RG at arms length

[High Fielder]

It remains to be seen if he'll even be charged. It remains to be seen if he can be charged; statute of limitations, lack of evidence, witness statements etc. That's how far back we are. Obviously nobody can condone domestic violence, but until we  allow due process to be followed, we simply cannot and must not declare him guilty until he legally is.

As for a trial, there's a long road to travel before we get to that point. I agree tbrick. It would be very difficult to find 12 people who are impartial and generally unaware of the case

[smelmoth]

It remains to be seen if he'll even be charged. It remains to be seen if he can be charged; statute of limitations, lack of evidence, witness statements etc. That's how far back we are. Obviously nobody can condone domestic violence, but until we  allow due process to be followed, we simply cannot and must not declare him guilty until he legally is.

As for a trial, there's a long road to travel before we get to that point. I agree tbrick. It would be very difficult to find 12 people who are impartial and generally unaware of the case

What role would the statute of limitations play here?

[restorepride]

There are many good reasons for him to stay quiet. He still has custody of the children remember. Does he really want to get into a public tit for tat? Notwithstanding that, if he's charged anc prosecuted based on fresh evidence or whatever, then there's only one side we can fall down on. Until then, it's speculation and/or hearsay

If everyone on Instragram believed he was a satanist, that would be speculation.
If his ex wife makes a statement which is backed up by a witness it isn't speculation.

To use that same argument, if hypothetically RG posted online that his ex wife was an absolute liar and one of his friends wives publicly agreed, would that make it fact?

Again, not condoning DV and if guilty it should be a jail sentence. But just because someone says it, doesn't necessarily make it true. There also needs to be more "proof" for want of a better word. But it seems on social media, someone only has to say it for it to be true.
That's the only issue I have with the whole affair.

It's not just about declaring something. The reaction of people is based on how plausible  both parties are and how they respond. Did he deny what she said ?
Ultimately it comes down to credibility. Lack of credibility is what caused him to resign. Blaming it on Social media is deflection. He realised that there was a hole in his credibility.

You're speculating. Do you know for sure lack of credibility caused him to resign? If you do, and it's common knowledge, has the investigation been reopened? Has he been charged? Has he lost the kids? Thankfully the law deals in facts and not speculation. If he's guilty, genuinely guilty, lock him up and throw away the key. Until then, he retains the presumption of innocence

The possibility of RG ever getting a fair trial is shot to pieces by all the commentary around this case. I was shocked to read that Joe Brolly was planning to boycott the Ulster Final if RG was there. Isn't or wasn't he a barrister? I'm sure he's had to defend some unsavoury characters

Joe is a defence barrister - and defence only - as far as I am aware. With regard to the planned boycott, this remains unsubstantiated and is reflective of Joe's journalistic style.

[seafoid]

It remains to be seen if he'll even be charged. It remains to be seen if he can be charged; statute of limitations, lack of evidence, witness statements etc. That's how far back we are. Obviously nobody can condone domestic violence, but until we  allow due process to be followed, we simply cannot and must not declare him guilty until he legally is.

As for a trial, there's a long road to travel before we get to that point. I agree tbrick. It would be very difficult to find 12 people who are impartial and generally unaware of the case

The story got intense attention for a week. Most people don't pay attention. If a trial happened in 18 months most people wouldn't remember

[High Fielder]

It remains to be seen if he'll even be charged. It remains to be seen if he can be charged; statute of limitations, lack of evidence, witness statements etc. That's how far back we are. Obviously nobody can condone domestic violence, but until we  allow due process to be followed, we simply cannot and must not declare him guilty until he legally is.

As for a trial, there's a long road to travel before we get to that point. I agree tbrick. It would be very difficult to find 12 people who are impartial and generally unaware of the case

What role would the statute of limitations play here?

