If there is no special status attaching to a politician why did he quote all the other cases?Mr O’Higgins cited a number previous cases where politicians were convicted for a breach of trust. He made reference to the case of former minister Fianna Fail Ray Burke who was jailed for six months for tax offences in 2005. Counsel said Burke’s offences are not comparable to Callely’s as they involved the tax code, which is directly decided by legislators.
Mr O’Higgins also referred to the case of Michael Fahy, a Galway county councillor who was jailed in 2007 for theft and fraud offences involving public funds, and the case of Fred Forsey Jnr, a former deputy mayor of Dungarvan who was sentenced to six years in 2012 for accepting corrupt payments. He said Fahy’s prison term was set aside by the court after a retrial and that the Forsey case was not comparable to Callely’s.
...
“There is no special status attaching to a politician,” Mr O’Higgins said, adding a custodial sentence should be the last resort, rather than the first resort.
The bold Ivor gets 5 months for making false mobile phone expenses claims. Good news.
I do find it strange that a man who was convicted of collecting pension contributions from his employees and keeping them, collecting €1'400'000 in VAT from customers but not passing it on to the state (in other words defrauding the people of Ireland of €1.4 million) around the same time he gave his half a million Italian villa and winery to his bother as a gift and was arrested for criminal damage in Shannon Airport is still sitting in the Dail.
I found the defence argument a bid odd
If there is no special status attaching to a politician why did he quote all the other cases?
If an employee of a private company fraudulently claimed €4,200 in expenses, would he go to jail?
This guy didn't go to jail for a much larger amount.
Anglo clerk gets suspended term for €200k fraud
This is the type of case that the defence counsel should have been quoting.
Why is a politician claiming false expenses from the tax payer so much worse?
I have never liked Callelly, but I think he should have got a suspended sentence.
In this case, a financial advisor went to jail for defrauding a client. But the money appears to have been fairly small. This may have been justified on the grounds that it was a breach of trust which seems worse than defrauding your employer - the state.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...illor-gary-o-flynn-jailed-for-theft-1.1854094
Are you confusing your Ivor's with your Micks!
Just read a CV of Ivor's by Harry McGee in the IT, and while he has a colourful past, there's no mention of any of the above. Mick Wallace on the other hand...
I think Purple was pointing out the irony (probably not the right word!) of the situation....
Harsh sentence but hard to have any sympathy to be honest.
I don't like the guy, but that is not a criterion for jailing him. So I do have sympathy for him.
He repaid the money and he pleaded guilty early on.
I would imagine that it will be overturned on appeal.
Brendan
Do you have sympathy for people who steal off social welfare or don't pay their tv license and are jailed even though other people who commit similar crimes might not be jailed for various reasons?
I have never seen a report of anyone being jailed for not paying a TV license. Maybe they have, it's just that I have not seen it....
I have never seen a report of anyone being jailed for not paying a TV license. Maybe they have, it's just that I have not seen it.
The penalty has to be proportionate. Most drunk drivers don't go to jail, which some would consider a worse crime than Callelly committed. Certainly repeated convictions for drunk driving should result in a jail sentence.
If every TV license evader and every false social welfare claimant and everyone who fraudulently claimed expenses, went to jail, we would need many more prisons.
Maybe all of these people should go to jail? A week for driving drunk. A week for not paying the TV license. A week for claiming false expenses.
Seems a bit tough to me, but maybe it would cut down these crimes.
But certainly a person should not be jailed for an offence for which he would not be jailed were he not a politician. The Anglo guy stole €200,000 and did not go to jail.
Brendan
Why are you claiming he was jailed because he was a politician?
Do you have sympathy for these people? Or is Ivor a bit different class of person as a politician?
[broken link removed]
Thanks Crugers
Thousands are charged, but why were these 411 jailed, I wonder. I suspect it was for repeat offences, so their jailing was probably justified.
Because they decided not to pay the fine and took the 3 or 4 hours in prison instead. No one is being sent to prison for not having a TV licence, they are being sent to prison for non-payment of a fine.
Callely was sent to prison because he was a politician as the judge stated
Judge Mary Ellen Ring said a custodial sentence was needed in the public interest, and the fact of the sentence rather than the length was the most important factor. Judge Ring said politicians are not expected to be superhuman, but said a major factor in the case was a “significant breach of trust” because of Callely’s role as a public representative.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/ivor-callely-sentenced-to-five-months-in-prison-1.1880454
He was held to a higher account than the bank clerk or the social welfare fraudster.
No he wasn't. He was sent to jail because he stole money. Being a politician was an aggravating factor. What's wrong with that? People get jailed all the time because of aggravating factors with regard to who they are and the position they held when committing a crime.
How was he held to a higher account? There are plenty of people in jail for defrauding social welfare. There are plenty that got suspended sentences as well. Do you feel sorry for the ones in prison?
People's attitude to white collar crime in this country amazes me. Instead of people calling for tougher sentences, we have expressions of sympathy because the poor guy got prison when a bank clerk was extremely lucky to only get a suspended sentence. Why not discuss why that sentence was so light instead of expressing sympathy for a crooked politician?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?