: if there had been no victim impact statement made in relation to this case would Mr DD have received a lesser sentence?

Or to put it another way. What if the victim had been single with no family. Should the fact that there was no widow to mourn him make any difference to how the crime should be judged? Should it make any difference, as to how the crime is judged, whether the victim had any children?

If victim impact statements effect how a crime is judged then in reality the seriousness of a crime is judged, not by the action of the criminal involved, but by either how popular the victim was, or if be had relatives.

A true justice system should take no personal account, or very little, of the effects of a criminal action on either the individual victim beself or, in cases of murder where the victim cannot make a victim impact statement, on bes relatives and friends.

For example, in one case the victim's family pleaded for ‘mercy’ for the drunk driver. This is laudable from one point of view. However, on another level this is irrelevant. The system should protect the citizens, and leniency because of some ‘Christian’ sentiments isn't necessarily in the best interests of the citizens of Ireland. Sentencing should be fair and impersonal, and for the benefit of all citizens.

Justice should be for all. Every citizen should get the same protection as every other citizen. The punishment for murder should be severe enough to help protect ALL citizens, not just those who are married, or who have lots of friends etc. Murder takes away the life of an individual and in a democracy, a true democracy, all citizens are equal and all murder victims deserve equal value.

Likewise, the effect of rape may vary considerably between different victims but each victim, and every other citizen, deserve FULL protection, no matter what, thus demanding a harsh sentence for ANY and ALL rapists, and not just ones who may have a particular negative effect on the victim.

Victim impact statements should be important - collectively, in altering the general understanding of how devastating those crimes are, and possibly effecting the sentencing for those types of crimes, but should not reinforce the notion that justice is personal or individual, or at the whim of a judge, depending on the level of supplication by the victim peasants.

Personal Sentencing

There may be ‘The Law Of The Land’ which every judge should adhere to, but because of the insistence that the judiciary be independent of the politicians (which is correct), together with the fact that there is no system of questioning or examining the decisions of these judges, their rulings and the level of sentences is like that of the feudal lord - not open to investigation by anyone.

Everybody had personal likes and dislikes, opinions, empathy, leanings, personal levels of understanding and forgiveness. This makes us individual. This makes us human. The problem is that some humans are put into a position of authority where no one can question their judgments. From a situation of being an individual with personal attributes and opinions a select few are elevated to positions where these opinions suddenly become authority.

Because of the nature of authority and hierarchy being unchallengeable from below a collective human trait rears its ugly head and leaves rational thinking far behind.

What human beings do, is that rather than accepting that the POSITIONS of authority of these individuals are being elevated accompanied with the understanding that the humans involved as just as stupid as the ‘rest of us’, these individuals themselves are miraculously elevated to the point where collectively the irrational accepted attitude is that they themselves are somehow transformed from being merely human to the point where they are not swayed by mere human emotions - they are elevated to the higher levels of un-human god-like wisdom. This helps us to accept a totally irrational situation where ordinary stupid humans are given authority beyond that which any human being should be allowed to have - especially in a democracy.

That is why most rulers of the past were seen as super-human - gods - divine right of kings etc. This is human nature - at its most peasantly pathetic.

Yet, it is understood by all that different judges give different levels of sentencing. Ultimately it is a personal whim. Even when the Government is trying to take harsher measures against criminals, drug importers for example, often the judges will ignore the wishes of the Government, AND THE CITIZENS, and give lenient sentences. They are determined to remain the thoroughly autocratic feudal elite. (By the way - you would do the same if you could!)

It has often been reported in the papers, a certain judge stating that from that point on be would give harsher sentences for a particular type of crime. Be had decided this on bes own initiative - totally personally, and that was what was going to happen in the future in bes court. In this democracy be has that right. It is how the system works. The law becomes the judge's personal law.

The problem with this type of judicial and justice system is that it doesn't take into consideration the wishes and fears of the citizens for, to a certain extent, one could say the sentencing depends on the mood of the judge at the time. The citizens may feel that other crimes are so threatening to the wellbeing of the citizens themselves that they wish these crimes to be dealt with more harshly, yet they have to just shut up and accept the judgments handed down by the elite from above - our betters.

