Frank Dunlop arrested

Oh yes - like a solicitor I knew near Dublin about 15 years ago who used his FF connection to get nominated (?) but there was a little matter of outstanding client claims and so on against him. No matter - a sheet of Law Society notepaper, a secretary who was in fear of him, a forged signature - and hey presto! all rise for Justice X, specialist in granting dodgy pub licences and quashing driving offences - allegedly. And if you think doctors close ranks - watch what our learrned friends do. Being a lawyer, or even wanting to be one, should immediately make one ineligible for public office. There are some honest, upstanding ones - both of the ones I can immediately recall are women as it happens - but there are quite a few rotten ones.

OK, maybe I’m being incredibly naive.

Surely there are some good people out there?

Come on wii4miinow! Five minutes’ research would clear up the numerous errors you’ve managed to cram into one paragraph.

  • He was approached by a member of the family
  • He was a supreme court justice at the time
  • His subsequent contact with the county registrar resulted in both his and another supreme court justice’s resignations.

Subsequently, he was nominated for a job in the European Investment Bank. Such was the scorn poured on FF from all directions (both locally and internationally) the former judge himself declined the nomination. So he never got that job.

Yes, that was an example of FF at its worst, but it seems the judge in question paid for his error of judgement.

Having a personal connection to the Frank Shortt case, I’d say the great majority of our judiciary are just more wee sleekit corrupt gombeen men, appointed to office because of their connections not their ability. The judiciary, in the main, is just another branch of the FF Welfare Programme for their cronies and supporters. Drooling morons, small-town gimps with delusions of adequacy, who will do what their political masters tell them to do. It’s the way the system in Ireland works, always has done.

That said, somehow a couple of brilliant judges, men and women of talent and dedication to the concept of true public service, manage to slip through the FF net. Catherine McGuinness, Peter Kelly and Adrian Hardiman spring to mind. Hardiman was truly awesome in the case overturning Frank Shortt’s conviction and declaring a miscarriage of justice, and McGuinness and Kelly have been tireless crusaders for social justice and the cause of the little guy against The Machine.

I’m right here!

Let me get back to the bit about “Five minutes” at the end.
Right now, see below, I’ll deal with my “numerous errors” as you claim that are within that paragraph…

I’ll allow you this one. It seems that he was not approached by a TD or Minister, or, at least my research thus far does not indicate this.

Did I say anything otherwise to this?
I said he was a judge. A judge of the supreme court nonetheless, but still a judge. His name for the matter of record being Mr. Hugh O’Flaherty
As I’ve continued reminding myself of that terrible scenario, I find that there was also another judge involved in the illicit affair, Mr. Cyril Kelly. It appears that he later became a High Court Judge.

It was much more than just the simplistic potrayal that you seem to suggest in your quick comment here.

As per the report of Chief Justice Liam Hamilton in regard the Philip Sheedy enquiry (Philip Sheedy was the driver involved in dangerous driving), In his conclusions, Mr Justice Hamilton said Mr Justice O’Flaherty’s approach to the Dublin Circuit Court Registrar, Michael Quinlan, about Sheedy was open to misinterpretation: “It was therefore damaging to the administration of justice,” he declared.
Here’s a link to the situaiton: … /ihead.htm

Furthermore, it appears that Judge Kelly was no angel either by all readings. How the appeal case was handled in court is literally beyond belief. The same link provides background. It was a whole lot more than just “contact with the country registrar”. It was literally damaging to the administration of justice and an abuse of priviledge.

Furthermore, in regard to your statement “resulted in both his and another supreme court justice’s resignations”.
Supreme Court Justice Mr. O’Flaherty stated in regard to the affair on national television on Friday, 16 April and doggedly proclaimed he had done nothing wrong, that he would fight his case and that he had no intention of resigning. Less than 24 hours later, Mr. O’Flaherty had resigned his position.
It appeared that Mr. O’Flaherty would not have resigned but for the outcome of a number of things, most especially that moves were underway to **impeach **him if he did not resign.
Here’s the link to that information:

Furthermore, those resignations, of all three officials, the supreme court justice, the high court justice and the registrar, all were supported by what I consider to be shameful golden pats on the backside with large payments to keep them happy for years.
Here’s the link to that information:

Admittedly he did not get the job. I agree to this error of my ways.
He did however get offerred the job and was ready to take up the position. In effect he had dipped his hand in the mud of FF with that acceptance. First make one error (the court case) then the other (accept a job for which he had limited experience and unproven ability). I accept an error in my description here.

