The Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission
What the Garda Siochana Ombudsman;s office advices that a member of the public do: If you wish to make a complaint, you may do so at any garda station, write to us at 150, Abbey Street Upper, Dublin 1 or make your complaint on-line through the complaints page of this site.
Ok so you the reader might think what is the problem with the Garda Siochana Ombudsman's commission advertisement above? Just look at what it states, If you wish to make a complaint, you may do so at any garda station,
1. Does it not occur to anyone that the general public are once again been sent back to the Garda force?
2. Wasn't the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission supposedly set up and tasked with been and independent body?
3. Does this mean the general public are still expected to accept that Garda members will investigate complaints about themselves?
4. Does all of this mean the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission is not independent after all for the ordinary public?
5. Why is there such a rule as the six month rule? One has to make a complaint within six months of and offence and this rule will only be overlooked in exceptional circumstances, what are these exceptional circumstances exactly?
6. What if a member of the general public was held up with false promises from the Garda force that they would investigate and then didn't?
7. What if the general public first made a complaint about a Garda Member to another Garda member only to have the same complaint held up and then falling outside the six month rule?
8. Why do the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission only follow the rules as set out in the Garda Siochana Acts and not have their own legislation to override the Garda Siochana Acts at all times?
9. In the case of the six month rule, should a crime committed not be seen as a crime committed and governed by the criminal legislation enacted as law and not governed under the Garda Siochana Acts? Is the general public to believe that the Garda Siochana Acts should be seen as a form of Cannon Law?
10. How much information is discoverable by an applicant who has had their case complaint dismissed by the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission?
11. Who should the General Public complain to about the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission's conduct?
12. Should the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission be seen as a blunder giving that they report to be independent but forward the general public back to the source of their complaint for investigation?
13. Would complaints of attempted murder not investigated by Garda members constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
14. Would complaints relating to leaks of information by Garda members constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
15. Would complaints of criminal conspiracy by Garda members constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
16. Would complaints ignored by the Garda Commissioner constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
Ok so you the reader might think what is the problem with the Garda Siochana Ombudsman's commission advertisement above? Just look at what it states, If you wish to make a complaint, you may do so at any garda station,
1. Does it not occur to anyone that the general public are once again been sent back to the Garda force?
2. Wasn't the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission supposedly set up and tasked with been and independent body?
3. Does this mean the general public are still expected to accept that Garda members will investigate complaints about themselves?
4. Does all of this mean the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission is not independent after all for the ordinary public?
5. Why is there such a rule as the six month rule? One has to make a complaint within six months of and offence and this rule will only be overlooked in exceptional circumstances, what are these exceptional circumstances exactly?
6. What if a member of the general public was held up with false promises from the Garda force that they would investigate and then didn't?
7. What if the general public first made a complaint about a Garda Member to another Garda member only to have the same complaint held up and then falling outside the six month rule?
8. Why do the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission only follow the rules as set out in the Garda Siochana Acts and not have their own legislation to override the Garda Siochana Acts at all times?
9. In the case of the six month rule, should a crime committed not be seen as a crime committed and governed by the criminal legislation enacted as law and not governed under the Garda Siochana Acts? Is the general public to believe that the Garda Siochana Acts should be seen as a form of Cannon Law?
10. How much information is discoverable by an applicant who has had their case complaint dismissed by the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission?
11. Who should the General Public complain to about the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission's conduct?
12. Should the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission be seen as a blunder giving that they report to be independent but forward the general public back to the source of their complaint for investigation?
13. Would complaints of attempted murder not investigated by Garda members constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
14. Would complaints relating to leaks of information by Garda members constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
15. Would complaints of criminal conspiracy by Garda members constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
16. Would complaints ignored by the Garda Commissioner constitute the six month rule been reconsidered?
Information contained in the Irish Daily Mail news article today the 31st May 2010 relating to the Garda Siochana Ombudsman? There was also a highlighted program on TV3 this morning with John O'Keeffe, Law lecturer.
