Go Back   Peoples Republic Of Cork Discussion Forums > The Langers Forum
User Name
Password
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 13-10-2017, 04:33 PM
Meridian Meridian is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: A better place
Posts: 6,554
Default And yet again the Irish Legal system is screwing us

It seems that the poor prisoners who had to slop out are in line for compensation.

What a fucking joke, Jesus Christ, these fucking scumbags should be told to go and fuck off, but no, the solicitors have obviously locked onto this.

Just goes to show the scum and pond life in the legal business.

But then as they say, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

High Court judge to decide 'substantial' costs in prisoner slopping out case
13/10/2017 - 16:08:59

By Ann O'Loughlin

A High Court judge will rule later on liability for what the State has agreed will be "substantial" costs, estimated at more than €1m, of a former prisoner's case over slopping out.

The State has yet to indicate if it will appeal Mr Justice Michael White's decision that slopping out breached former prisoner Gary Simpson's right to privacy and to dignity. 1,200 cases over slopping out are in the pipeline.

In his judgment last month, Mr Justice White rejected a key claim by Mr Simpson that slopping out also breached his right not to be subject to inhuman and degrading treatment.

The judge also refused to award damages for the breach of privacy rights after finding some of Mr Simpson’s evidence concerning his treatment was either untruthful or grossly exaggerated.

When the case returned before the judge today, he made a formal declaration, consequential on his judgment, that slopping out breached Mr Simpson's constitutional right to privacy and dignity.

Paul O'Higgins SC, for Mr Simpson, sought a declaration in those terms but Remy Farrell SC, for the State, argued a declaration of a breach of the right would adequately reflect the court's findings in the case.


The judge said he would make the declaration as sought by Mr O'Higgins.

He also directed the sides to provide submissions on costs issues by October 27th. After that, he will fix a hearing date to decide liability for what both sides agreed will be "substantial" costs of the case, which ran for more than 30 days.

Because Mr Justice White had stressed in his judgment his decision was made in the particular circumstances of Mr Simpson’s imprisonment over eight months in 2013 - being under protection, doubled up in a single cell and 23 hour lock-up – the judgment’s implications for other cases remains unclear.

Official figures for last July showed 415 prisoners were on a restricted regime, most of whom had sought protection at their own request. 305 of that number were locked up for at least 21 hours daily.

Legal sources believe a considerable number of the cases have a reasonable prospect of securing damages because of their particular circumstances.

Cases of prisoners without previous convictions who were subject to slopping out after being jailed for a “once-off” offence may get a sympathetic hearing, sources suggested. A case where a prisoner allegedly had a bucket of faeces dumped on his head but was unable to get access to a shower for 24 hours is among those being pursued.

Following the Simpson judgment, a number of law firms pursuing hundreds of slopping out cases urged the State to actively consider an individual case assessment scheme which could lead to redress for some prisoners.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 13-10-2017, 04:39 PM
Roxetten Roxetten is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,783
Default

It's a thundering disgrace imho.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 13-10-2017, 04:48 PM
Meridian Meridian is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: A better place
Posts: 6,554
Default

Prison is supposed to be about suffering.

What a fucking joke, it could only happen here.

It is about time that Irish prisons get subbed out and consideration should be given to sending repeat offenders to South America, to real prisons to serve their time.

I have a feeling that their reoffending will stop after a spell in one of them
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 13-10-2017, 04:50 PM
jakbhoy jakbhoy is offline
PROC Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,089
Default

Armitage Shanks & co solicitors.

No win, No fee, No shit.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 13-10-2017, 05:48 PM
Matlock Matlock is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 45,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meridian View Post
Prison is supposed to be about suffering.

What a fucking joke, it could only happen here.

It is about time that Irish prisons get subbed out and consideration should be given to sending repeat offenders to South America, to real prisons to serve their time.

I have a feeling that their reoffending will stop after a spell in one of them
No it isn't. It is meant to be about the deprivation of liberty.

Also, it couldn't "only happen here", there was a similar ruling in Scotland a few years ago.
__________________
Minister for Justice
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 13-10-2017, 05:58 PM
Donald Trump Donald Trump is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: The White House
Posts: 10,563
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meridian View Post
It seems that the poor prisoners who had to slop out are in line for compensation.

What a fucking joke, Jesus Christ, these fucking scumbags should be told to go and fuck off, but no, the solicitors have obviously locked onto this.

Just goes to show the scum and pond life in the legal business.