When did the alleged offences take place? I think the victim has 6 months to make a complaint and 2 years overall to get a prosecution. It seems a narrow enough window, particularly if the victim wasn't in a position (for whatever reason) to make a complaint. My gut feeling is that RG will never be prosecuted, but I don't know the timeline or extenuating circumstances. In fact I know very little about it all. There will be so much more to the case than what has been made public

[Milltown Row2]

I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who is a successful coach/manager with a successful team and my ex goes on line and declares to all that I'm am guilty of DV. Would I resign my role of the said team if i was innocent and the allegations were untrue. Would you? I am certain I would not be resigning, I would in the strongest terms be denying it and  going down the legal path and issuing a statement explaining as much. I would be forcing my employers to sack me so I could after them as well, knowing there is no evidence that will come out. I would not be resigning. Kinda makes it simple.

Do you want examples of where people claim their innocence and denial of such things but get tarnished by others and have orders put out on them only for them to be untrue? I know of one very close to me which an ex made all sorts of claims, a fecking header, but shit sticks.

Someone makes a claim and hey ho its your word against theirs

[seafoid]

The Gardai were eager to talk to Mrs G last week. If it doesn't fly in the North it may in the South.

[seafoid]

I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who is a successful coach/manager with a successful team and my ex goes on line and declares to all that I'm am guilty of DV. Would I resign my role of the said team if i was innocent and the allegations were untrue. Would you? I am certain I would not be resigning, I would in the strongest terms be denying it and  going down the legal path and issuing a statement explaining as much. I would be forcing my employers to sack me so I could after them as well, knowing there is no evidence that will come out. I would not be resigning. Kinda makes it simple.

Do you want examples of where people claim their innocence and denial of such things but get tarnished by others and have orders put out on them only for them to be untrue? I know of one very close to me which an ex made all sorts of claims, a fecking header, but shit sticks.

Someone makes a claim and hey ho its your word against theirs

Mrs Maguire went to the hospital with her. Would that  not be good enough as justification in Milltown Chambers?

[restorepride]

I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who is a successful coach/manager with a successful team and my ex goes on line and declares to all that I'm am guilty of DV. Would I resign my role of the said team if i was innocent and the allegations were untrue. Would you? I am certain I would not be resigning, I would in the strongest terms be denying it and  going down the legal path and issuing a statement explaining as much. I would be forcing my employers to sack me so I could after them as well, knowing there is no evidence that will come out. I would not be resigning. Kinda makes it simple.

Do you want examples of where people claim their innocence and denial of such things but get tarnished by others and have orders put out on them only for them to be untrue? I know of one very close to me which an ex made all sorts of claims, a fecking header, but shit sticks.

Someone makes a claim and hey ho its your word against theirs

Mrs Maguire went to the hospital with her. Would that  not be good enough as justification in Milltown Chambers?

In legal terms, no. Depends what reasons were given for injuries at the time.

[Milltown Row2]

I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who is a successful coach/manager with a successful team and my ex goes on line and declares to all that I'm am guilty of DV. Would I resign my role of the said team if i was innocent and the allegations were untrue. Would you? I am certain I would not be resigning, I would in the strongest terms be denying it and  going down the legal path and issuing a statement explaining as much. I would be forcing my employers to sack me so I could after them as well, knowing there is no evidence that will come out. I would not be resigning. Kinda makes it simple.

Do you want examples of where people claim their innocence and denial of such things but get tarnished by others and have orders put out on them only for them to be untrue? I know of one very close to me which an ex made all sorts of claims, a fecking header, but shit sticks.

Someone makes a claim and hey ho its your word against theirs

Mrs Maguire went to the hospital with her. Would that  not be good enough as justification in Milltown Chambers?

I'm not talking about this case, I've already said that, keep up

[David McKeown]

What statute of limitations?

[seafoid]

Croke Park ordered an audit
There were 5 emails from her father. They went  to an administrator address.
They all got lost. Allegedly
Derry GAA spoke to him this week

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/revealed-nicola-gallaghers-father-sent-five-emails-to-gaa-about-rory-gallaghers-alleged-abuse/a295909971.html

[RadioGAAGAA]

Very surprised with your take on this.

My take is fairly simple. NG has been badly failed by social services and her legal representation* - not the Derry county board.

Some of the expectations on the Derry CB "investigations" of matters in this thread are wholly ludicrous.