Often very lenient sentences have been given for specific crimes, often child sexual abuse, and the only conclusion one can come to is a great understanding and empathy by the judges involved regarding the perpetrators, for allowances are made, and there is little understanding or consideration for the victims and the citizens. There is very little the prosecution service can to. There is NOTHING the citizens can do.

The plain fact is that judges make PERSONAL judgments and give out PERSONAL sentences, in this oh-so-democratic Nation.

Also, based on the understanding that judges make personal decisions, that is why most so-called democratic systems allow the Government to appoint members to the Supreme Court. In the case of the United States it is the President who makes these choices for the Supreme Court. These choices are very important because they decide what type of verdicts these judges will make, based on the personalities and politics of the judges.

This publicly acknowledges that fact that judges are biased in their opinion and that they are not the objective and impersonal decisions as the propaganda pretends them to be. The talk of impersonal judges is a myth. In reality the sentence a criminal receives depends on which judge is handing out that sentence.

The judicial system should not continue to be a lottery - a lottery of how much, or how little, any particular judge will take into consideration the protection of the citizens. The area in which a crime was committed, the personality of the individual judge, the effect on the victim - all should have no bearing on the sentence given to a criminal who is found guilty.

A justice system totally controlled and run by a feudal elite is not a justice system but a continuation of the feudal past where the citizens are expected to passively accept what is thrown at them, to hope for the best - the feudal largess, and to keep paying.

Technicality

Definition: A petty formal point arising from a strict interpretation of rules, etc. eg the case was dismissed on a technicality.

I have already mentioned the legal and justice system is a game to those running it. They are in charge and they make the rules and play the game, while being paid, generously paid, very generously paid, extremely generously paid - by the citizens.

Example: Judge Brian Curtin, Ireland (2002)

Brian Curtin was appointed to the circuit court in November 2001. He heard cases on the South Western Circuit, encompassing his home county of Kerry.

In May 2002, the Gardaí (Irish police force) launched Operation Amethyst which was a major investigation based on details received from Interpol in August 2001 of Irish credit card transactions made in 1999 to a child-pornography website in Texas. The operation led to numerous arrests and convictions.

One of the credit card details pointed to Judge Brian Curtin. Detectives executed a search warrant on Curtin's private residence, seized his computer and reported finding 273 child pornographic images on the hard disk.

Judge Curtin was charged in January 2003. Following delays due to the judge's ‘ill-health’, the trial took place in April 2004. At the trial, Curtin claimed that the search was illegal because it had taken place outside the limit of the 7-day warrant. The Gardaí claimed that the delay was due to Curtin's extended absence from his home and that when it took place at 2:20pm on 27 May 2002, it was still within the 7-day limit.

The trial judge ruled that the search was illegal. As a result the computer evidence found could not be used. Without that evidence Curtin was found not guilty, the judge declaring that the case was "crystal clear".

Judge Curtin refused to stand down and intended to remain in his position as a judge. After much furore in the press and the media - it was a difficult situation because of the very important and necessary division between the executive (Government) and the judiciary - the Minister for Justice decided to try and impeach Judge Brian Curtin.

This was an unprecedented move in Irish judicial history. In the Irish Constitution a judge could be removed by impeachment, but had never been used. The Dáil instead set up a joint Oireachtas select committee to examine the evidence. This inquiry was challenged by Judge Curtin in the courts but was unsuccessful as ruled by the Supreme Court in 2006.