But then as they say, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

High Court judge to decide 'substantial' costs in prisoner slopping out case
13/10/2017 - 16:08:59

By Ann O'Loughlin

A High Court judge will rule later on liability for what the State has agreed will be "substantial" costs, estimated at more than €1m, of a former prisoner's case over slopping out.

The State has yet to indicate if it will appeal Mr Justice Michael White's decision that slopping out breached former prisoner Gary Simpson's right to privacy and to dignity. 1,200 cases over slopping out are in the pipeline.

In his judgment last month, Mr Justice White rejected a key claim by Mr Simpson that slopping out also breached his right not to be subject to inhuman and degrading treatment.

The judge also refused to award damages for the breach of privacy rights after finding some of Mr Simpson’s evidence concerning his treatment was either untruthful or grossly exaggerated.

When the case returned before the judge today, he made a formal declaration, consequential on his judgment, that slopping out breached Mr Simpson's constitutional right to privacy and dignity.

Paul O'Higgins SC, for Mr Simpson, sought a declaration in those terms but Remy Farrell SC, for the State, argued a declaration of a breach of the right would adequately reflect the court's findings in the case.


The judge said he would make the declaration as sought by Mr O'Higgins.

He also directed the sides to provide submissions on costs issues by October 27th. After that, he will fix a hearing date to decide liability for what both sides agreed will be "substantial" costs of the case, which ran for more than 30 days.

Because Mr Justice White had stressed in his judgment his decision was made in the particular circumstances of Mr Simpson’s imprisonment over eight months in 2013 - being under protection, doubled up in a single cell and 23 hour lock-up – the judgment’s implications for other cases remains unclear.

Official figures for last July showed 415 prisoners were on a restricted regime, most of whom had sought protection at their own request. 305 of that number were locked up for at least 21 hours daily.

Legal sources believe a considerable number of the cases have a reasonable prospect of securing damages because of their particular circumstances.

Cases of prisoners without previous convictions who were subject to slopping out after being jailed for a “once-off” offence may get a sympathetic hearing, sources suggested. A case where a prisoner allegedly had a bucket of faeces dumped on his head but was unable to get access to a shower for 24 hours is among those being pursued.

Following the Simpson judgment, a number of law firms pursuing hundreds of slopping out cases urged the State to actively consider an individual case assessment scheme which could lead to redress for some prisoners.
When you take away someone's liberty, I think it's fair to say that the responsibility for looking after that person is now yours. The state failed, and must now pay.

Seems fair to me.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 13-10-2017, 06:38 PM
Smaug Smaug is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21,739
Talking

PC gone mad.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doolaly View Post
...aye, Smaug is fussy about the kind of jigsaw he makes....
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 13-10-2017, 06:39 PM
dennisfallen dennisfallen is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matlock View Post
No it isn't. It is meant to be about the deprivation of liberty.

Also, it couldn't "only happen here", there was a similar ruling in Scotland a few years ago.
Liberty, are you for real? What liberty does the ordinary law abiding citizen have? They roll out of bed at 6:30 am to go to a shitty job and sit for up to 8 hours in front of a screen.At the weekend they're too tired to go out an enjoy themselves because they're exhausted. To aff insult to injury their tax goes to the upkeep of lawbreakers and low life scum.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 13-10-2017, 06:41 PM
Smaug Smaug is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 21,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dennisfallen View Post
Liberty, are you for real? What liberty does the ordinary law abiding citizen have?
You have all the liberty in the world M8, just don't get caught is all.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doolaly View Post
...aye, Smaug is fussy about the kind of jigsaw he makes....
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 13-10-2017, 06:46 PM
Matlock Matlock is offline
Senior PROC Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 45,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dennisfallen View Post
Liberty, are you for real? What liberty does the ordinary law abiding citizen have? They roll out of bed at 6:30 am to go to a shitty job and sit for up to 8 hours in front of a screen.At the weekend they're too tired to go out an enjoy themselves because they're exhausted. To aff insult to injury their tax goes to the upkeep of lawbreakers and low life scum.
Not all ordinary law abiding citizens have shitty jobs or the inability to enjoy their weekends.

They do have liberty though, something prisoners do not have.
__________________
Minister for Justice
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump










All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All forum comments are the sole responsibility and property of forum users. PeoplesRepublicOfCork.com and its sponsors disclaim all liability for content posted by users of the forum. PeoplesRepublicOfCork.com and its sponsors do not necessarily share the views expressed in this forum. Use the report post system to have comments considered for edit or deletion. All users are IP logged. Website hosted by Hostrocket USA.