Not by half. It was just another one of a litany of terribly bad outcomes of having FF in government, and looking after all of their boys in the courts (by this I mean they all had their pensions protected, rather than being sent to jail).

No, actually he didn’t pay, I and other tax-payers paid. He resigned on a pension payment that was very close to a full pension.

So in finishing, I admit to one mistake in full, and one partial mistake in decription. Overall the commentary that I’ve passed bears up under investigation.
Hardly numerous errors.
These doods should have certainly have lost their pensions. But not a chance of this in the cosey cartel of FF and the Legal Society of Ireland. All for one and one for all!
And I believe that I’ve certainly backed up my statements, by a lot more than the less than 5 minutes it too for you to make it seem like everthing in the legal system is Hunky Dory.
No more trolling for now thanks.
People in Ireland, including those in FF, know how the court system works.

Note to Cellopoint, most of those other judges, that I mentioned in my examples, also resigned on pensions closely if not equivalent to their full pensions. So yes they might not be judges, but they sure were paid like them.
Hardly an example of integrity to resign on your full pension now is it?
I’d say it speaks loudly of their implict corruptness through and through.
Put your money where your mouth is: resign on just the basic national state pension. Then I’d believe you.
The justice system here, in parts (as I’ve indicated), is a sham, as is so much of rest of this banana republic government. Numerous examples on the Pin…

It would seem you were more convinced than I by Frank’s performance in the witness box. He was less than convincing to put it mildly. I think he should be sentenced to live out his life in the areas of Lucan that he helped destroy.

Two is a number … :slight_smile: They were serious enough to be highlighted.

Well, now you have, yes! Your initial description was fairly woolly you must admit.

I never claimed everything was hunky dory in the legal system, I just think if you’re going to point out its flaws you should aim for a bit of accuracy.

I never accused you of trolling :slight_smile: Just pointing out that you’re hurting your own argument by not paying much attention to detail. Yes, you certainly made up for it in that follow up.

The same people who gave a suspended sentence to a RAPIST?
Either you have a sick sense of humour or you’re in denial :open_mouth:
I’m sure if you had a sister or a daughter, you wouldn’t have quite as much confidence in our judiciary! Give me the government any day - although then again, Tony Kileen’s office staff goes against that theory!

Its not that I believe him to be telling the whole truth, or that I trust Dunlop, I’m just annoyed that the one guy we manage to get into court on corruption out of all of this (ignoring George Redmond) is somebody who actually admits it, and yet the people he admits being corrupt with are not in court?

The way I see it panning out: Dunlop gets done and serves some easy time; those people he paid bribes to continue to deny they ever received them, Irish Society says “well Dunlop got put away therefore thats the whole corruption thing sorted”.

We know there were LOADS of them at it - we know a lot of their names; we know how much they got (or have an idea) and we know why in a lot of cases, yet we seem to be focusing in on punishing Frank Dunlop as a what? A cleansing ritual? I would get no satisfaction out of seeing Dunlop do time, not because he didnt(doesnt) deserve it but because all the others will get away if we focus our energy on the wrong target. Dunlop admitted it, go after, and try, and punish, the people who havent.

I cant think of a way to describe it - but its feels something like we’re burning a witch and expecting everything to be sorted afterwards? I dont buy it.

And the other thing relates to the specifics of the case - if he is found guilty of corruption, surely that must mean the recipient of a bribe is corrupt also? If you were shagging on a beach, and admit it, and were found guilty of indecent exposure, how can the other party get away with denying that you so much as kissed?

For all the faults of the Irish legal system I do believe this is what they are doing. If Frank is guilty then A. N. Other must be guilty also and all the better if Frank pleads guilty to multiple charges.

I was referring to your soft spot for Frank Dunlop.

The problem is that Mr Dunlop has a reputation for only having a passing familiarity with the truth. The ability to lie, & deceive while being charming were the reason he was a Press Secretary for FF. All a defence barrister has to do is achieve ‘Reasonable Doubt’ with a single witness, who has a serious credibility issue that isn’t difficult.