In November 2006, Judge Curtin resigned from the judiciary on ‘health grounds’, ending the investigation. This occurred days before he was to give evidence in private to the committee, and days after he had completed five years on the bench, the minimum sufficient to qualify for a pension.

~~~~~

This fully reveals the present objective of the justice system in Ireland. The overriding intent of the legal system is to play a game by the rules set down by those in the legal system. Justice for victims, fairness for society, protection of the citizen, punishment of the guilty, safety of the victims - all these things are meaningless. The game, AND THEIR CONTROL OF IT, is the whole point of it all.

The example above, Brian Curtin, clearly demonstrates that whether a person is guilty or not is of no relevance or interest whatsoever to those taking part in the game - the judiciary and the members of the legal profession.

To say the case was dismissed on a technicality is to say that although this person may be utterly guilty of a crime, nevertheless, the breaking of some little rule, which in itself did not corrupt or damage the evidence in any way, becomes the deciding factor in allowing the accused to be totally free and beyond prosecution (using any of that inadmissible evidence).

The guilt, or not, of the accused becomes utterly irrelevant merely because of this little break in the rule.

The fact that the search was carried out a few hours after the search warrent was ‘out of date’ did not, in itself change the nature of the evidence at all. The question of whether Judge Brian Curtin was guilty or not was, factually, not altered in the slightest by the late gathering of evidence - even if the judge had paid for and downloaded the child pornography AFTER the deadline had been past.

But playing games and arguing whether a day is a twenty-four hour period from a set point of time, or whether it is denoted by the change in day name, and making this insignificant detail the cause of an accused being set free unconditionally and nullifying evidence which may have found the accused guilty, is displaying the usual contempt which the feudal elite view the legal system.

When all is said and done whether an individual who may be a threat to society is tried or not, and whether they are guilty or not, and whether they are sentenced or not, is of very little interest to the judiciary. The consequences fall on the citizens. The judiciary and those involved in the legal system win, win, win - they CANNOT, they NEVER, lose.

To sum up the example of the Judge Brian Curtin farce one could just say this: the ONLY people to lose out over this is the citizens. It is always the citizens. Time, after time, after time.

Balancing Act - Prevention Of Crime vs Personal Rights

I would prefer not to include these few paragraphs but realise that this section may be ‘defended’ by the legal profession, so I reluctantly include them.

More often than not there may be conflicting rights contending for priority in these questions of evidence, admissibility and constitutionality. In many instances there cannot, or should not, be hard and fast rules, for the political, legal, and Constitutional systems are in place for a purpose - for the benefiit of human beings - of the citizens.

So, in effect, the question of whether the evidence on Judge Curtin's computer should have been admissible, depends on not one consideration, but two.

Firstly, in the Constitution, the person's home is protected from illegal intrusion - this protects each and every citizen. Nevertheless search warrants are issued in certain circumstances so it is understood that there are situations where this rule can be over-ridden - for the benefit of the citizens collectively.

A search warrant had been issued based on sufficient ‘evidence’. Nevertheless, based on this particular consideration of the active period of that warrant, because Judge Curtin's computer was seized when the search warrant had run out, any evidence was inadmissible. If this decision was taken on its own merit alone, where no other consideration needed to be taken into account, one may possibly reluctantly agree with it.

Nevertheless, there is another aspect to the Constitution, the protection of all individuals from personal physical and sexual attack (perhaps Article 40.3.2), which also must be taken into consideration. Child pornography automatically includes child rape, possibly child torture and possibly child en-slavery. Although one may not be able to prove that any of the children in the pornographic images downloaded were in fact living in Ireland, one may not assume that they weren't.

Thus, there are two aspects to this question of admissibility which need to be balanced and evaluated one against the other. There is the question of the seizing of the evidence a few hours after the warrant ran out on the one hand, and there is the question of protecting children from attack and rape on the other. What should have decided the case is the question of which of these rights and protections of the individual should take priority - as regards the protection and wellbeing of the Irish citizens.

The judiciary of Ireland considered that the lateness, by a few hours, of the search should be given priority over the protection of children from abuse.

I know what my un-'learned' opinion would be.

Legal Representation