As stated in the Irish Daily mail the GSOC (Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission) office had apparently processed 4,000 complaints, but yet there was only one officer convicted and 146 members disciplined, all seems very cosy really doesn't it, just like the bankers had a cosy relationship with the Banksters and we all know what happened there.
Here is the part that doesn't make sense however, in the irish Daily mail article it stated that 15 percent of allegations were for assault.
1 Garda Member convicted of assault and 146 disciplined, would total 147 would it not? and 15 percent of 4,000 would total 600 would it not? Is anyone else out there confused by these figures then? the figure 147 is 453 shy of 600 and that is only the assualt figure, so what about the rest of the figures. It seems all our government departments have problems with figures!!.
Has anybody made a complaint to the so called independent Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission, only to be told to go back to the Garda Force with their complaint? This is most contradictory and in no way shape or form independent. Such advice only subjects the general public to more investigations by investigators who are investigating themselves. Need the general public be reminded of the Morris Tribunal. No complaint presented or complainant presenting to the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission should be sent back to the source of the complaint, commen sense would ask how could this be an independent source of resolution.
VOTS intend to highlight all issues concerning the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission's criteria and the non-independent role it plays.
In the future Victims of the State plan to bring all parties whom have had issues with the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission together. This gathering will discuss all actions taken by the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission, where, either complaints were deemed as inadmissable or Complainants were sent back to the source of complaint.
If non-independent or unfair ajudication practices are found to be the case, a civil class action against the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission will then be persued to highlight the non-independant practices. Should such a civil class action proceed in the future, VOTS will also be seeking that criminal prosecutions for complicity in such matters, be attached to this civil class action against those who adjudicated on same.
A CRIMINAL ACT, TO COVER UP ANOTHER CRIMINAL ACT, IS A WORSE CRIMINAL ACT
FEAR WILL HOLD YOU PRISIONER - HOPE WILL SET YOU FREE
As stated in the Irish Daily mail the GSOC (Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission) office had apparently processed 4,000 complaints, but yet there was only one officer convicted and 146 members disciplined, all seems very cosy really doesn't it, just like the bankers had a cosy relationship with the Banksters and we all know what happened there.
Here is the part that doesn't make sense however, in the irish Daily mail article it stated that 15 percent of allegations were for assault.
1 Garda Member convicted of assault and 146 disciplined, would total 147 would it not? and 15 percent of 4,000 would total 600 would it not? Is anyone else out there confused by these figures then? the figure 147 is 453 shy of 600 and that is only the assualt figure, so what about the rest of the figures. It seems all our government departments have problems with figures!!.
Has anybody made a complaint to the so called independent Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission, only to be told to go back to the Garda Force with their complaint? This is most contradictory and in no way shape or form independent. Such advice only subjects the general public to more investigations by investigators who are investigating themselves. Need the general public be reminded of the Morris Tribunal. No complaint presented or complainant presenting to the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission should be sent back to the source of the complaint, commen sense would ask how could this be an independent source of resolution.
VOTS intend to highlight all issues concerning the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission's criteria and the non-independent role it plays.
In the future Victims of the State plan to bring all parties whom have had issues with the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission together. This gathering will discuss all actions taken by the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission, where, either complaints were deemed as inadmissable or Complainants were sent back to the source of complaint.
If non-independent or unfair ajudication practices are found to be the case, a civil class action against the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission will then be persued to highlight the non-independant practices. Should such a civil class action proceed in the future, VOTS will also be seeking that criminal prosecutions for complicity in such matters, be attached to this civil class action against those who adjudicated on same.
A CRIMINAL ACT, TO COVER UP ANOTHER CRIMINAL ACT, IS A WORSE CRIMINAL ACT
FEAR WILL HOLD YOU PRISIONER - HOPE WILL SET YOU FREE
