Meanwhile, At The Jobstown Trial

at

Screen Shot 2017-05-02 at 17.30.42 Screen Shot 2017-05-02 at 17.29.59 Screen Shot 2017-05-02 at 17.31.45

This morning.

Outside the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court.

Labour TD and former tánaiste Joan Burton; Solidarity TD Paul Murphy and broadcaster and journalist Eamon Dunphy arrive for the trial of Mr Murphy and six other men.

The six other men are Kieran Mahon, of Bolbrook Heights, Tallaght; Michael Murphy, of Whitechurch Way, Ballyboden; Scott Masterson, of Carrigmore Drive, Tallaght; Ken Purcell, of Kiltalown Green, Tallaght; Frank Donaghty, of Alpine Rise, Tallaght; and Michael Banks, of Brookview Green, Tallaght.

The seven men are charged with falsely imprisoning Ms Burton during a water charges protest in Jobstown, Tallaght in November 2014.

Burton recognised Murphy only at Jobstown rally (RTE)

Rollingnews

Meanwhile…

Screen Shot 2017-05-02 at 17.18.47

On Friday, the above clip was played in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court during the Jobstown trial.

The clip is from the day in question in Jobstown, Tallaght, Dublin on November 15, 2014.

In the video, Ms Burton is heard telling Ms O’Connell:

“Well, what you should do now is go, well, don’t really talk to Paul first, but you should just go on social media and say it was just shameful, all the little kids who were there and nobody minding them, nobody looking after them. They were just free to roam the streets.”

Last Friday, the Irish Independent reported:

Asked about the comment by Mr [Padraig] Dwyer [SC], [Joan Burton] said: it was “just chat” and there was no intention to send out a social media message.

Joan Burton denied being relaxed during protest as footage showed her laughing (Irish Independent, Shane Phelan, Friday, April 28)

142 thoughts on “Meanwhile, At The Jobstown Trial

  1. Brother Barnabas

    I wonder is Joan even a small bit embarrassed about being such a fupping galoot

    1. Joe

      the sad fact is that she doesn’t even realise it. she’s got a dose of superiority that’ll be hard to get rid of. I can easily imagine her saying “don’t you know who I am” to try to get out of tricky situations. A pure sneakkkkk.

  2. Steve

    The defence today was laughable – she should be able to take being called a ‘rhymes with rich’ and a ladypart etc.

    …..

    Try that in an equality tribunal / unfair dismissal against a female employee and see how that works out for ye.

    I think your jobstown boyos could be in trouble. Delighted.

    1. Sam

      Very few employees have the power to inflict cuts on their employers. I doubt very much that Joan Burton thinks of herself as an employee. Any employee who took money from, indebted their employer to pay off their buddies’ gambling debts would get called a lot worse than ladypart, don’t ya think?
      She doesn’t have to like being called names, but it isn’t an offence worthy of punishment up to and including a life sentence, is it?
      Whatever way you slice it, it boils down to using the courts for political ends, trumping up charges of false imprisonment, when at most they could have had them for Public Order for obstructing traffic.

    1. theboogieman@sǝɯǝɯ

      My darling… let me start at the beginning.
      I live in Jobstown.
      It’s a BIG PART of Tallaght, which is bigger than Limerick, the fake city.

      Would you ever go and play with yourself, please?
      I live in Jobstown. I’m NOT YOUR DONKEY, YOU duck, and the u is an i, you willy.

        1. MYREALNAMEIS

          My comments get truncated, deleted, censored and adjusted to not make sense.. I don’t understand them meself.
          It’s not my fault so I’m not apologising for it.

          I don’t care anymore, or any less, or ever. Don’t be so optimistic.

          Carry on.

          1. JOBSTOWN.RULES.O.K.

            And I’m bloody PROUD to live in Jobstown.
            I’m surrounded with wonderful neighbours… I know ALL their names… I know their kid’s names. They know me.
            I doubt you even know your next-door neighbours’ names.

            I’m sick of having my neighbourhood run down by ignorant idiots who know nothing about the place. I live here and I love it.

            THAT’S why I stand up for the place.
            Get back in your box.

            Now, put your headphones on and turn the volume up to 25.
            Then click on my name.*

            *Don’t do it. It’s probably The Fall again.