This is a quote regarding advice from a solicitor to an individual, living in Britain, who was going to be prosecuted for being over the limit of alcohol in the blood while driving.

You are likely to be sentenced to a ban of 23 - 28 months from the reading that you have outlined. This presupposes that you intend to plead guilty to the offence with which you are charged. A Community Penalty is also likely to be imposed. However, if the offence is more serious in the Court's eyes they would be permitted to consider a custodial sentence.

The Court can deviate from this suggestion depending on how they view the case as a whole. Therefore it ultimately depends on how your case is presented to the Court. This is where having a Solicitor can minimise the damage to your driving licence and achieve a shorter ban.

Drink Driving law is a highly specialised area of law. As such, you are best to seek the services of an expert motoring lawyer in order to maximise your prospects of success.

In other words a person has a better chance of a lenient or no sentence if be is represented by a better qualified, or more experienced lawyer. In other words, as we all as aware, presentation is as important as the facts of the case, if not more so. This is very much like the political system - presentation is more important than the actual reality of the facts.

The legal elite monopoly have designed the system with the rules and procedures they wish to have, and which suit them, and the more money you pay for these experts the better quality justice you will receive.

If you want justice - you will need to pay for it!

Examples Of Injustice - NOT Only In Ireland

These are a few items I came across. It shows that this justice system farce is not only confined to Ireland. There aren't too many, just those I happened to see on the news or a tv documentary.

News from Britain:

Ten years ago the man was convicted of robbery and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment - yet within a ten year period he was out committing another crime.

Belgium (December 2011)

Nordine Amrani's shooting spree, which targeted passers-by near the city's court house, was unleashed as hundreds of teenagers emerged from end-of-year exams and festive market-goers converged on the popular area. He hurled three grenades into the crowd and killed three people including a baby and injuring scores in an attack in a crowded Belgian square on Tuesday.

Released on parole just over a year ago less than halfway through a sentence for firearms and drugs offences, Amrani had been summoned by police in the morning but never showed up. A search of Nordine Amrani's home led to the discovery of the body of a 45 year old woman. Amrani has had around 20 brushes with the law, it has emerged.

British Justice

In one instance an eminent retired judge, Lord Denning, gave an opinion regarding a suspected case of the wrongful imprisonment and miscarriage of justice regarding the Birmingham Six (6 innocent Irish men accused of planting an IRA bomb and falsely found guilty in a British court) and his opinion was that those who were possibly innocent should not be re-tried in case it made the legal, judicial, and justice system look as if it had made a mistake and that the police force had lied in court.

As far as he was concerned whether there was justice or not, or whether these men were innocent or not, was of no consequence, consideration or importance - it was of no concern as regards the legal and judicial profession. These legal systems were to be protected at all costs - even if it meant innocent people remaining in prison for crimes they did not commit.

January 2012:

A man has been jailed for 20 years in Britain for trying to kill his girlfriend by burying her alive. His 18 year old friend who was found guilty of helping kidnap the woman but cleared of attempted murder by a jury was sentenced to four and a half years. Both men were told they would serve half their sentences before being released on licence.

An Attempt To Get Information On Previous Convictions

I had intended to take an example of one or two of the criminals above (in the Irish section) with many previous convictions and show the extent of damage and danger to the citizens on account of having a dysfunctional justice system. I contacted the Department of Justice on a few occasions and you can read what happened:

I sent a few emails and finally got a reply back. This is my last email to them and their reply:

Subj: information regarding previous convictions
From: Lou Gogan
To: foiAAATTTjustice.ie (freedom of information justice department)
Date: 21 Dec 2011

I am seeking information on the previous convictions for the individuals listed below. The purpose of this information is to document the justice system in Ireland.

1. Can you provide the information?
- if not can you suggest where I can find the information?
2. Do I need to put the data request in writing?

Information required on the following individuals:

[ Here I listed four criminals ]

Thank you.

Regards

Lou Gogan
Saula, Achill, Co Mayo, Ireland.

Date: 21 Dec 2011

Dear Mr Gogan,

In relation to your below request. The information you are seeking would not be available under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act as it would be information personal to someone other than you the requester. Section 28 of the Act states that:

