It was never false imprisonment. The Garda evidence was spectacularly unconvincing... contradicted by actual video evidence.
The jury made the right decision, it would have been a gross travesty of justice to convict.
The scary thing is that if the video evidence hadn't been available - and remember AGS had to be compelled by the defence legal team to hand over some video evidence that was beneficial to the defence even though they have a legal duty to do so - a travesty of justice would have occurred.
There were lots of charges that could have been brought which were applicable to what happened on that day.
If anyone assaulted a Garda on that day or threatened Jaon Burton they should be convicted of that specific offence.
Just because you dislike Paul Murphy, and just because he may have committed other offences on that day does not make him guilty of the serious crime of false imprisonment.
I have yet to hear anyone who thinks he should have been found guilty of false imprisonment made a cogent argument as to why in fact he was guilty of that specific offence and not a general "he's a toe rag" or "he was up to mayhem that day".