Right Winger
Registered User
- Messages
- 293
There's been quite an incidence throughout the world of COVID era fines and penalties being overturned or quietly dropped. Happened in the UK and more spectacularly in Australia.Really? Can you cite something to support that statement?
I thought that we were talking about Ireland here?There's been quite an incidence throughout the world of COVID era fines and penalties being overturned or quietly dropped. Happened in the UK and more spectacularly in Australia.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...s-withdrawn-in-nsw-after-adverse-court-ruling
4,000 Covid lockdown fines are dropped by Met Police
Reasons for dropping referrals included where the person had a ‘reasonable excuse’ for breaking lockdown ruleswww.standard.co.uk
Even uber-liberal- lefty California! https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/covid-19-fines-court-ruling-san-jose-church/2979251/
And ultra authoritarian UAE https://english.alarabiya.net/coron...-50-percent-discount-on-unpaid-COVID-19-fines
Even Canada, perhaps the ultimate nanny state, is reluctantly getting with the program. https://vancouversun.com/news/local...violation-tickets-dropped-many-more-go-unpaid
Here, I suspect it's more a case of prosecutions withering on the vine. I don't see much evidence of Guards enthusiastically following up unpaid COVID fixed penalty notices from 2020/2021.
Perhaps because they were paid?Here, I suspect it's more a case of prosecutions withering on the vine. I don't see much evidence of Guards enthusiastically following up unpaid COVID fixed penalty notices from 2020/2021
Yes, but in the absence of concrete Irish data, we must reason by analogy.I thought that we were talking about Ireland here?
Indeed! We are, though, a common law jurisdiction, like the UK, Australia, Canada, California and, to some extent, the UAE. Their experience can be instructive. We share traits like adversarial, rather than inquisitorial, court processes, where the prosecution MUST prove every ingredient of an offence beyond reasonable doubt. The defendant need prove nothing - the burden of proof is entirely on the prosecution. So the prosecuting Garda must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that a defendant did NOT have a reasonable excuse to leave his house. Without an admission from the defendant, that's an almost insurmountable problem. So I wouldn't expect much Garda time and resources to be expended on such prosecutions. Even the Garda Commissioner, was less than enthusiastic about the prospect of heavy duty enforcement. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40070081.htmlWe're not part of the empire anymore, you know?
I doubt it. The Irish Times suggests likewise.Perhaps because they were paid?
Unfortunately not. Do you? But anyway, don't you think that if the State had been successful in collecting the penalty charges, or prosecuting the offences, they'd be trumpeting this from the rafters? Pour encourager les autres. Absence of evidence is not always evidence of absence, but I'd suggest, in this case, it's highly suggestive of a lack of intention to do much else.Do you have access to Garda internal systems?
There's no need to reason by analogy. The Irish Disctrict Courts have in recent months been busy imposing fines and other minor penalties for breaches of Covid restrictions. at least going by the court reports in local papers.Yes, but in the absence of concrete Irish data, we must reason by analogy.
Fair enough, I wouldn't be an avid reader of local papers, but I'll bow to your better knowledge of that. I'd still be curious as to what overall figures are here though.There's no need to reason by analogy. The Irish Disctrict Courts have in recent months been busy imposing fines and other minor penalties for breaches of Covid restrictions. at least going by the court reports in local papers.
Do remember that if they take your car you are the one who had to prove they are wrong, they don't have to prove they are right.No need to raise it, it's not that they are wrong, there just isn't a law to support the statement. And people jump to conclusions without actually asking the question. So here it is" what law supports the statement"?
Memories of that Programme Stop Search Sieze that followed the Irish Customs at road side check. It was comical viewing as drivers disputed the legislation. All had to pay the fine and VRT later to keep the car. Some may have challenged fines in court but the law on VRT is pretty tight. They all knew what they were doing was dodging VRT.Do remember that if they take your car you are the one who had to prove they are wrong, they don't have to prove they are right.
Just a hunch here but are you anything to the Burkes?
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?