The official NATIONAL court report thread

[Matlock]

It really is beyond your comprehension that I could know or be friendly with members of the Gardai isn't it.

No, but the stories you tell that you heard from him are bullshit.

If a garda sat in Court with direct knowledge that an application for an interpreter was bogus and decided that he wouldn't say anything then he is colluding in a fraud.

But this never happened, so it doesn't matter.

The only one bullshitting on whether or not I know Gardai and am friendly with some of them is by you. Hell, I even know a couple of people who've been prominent members of the Legal profession in this city, one of whom I meet on occasion for a chat and a coffee. But, don't let the facts interfere with your narrative eh

 

[Clairecarebear]

I do know what those involved in even non contentious family law cases are paying, from those that come to me, and the legal aid fees pale in comparison to them, so it definitely isn't the most lucrative of income streams, relatively speaking. That is something which definitely needs to be overhauled.

 

[Yermon]

No, but the stories you tell that you heard from him are bullshit.

Just because it doesn't suit you to believe them doesn't make them bullshit.

If a garda sat in Court with direct knowledge that an application for an interpreter was bogus and decided that he wouldn't say anything then he is colluding in a fraud.

But this never happened, so it doesn't matter.

Tell us, if a barrister sat in Court with direct knowledge that an application for an interpreter was bogus and decided that he wouldn't say anything then is he colluding in a fraud? And do you think he should be struck off for doing so?

Next you'll tell us that never happened either. Gowan ya beaut!

 

[Matlock]

Just because it doesn't suit you to believe them doesn't make them bullshit.

It doesn't matter to me either way. If it is true, then your friend is really bad at his job. I very much doubt its true though, or that he would have admitted it if it was.

Tell us, if a barrister sat in Court with direct knowledge that an application for an interpreter was bogus and decided that he wouldn't say anything then is he colluding in a fraud? And do you think he should be struck off for doing so?

He would certainly be colluding in a fraud. It would be up to the bar council to decide if it was a strike off offence.

Next you'll tell us that never happened either. Gowan ya beaut!

When did that happen?

 

[Yermon]

It doesn't matter to me either way. If it is true, then your friend is really bad at his job. I very much doubt its true though, or that he would have admitted it if it was.

Course it doesn't - that's why you continue with your narrative that I'm bullshitting when I'm not

He would certainly be colluding in a fraud. It would be up to the bar council to decide if it was a strike off offence.

When did that happen?

If you honestly think that no barrister has ever pleaded for his client to get an interpreter in court for his client unless his client cannot speak and understand english then you're more naive than I thought.
I wonder do many solicitor's offices around town have interpreters on retainer for when the next poor potential-client without english rocks up with a case



The system is being abused. The Minister for Justice, himself a barrister admits that there's abuse in the system, but because a friend of MINE pointed out an abuse in the system that he encountered you don't seem to want to accept it.

That's up to you, but I think most sensible people reading this thread will accept it happens.

 

[Turf cutter]

A right legal gouging, he said , she said , fraud collusion slinging ruck ongoing here.

Live.

 

[Yermon]

A right legal gouging, he said , she said , fraud collusion slinging ruck ongoing here.

Live.

Shut it you - or I'll get my brief to send you a letter

 

[Matlock]

Course it doesn't - that's why you continue with your narrative that I'm bullshitting when I'm not

The story you tell paints your garda friend in a very very poor light.

If you honestly think that no barrister has ever pleaded for his client to get an interpreter in court for his client unless his client cannot speak and understand english then you're more naive than I thought.

Why would they do that? You don't get paid extra for acting for a client who requires an interpreter, and your onus is heavier. There is literally no reason why they would do that.

I wonder do many solicitor's offices around town have interpreters on retainer for when the next poor potential-client without english rocks up with a case

None. Again, what would be the point of paying a retainer? If you need one, you just ring a translation service and arrange for them to send out an interpreter. It happens in loads of areas of business.

The system is being abused. The Minister for Justice, himself a barrister admits that there's abuse in the system, but because a friend of MINE pointed out an abuse in the system that he encountered you don't seem to want to accept it.

Your friend didn't point out abuse in the system. As you tell it, your friend saw abuse of the system and decided to collude with it, in contravention of his duties as a guard.

That's up to you, but I think most sensible people reading this thread will accept it happens.

Most sensible people reading this thread have already read many many things that you have posted as fact that turned out to be bullshit.

 

[Yermon]

The story you tell paints your garda friend in a very very poor light.

Why would they do that? You don't get paid extra for acting for a client who requires an interpreter, and your onus is heavier. There is literally no reason why they would do that.

None. Again, what would be the point of paying a retainer? If you need one, you just ring a translation service and arrange for them to send out an interpreter. It happens in loads of areas of business.

Your friend didn't point out abuse in the system. As you tell it, your friend saw abuse of the system and decided to collude with it, in contravention of his duties as a guard.

Most sensible people reading this thread have already read many many things that you have posted as fact that turned out to be bullshit.

And they've also read quite an amount of opinions from you that you try to pretend are facts but are bullshit. We know, and you know it, it's just that you won't admit it.

Someone criticising the judicial system in Ireland? Quick, circle the wagons and try undermine the messenger It's a pretty transparent and oft repeated MO.

But now even the Minister for Justice is calling out some of the abuse in the legal system, where he has a lot more experience than you.

 

[Matlock]

And they've also read quite an amount of opinions from you that you try to pretend are facts but are bullshit. We know, and you know it, it's just that you won't admit it.

Someone criticising the judicial system in Ireland? Quick, circle the wagons and try undermine the messenger It's a pretty transparent and oft repeated MO.

But now even the Minister for Justice is calling out some of the abuse in the legal system, where he has a lot more experience than you.

Once again, I have said many many times that our current legal aid system is not fit for purposes and it should be scrapped and replaced with a public defender system. You keep ignoring this, because you want to pretend that I am defending the current system but I am not.

You seem to also have ignored my questioning as to why a barrister would make a false claim for an interpreter, or why a firm would have an interpreter on retainer?