          2. Lord Snowflakee

            Jobstown is very proud of you too.

            Humbledm in fact, I’d say, to be in your presence, as we all are.

          3. mildred st. meadowlark

            There’s nothing wrong with pride in your town. Is it a bad thing to love the town you live in, to feel pride in it?

            I doubt every soul in Jobstown was there, obstructing Joan Burton, so it seems a bit ridiculous to paint them all with the same brush.

          4. Harry Molloy

            I don’t think anyone was, the only person who seems to be associating all of Jobstown with tho protest is poor aul memes but he’s all wound up and has the DTs

            I agree, town pride is a great thing

          5. Listrade

            @ Harry, “I don’t think anyone was, the only person who seems to be associating all of Jobstown with tho protest is poor aul memes but he’s all wound up and has the DTs”

            There were three comments before Memes’s about Jobstown. Add that to the fact that the DPP tried to restrict the jury by excluding everyone from Jobstown, it’s not irrational for memes on this occasion to have a rant standing up for where he lives.

          6. Lord Snowflakee

            For once I agree with everyone below mine on this subthread, but the fact is that Meme’s reaction is completely OTT as well. Grow up FFS memes, people are just having a bit of a laugh.

          1. know man is an island

            That’s pretty good memes
            Where does one start if one wants to check out the Fall?

  3. Walter-Ego

    Why hasn’t anybody on the defence raised the fact that the Labour Party were involved in sit down protests at Shannon Airport at U’S’ Military presence, around 2002, which also restricted the movement of people.

    1. newsjustin

      You’re assuming the defence don’t want to go to jail. That’s silly. It would be election gold to end up in the slammer.

  4. Frilly Keane

    And all the other Labour Party members?

    Its no less than ye deserve

    To end up as the laughing stock of Irish Politics
    And in that’s quite the achievement in the era of Renua

  5. MoyestWithExcitement

    I’ve seen an unverified video on Facebook (and it’s the best fake video I’ve ever seen if it turns out to be so) of herself speaking off camera (hence the unverified bit) taken from someone inside her car and she’s nice and calmly planning a PR campaign on social media to paint the protesters as borderline feral, about how it was “shameful” the kids with “nobody looking after them” being “*let* free to roam the streets”. *Let* free to roam the streets like they’re animals.

        1. Bertie "the inexplicable pleasure" Blenkinsop

          Wasn’t being smart, just meant it looks like what you saw on FB is legit.

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            No I know, I initially I thought I missed it when I posted that but then I saw the ‘meanwhile..’

  6. Lilly

    How on earth did that clip get out? There is no sense of fear or panic in that car. She’s reading a newspaper for Pete’s sake. Looks like the Hearld or some such crap. Stop wasting the court’s time with this nonsense, throw it out.

    1. Steve

      You’re aware that the jury are looking at events in the round, I.e before the car, like the egg throwing etc.

      Sideshow Bob : oh yeah all that other stuff I did.

      1. MoyestWithExcitement

        Yes, at least 3 eggs must be thrown for it to be legally defined as false imprisonment.

      2. Lilly

        Egg throwing, water bombs? A daily occurrence for anyone who has to walk along North King Street to get home.

    2. Nigel

      Woman stands condemned by behaving in an outwardly calm and rational manner. It isn’t as if this sort of approach to proving that it must be okay for a group of men to behave a certain way because their female target didn’t react with panic and tears doesn’t have form.

  7. Diddy

    These “protestors” were surrounding the car of a woman who

    A.. Opposed the ruinous bank guarantee

    B: ring fenced social welfare when Tory boy leader in waiting wanted it slashed.

    Most of these ignoramuses should have been thanking her

  8. BingGongGone

    This is one video among many more I’m sure are due to be shown. The DPP (yes the DPP take the case on, not Joan Burton) wouldn’t have taken this case if they didn’t think there was a genuine chance to win. Not even a week into the trial – far too early to call at this stage.

    1. MoyestWithExcitement

      “The DPP (yes the DPP take the case on, not Joan Burton) wouldn’t have taken this case if they didn’t think there was a genuine chance to win.”

      Oh, well then there’s definitely nothing underhanded at play here so.

  9. theboogieman@sǝɯǝɯ

    The FG shills are shite.
    My 5yr old could come up with better names, but FFS, she;s 5yrs old. She has integrity.