Under Section 28(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a head shall refuse to grant a request under Section 7 if, in the opinion of the head, access to the record concerned would involve the disclosure of personal information (including personal information relating to a deceased individual).

I regret that I cannot assist you further in this matter.

Thank you for your query.

Xxxxx Xxxxx
FOI Unit
Department of Justice and Equality
51 St Stephen's Green
Dublin 2

So, in Ireland in 2012, it seems as if the 37, 41, 50 and 67 previous convictions of the four specified individuals are considered to be personal information ie PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. If I didn't understand just how rotten the democratic system is in Ireland 2012 I would find this a very strange situation. These four individuals, between them, had 195 previous convictions and I, Lou Gogan, a citizen of Ireland, had no right to know what these crimes were, including the convictions and results of the court cases.

The fact is, this attitude didn't really surprise me at all. As I have already stated, the authorities do not want the citizens of this so-called democracy to know what is going on. On the one hand they prevent the citizens from accessing information and on the other they employ ‘directors of communications’, PR gurus, and ‘spin doctors’ (all paid for by the citizens) to lie to the citizens to make them think they are living in a democracy where the protection of the citizens is important, whereas the reality is: it isn't - not in the slightest!

THEY control what they want you to know and they certainly do not want you to know just how obscene, how dysfunctional, how outrageous, how rotten, how deceitful this pretence of a justice system is. They do not want you to know the psychopathic, vicious, brutal, savage, mindless, violent individuals who are allowed to freely walk the streets of Ireland mingling with the unsuspecting citizens, unaware just how irrelevant their protection is seen by the feudal elite.

They do not want you to know that it is all a con, a lie, a perverse sick facade of a justice system. And the purpose? A dumb ignorant citizen is far easier to keep servile than one who is ‘up in arms about the injustice of the system’ and that is what they intend to continue doing - keeping you in the dark - controlling what you think of the system.

They don't want you to know these things - and they succeed.

Result Of Present Justice System On The Citizens Of Ireland

There are many indirect negative effects to this catastrophe of a justice system, apart from the obvious lack of protection for the citizens, most of which remain hidden to the citizen.

As an example I will take just one criminal from the list above (example 11), Mr H1, who is 29 years of age and has 64 previous convictions - I must repeat that - who is 29 years of age and has 64 previous convictions - and who was on temporary release from prison when he attacked the victim and killed him - and consequently received a trifling, insignificant and insulting ‘pretend’ five year sentence - insulting to the life of an innocent victim. Though it is important to understand that since this is a feudal system the life of a mere lowly citizen serf is not considered as being of any value whatsoever - in this particular example he can easily be replaced.

Unfortunately I don't have a list of the offences for those previous 64 convictions because they are a State secret, but I will carry on despite that fact.

Firstly, there is the question of how many people have been effected by the activities of this one criminal. How many people have been injured? How many people have been robbed? How many people have been afraid because of this one criminal? How many lives have been affected negatively by this one criminal? At least one individual is dead because of him - murdered.

Then there is the question of how much this one criminal with his 65 convictions has cost the citizens of this Nation financially. How much extra safety features need to be bought and installed to keep criminals like him from having a chance to threaten and injure the lives of the people? This effects not only his victims but all of society. We all need extra security, and alarms, and extra locks, and extra protection. Then there are the areas in towns at night which may be out of bounds to careful citizens because of violent criminals like him.

Then there is the added cost through the insurance companies because the activities of this one criminal is allowed to go unrestrained and for the most part unpunished. Every time a crime is committed in Ireland insurance costs increase, and who pays for this increase? - the peasant citizens, of course. They are the only ones who ever have to pay.

Then there is the question of how many Gardai hours have been allocated to all the 65 criminal activities of this one criminal. How many hours have been allocated to this one criminal by the solicitors, lawyers, judges, courts - all of which don't come cheap (though the quality of some of their services certainly are).

Overall, this one individual criminal with his 65 convictions will have cost the citizens of this Nation very, very, very, very, VERY dearly. And to top it all - one citizen is dead.