    It’s all a load of Specials,.

      1. theboogieman@sǝɯǝɯ

        Oh holy F to the F to the Hello…>

        That song I posterdds.
        It was poignant by aCCIDENT.
        – I’m actually stupid IRL, only clever by accident…

        A cnut by oproxy, and proyd.

        It’s all a load of something.,.,.
        I piss on any premise.

        Doesthis make sense?

  10. MoyestWithExcitement

    At the very start of the video, whoever it was with her tells Burton that the protestors are saying they defunded the breakfast clubs (remember how they’re supposed to be guerriers and thugs and unfit parents implying they had no valid reason for their anger) and her response to me sounds very much like a laugh.

  11. memes

    I understand if you think I’m an eejit.
    You aren’t the only eejit, but you are.

    I’m extremely good-looking and clever as fupp.
    My daughter is not as funny as me but she’s 16yrs old in a few weeks. She would pass on chewing you up, etc/ You aren’t interesting. She wouldn’t be interested.
    Get a grip.
    F to the O to the FF, turn 360 degrees and continue…

  12. bisted

    …there was a post earlier about May Day…this was always a parade to celebrate workers of the world and not least in Ireland where the memory of Larkin and Connolly was celebrated…labour party and their leaders were always foremost in these parades…now not a sign…their supporters were betrayed and the only leader to show her face was at the courts trying to jail people for protesting…shame Joanny

    1. Lord Snowflakee

      Time moves on Bisted.

      That ground is occupied by the likes of PBP and Sinn Féin these days.

      The last Labour party politician prominent today who is true to this tradition is Michael D.

      And even he is fairly mainstream.

  13. Praetorian

    I remember a time when Bodger & Broadsheet had a pair of bollox…nowadays they only pay lipservice.
    Goodluck.

    1. anne

      These videos are all over facebook anyway. Mosey on over there shur. If they’ve received legal advice to take the video down it’s really none of your business.

    1. mildred st. meadowlark

      Because BS are so cool, man.

      They dgaf.

      (Honestly, I’m not sure. I asked a similar question the other day.)

      Leave them to it so.

      1. Listrade

        Not quite a parallel. BS have published the video that was shown to the jury by the defence without comment. Other news sources have described and reported on the video. They haven’t provided any comment or editorial themselves other than reporting what the jury has already seen and heard. That in itself isn’t Sub Judice.

        It was an invited commentator on the RTE programme who made a prejudicial comment against the defendants while the trial was ongoing. There is a world of difference between a person on a tv or radio show making a comment (even as with RTE if it were off-hand and unplanned) and an under-the-line commentator on a web-site.

        The significant difference (apart from whether or not online commentators are “broadcasting”) is that Sub Judice is largely to prevent prejudice against the accused. This doesn’t. It is a video, used in court that may contradict a statement made by one of those involved. I don’t see how it is necessary to restrict publication of this or comments on this video in order to preserve the administration of justice.

        Certainly less a contempt of court or prejudicial than those who have commented since the event on the morals of those involved or speculated on their motivations. However, I haven’t seen the BS legal experts calling Sub Judice on comments about Paul Murphy being guilty just because he’s Paul Murphy, or the “scumbags” involved or sarcastic “peaceful protest” comments since the case came about, the jury was selected and the case started.

        1. rotide

          The comparison i was making was to John Waters suing rte for Rory O’Neils comment (and Obviously I’m aware of the difference between Sub judice and libel)

          As an aside, I’m no Legal Cofee Drinker but both the video above and more so the one that’s doing the rounds on social media could possibly be construed as being prejudical due to the fact they are minor snippets of what was shown at trial (Particularly in the case of the one that’s been heavily edited to show 3 minor parts of a larger video.)

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            “As an aside, I’m no Legal Cofee Drinker but…”

            Translation; ‘I’ve no idea what I’m talking about but I have an opinion anyway’

          2. rotide

            Moyest, you said : “As an aside, ..I’ve no idea what I’m talking about”

            I agree.

            Gotta love editing.

          3. Listrade

            I haven’t seen the one on social media, so can’t comment on that one.

            But I don’t see how they are prejudicial if the Jury has seen them in their entirety and in their context.