To make matters worse, the only thing the citizens will get from all this cost is a dangerous criminal ‘at large’ and out to do his worst among the citizens of this Nation. Or, to put it another way, all the citizens will get, apart from NOTHING, is NO safety and NO protection, and a hefty bill for this atrocity and disgrace of a justice system.

Summary

The fact is that the judicial and justice systems in so-called democratic countries directly stems from and continues the feudal system whereby a few people in authority - our betters, the elite - are unquestionably in charge over the citizens. Their rule and their decisions are not open to any challange by the citizens.

The ‘law’ - the legal system, is in place to keep the citizens under control. It is not in existence to protect them. The few examples above prove that. The only true threat to the feudal elite and the feudal system is if the citizens who provide the wealth decide not to partake in this pretence of a democracy, or perhaps even just demand value for their money.

The worst depressing aspect regarding most of the above crimes, and most damning of the justice system, is the fact that they were preventable. They only occurred because the system allowed psychopaths to roam freely in Ireland. Most of these crimes NEED NEVER HAVE HAPPENED - if we had in place a useful and productive justice system in Ireland.

Some of the people, the victims, mentioned above were murdered, they were killed, they are DEAD, as a direct result of the dysfunctional justice system in Ireland. It is truly an abomination of everestal proportions. It is truly sickening. It personally angers me to an extent which is immeasurable.

The only time the feudal elite emerge from their comfortable cocooned lives and acknowledge the fact that the citizens are not happy in their passive unprotected servitude is when there is an outcry from the public about some crime or other. Then the feudal elite decide to come down heavy on the criminal 3% and make it appear that the Government is ‘tough on crime‘. Rather . . . . it is big on show!

The true fact is, the Government is tough on anything which will upset their apple-cart, and if they have to pretend to become tough on crime, then they will go through the motions, but underlying all this is the continued motivation of ensuring the passive submissiveness of the citizen peasants.

That is why the farcical system is in place where a judge will condemn a criminal and sentence that individual to some years in prison knowing full well that because of the AUTOMATIC reduction of the sentence for good behaviour, together with the fact of overcrowding in the prisons which again will AUTOMATICALLY mean that the sentence is further reduced to a point where most criminals serve a much smaller period than that which the judge loudly proclaimed. All this play-acting is done so all the dumb gullible citizens believe and are comforted by all those lies.

This charade of justice, where in effect every judge in the land lies every day they are in court, continues on day after day, week after week, year after year, killing after killing, stabbing after stabbing, rape after rape, attack after attack, robbery after robbery. The judiciary and the legal profession reap the generous rewards.

The bottom line is this. The citizen serfs and peasants are of no value, other than as the wealth generators. Whether the citizens are attacked or not, or protected or not, or whether they feel safe or not, is of no consequence, consideration or importance whatsoever - to the feudal elite.

Just like the political system itself, the justice system is NOT being run for the benefit of the citizens. Plain and simple.

This is a sad depiction of a dysfunctional justice system within the Irish system of democracy in 2012.

Lou Gogan

31st January 2012

Copyright © 2010-2012 Lou Gogan: All rights reserved. All moral rights reserved.
Content in the POLITICS section may be reproduced online, in full (if short articles) or excerpted (for Chapters and Documents in the Feudal Democracy, and the Democracy 1.0 Sections) provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to (please notify me of context, target online location etc, if possible). Please contact me regarding permission for reproducing full Chapters and Documents, or for reprint permission in other media. Please do not display my email address in readable plain text (obfuscate it by copying the code - NOT the link).

Coding and design by Lou Gogan. Any problems with the pages (font, colours, typos, etc)? Please let me know.

Lou Gogan, Saula, Achill, Co Mayo, Ireland.

Health - Dystopiem metabolic disorder explains ME/CFS, Long Covid, some Alzheimer's disease and more.
Politics and Democracy : investigating REAL democracy and revealing our present Fake Democracy
Achill Island, Co Mayo : art, photos, turf cutting
Computers (linux and more) :: desktop photos, some linux/bash scripts
Gaeilge (the Irish language) : a few phrases and hints for those who want to hear Irish being spoken
Art : my efforts at painting and sketching
Worst Guitar Chord (ouch!) : some of the worst guitar chords in the universe and beyond
Archos mp3 Player (sort tracks) : how to sort tracks on the Archos mp3 player
Hints and Tips : keep salt/sugar dry, store boiled sweets, easy cook pasta and much much more
My Music Recordings : My CD 'On A Saturday' 2005. Listen FREE to full songs.
Philosophy and Thoughts On Life : The UT Instinct and philosophical articles.

Go To Top of Page