          4. MoyestWithExcitement

            I’ve no idea how you didn’t see the quotation marks or how you forgot that you said that. I’m actually embarrassed for you.

        2. MoyestWithExcitement

          “rotide
          May 3, 2017 at 11:48 am
          The comparison i was making was to John Waters suing rte for Rory O’Neils comment (and Obviously I’m aware of the difference between Sub judice and libel)

          As an aside, I’m no Legal Cofee Drinker but”

          Poor rotide.

        3. RockyRoader

          Thanks – makes sense.
          Tho he IS Paul Murphy, ffs! Surely that has to be taken into account!

  14. Deluded

    Whataboutery, I know, but can anyone explain the difference with this:
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/farm-protesters-vent-anger-over-reps-cuts-as-minister-visits-cheese-plant-1.700984
    “…
    Some 20 gardaí struggled to contain the protesters after one farmer lay down in front of the ministerial car and prevented it from leaving the plant. About 20 other farmers rushed the vehicle and starting kicking the doors and pounding on the roof and bonnet with their fists.

    Protesters chanted “Reverse the cuts” as they pressed four and five deep on the car, which suffered a number of dents as it took over 10 minutes to travel less than 100 yards and get free of the crowd, with many protesters hurling rolled up cardboard placards at the car.”

    1. Harry Molloy

      False imprisonment probably not applicable there as the car seemed to keep moving (though I didn’t read the article), though criminal damage and assault (which can be threatened) might be and in my opinion charges should have been brought for a protest that obviously crossed the line and went beyond what an actual protest is

      1. Lord Snowflakee

        excellent points there both

        Does anyone know if a person can write to the DPP and ask for the reasoning behind why prosecution A was taken but not prosecution B (say under FOI)?

      2. MoyestWithExcitement

        That’s it, Harold. Mindlessly defend the establishment. Good lapdog.

        1. Harry Molloy

          Dear Moyest,

          we are a nation of laws and are governed by consent. laws are applicable to all, you do not get to choose

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            Yet here you are justifying one group of citizens being treated differently to another. You are the type of person that votes for dictatorship.

          2. Harry Molloy

            can you read, I stated both groups deserved to be prosecuted.

            it seems you don’t think laws should be applicable at all. does that make you an anarchist?

          3. MoyestWithExcitement

            I read you give this “False imprisonment probably not applicable there as the car seemed to keep moving” pathetic defence of the establishment holding different citizens to different standards.

      3. Deluded

        Thanks Harry – but I quoted the article for you: one farmer lay down in front of the ministerial car and prevented it from leaving the plant. It doesn’t sound like the car was moving which is why I selected that example.
        A further quote “…According to Supt Eddie MacEoin of Bandon Garda station, who was in charge of the operation, it was extremely fortunate that no one was injured as gardaí were dragged and pulled away from the car by a small group of protesting farmers jostling to get at the car… “One officer was knocked to the ground at the back of the car and another was knocked to the ground right in front of the car – somebody could have been seriously hurt if they fell to the ground as the driver was trying to get away from the plant,” he said.”

        1. Harry Molloy

          Fair enough, was reading that it kept moving from the took 10 mins to move 100 yards but if the car was stopped and it was surrounded by an orchestrated hostile crowd then no reason why those charges couldn’t have been brought.

          the definition of crime doesn’t change because it was part of a protest

    2. MoyestWithExcitement

      “can anyone explain the difference with this:”

      Those involved farmers who had a moment of weakness because they are human beings and humans are flawed. Jobstown involved poor people and poor people are animals.

      1. Lord Snowflakee

        haha you know what – you do have a point there?

        If only the the Jobstown protesters had brought some sheep or pigs along to the protest and set them free running about in front of the Ministers car.

        How differently it might have all turned out.

        Clutching at straws mate.

        These people were acting like thugs on this particular occasion irrespective of the validity of their overall cause. Deal with it.

      2. mildred st. meadowlark

        Moyest, your tone really doesn’t help your case. And I’d be inclined to side with you on this.

        This was an act of frustration and desperation. It was something that had been brewing in this country for quite some time.

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          Help my case? What the hell are you talking about? This is a comment section of a blog. It is not a court. I have no obligation to you. If you don’t like my posts, scroll past them. FFS.

          1. mildred st. meadowlark

            Jesus, Moyest, this is exactly what I’m talking about. I generally agree with the points you are making, but you just jumped down my throat.

            I’m not attacking you. But if you treat every comment with an opposing view to yours as an argument, as an attack, then it doesn’t help to get your point across.

            I’m not trying to start an argument with you here.

          2. MoyestWithExcitement

            No, you’re literally tone policing. It’s no less patronising when you do it than when male journalists do it about 8th campaigners.

          3. mildred st. meadowlark

            I think you are wilfully misunderstanding me.

            However.

            I reckon it’s best to just agree to disagree on this occasion. Maybe have an ice cream. It’s only glorious out there. The beach beckons.

          4. MoyestWithExcitement

            “I think you are wilfully misunderstanding me.”

            If you say so. “your tone really doesn’t help your case”

        2. MoyestWithExcitement

          I’ll try and remember this if I see you complain about tone policing of 8th campaigners. Well. I won’t, but you get the point.

      3. Daisy Chainsaw

        I’m with Moyest on this.

        I was “falsely imprisoned” by farmers a few years back. A bunch of thugs looking for a graaant assaulted two staff and intimidated the rest of us because the gardai said it was a public office and couldn’t remove them. Farmers are a nationwide lobby so politicians are scared of them and will never have their protests policed and violent actions subject to law. Jobstown is one area full of disgruntled povs in one constituency that may affect 1 TD so it doesn’t count and can be treated with contempt and threatened with impunity. When they get uppity, the establishment will push them back down.

        1. Rob_G

          I genuinely am struggling to understand how you can declaim one instance of said behaviour (farmers), and then in the next breath support it (Jobstown)…

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            I genuinely am struggling to understand how you can’t see the obvious point being made as regards double standards.

          2. Rob_G

            If a double standard is being applied, does this somehow make it ok for the Jobstown people?

            (in your case, I can put it down to plain old cognitive dissonance, but Daisy seems a not unreasonable person on many issues)

          3. MoyestWithExcitement

            Man that is the stupidest question I’ve read this morning. Well done.

          4. Rob_G

            It was a fairly simple question; your failure to understand it is probably down to you.

          5. MoyestWithExcitement

            “(in your case, I can put it down to plain old cognitive dissonance, ”

            Throws a tantrum and then expects to be spoken to like an adult.

  15. ahjayzis

    You can defend protest and civil disobedience, you can defend condemning Joan Burton on her record. I can’t really defend victimising someone in this kind of personal way, though. I find the videos of her being pelted with water balloons really sad, maybe cause she’s about my mam’s age and size.

    There’s a difference in lying down on the road to impede exit and battering the car and calling her a koont and threatening her. There’s a very real difference there, and to gloss over it is being disingenuous, to gloss over it by referring to their socioeconomic background is both patronising and disingenous.

    1. MoyestWithExcitement

      “You can defend protest and civil disobedience, you can defend condemning Joan Burton on her record. I can’t really defend victimising someone in this kind of personal way, though.”

      What about putting protestors on trial for false imprisonment though? Can you defend that? Is name calling a bigger deal to you than the state engaging in political prosecutions through trials?

    2. anne

      we all age..even tyrants get old.

      Why not just arrest the person who threw the water balloon then?

      1. ahjayzis

        I actually do think dousing someone in water is a form of assault.

        You’d be okay with me dumping a bucket of water over you randomly on a street?

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          I wouldn’t expect you to be put on trial for false imprisonment anyway.

  16. Boj

    ‘Thugs’…I just think it needed to be said one more time…ah, have another one, ‘thugs’…it’s losing meaning as I type…’thugs’…aragh it’s just a sound now…’thugs’

  17. 15p

    growing up i was under the belief that lying in court was a serious offense.. must be like other offenses in Ireland, they don’t apply to the ruling classes.

    1. :-Joe

      If you can pay for a good lyer or team of reality deniers you can pretty much get away with murder..

      :-J

  18. MoyestWithExcitement

    “Ms O’Connell was heard on the video saying: “This always happens and the end of the protest, the f***ing dregs decide not to finish it.”

    That was reported today. “Dregs”. That’s how these human beings are seen by the Labour party and many people on this site.

Comments are closed.