*my natural dislike of the legal system is also probably shining through; barristers are quick enough to rake all other professions over the coals in court inquests with the benefit of hindsight and an assumption of infinite resources - so IMO what is good for the goose - how the f**k are family law practitioners not expected to identify the signs of an raise concerns with the investigating authorities in divorce/child custody cases? If there are already such expectations, will there be any action taken against NG's representatives?

**teachers are educators, yet are expected to pick up on and raise child abuse concerns.

Probably should jump in here and defend my colleagues.  Not only is that a vast generalisation it also displays an ignorance of the legal system.  Mistakes can and do happen and on that basis I have been very keen not to make any comment on this case because I wasn't involved.  There are important general things that have to be remembered though.

Firstly and most importantly family courts are private and therefore it is impossible to know what was and what was not raised in any case but if allegations are made of a violent or sexual nature the court must conduct what is called a Re L hearing.  That is a hearing to determine the truth of any allegation.  That is done to the civil standard which is much lower than the criminal standard and involves a detailed and thorough investigation.

Social services will be involved and will investigate.  They are notoriously conservative and will take very seriously any allegations of domestic abuse.  Guardian Ad Litems will be appointed, they are specifically trained to speak to any children involved and to rely the views of those children through separate lawyers appointed by the Guardians.

Grandparents or other family members are also often separately represented.

The court will hear evidence and come to a conclusion.  The test for them is not whether one parent is more suitable than the other its to determine whether either parent is suitable.  These cases are usually protracted and are very thorough.

The point I am making is that we have no idea what happened in this family case and its therefore very unfair to criticise or worse lambast the whole professional

It's a nice big answer, but doesn't actually address the concern I've raised. Well, I suppose it partially might, as you say, its all private, so maybe allegations were made, but if that were the case, would custody decisions not have been paused pending completion of judgement on abuse investigations?

If teachers (who, lets not forget, have a primary role of educating) are expected to be able to identify and raise cases of child abuse, solicitors and barristers who spend their time practicing family law (i.e. their primary role is dealing with relationships in difficulties) should have the exact same expectation of being able to identify and raise instances of abuse. Indeed, one would think the solicitors and barristers working with abuse victims would be much closer to their core role than teachers.

The requirement of the system to only kick in "if allegations are made" is, IMO, either a complete abdication of responsibility or a failure of the system to assign responsibility to both social workers and law practitioners to protect victims who are afraid to make the allegations.

[RadioGAAGAA]

I was shocked to read that Joe Brolly was planning to boycott the Ulster Final if RG was there. Isn't or wasn't he a barrister? I'm sure he's had to defend some unsavoury characters

You have to open your wallet to get them to park their morals.

[Whishtup]

Very surprised with your take on this.

My take is fairly simple. NG has been badly failed by social services and her legal representation* - not the Derry county board.

Some of the expectations on the Derry CB "investigations" of matters in this thread are wholly ludicrous.


*my natural dislike of the legal system is also probably shining through; barristers are quick enough to rake all other professions over the coals in court inquests with the benefit of hindsight and an assumption of infinite resources - so IMO what is good for the goose - how the f**k are family law practitioners not expected to identify the signs of an raise concerns with the investigating authorities in divorce/child custody cases? If there are already such expectations, will there be any action taken against NG's representatives?

**teachers are educators, yet are expected to pick up on and raise child abuse concerns.

Probably should jump in here and defend my colleagues.  Not only is that a vast generalisation it also displays an ignorance of the legal system.  Mistakes can and do happen and on that basis I have been very keen not to make any comment on this case because I wasn't involved.  There are important general things that have to be remembered though.

Firstly and most importantly family courts are private and therefore it is impossible to know what was and what was not raised in any case but if allegations are made of a violent or sexual nature the court must conduct what is called a Re L hearing.  That is a hearing to determine the truth of any allegation.  That is done to the civil standard which is much lower than the criminal standard and involves a detailed and thorough investigation.

Social services will be involved and will investigate.  They are notoriously conservative and will take very seriously any allegations of domestic abuse.  Guardian Ad Litems will be appointed, they are specifically trained to speak to any children involved and to rely the views of those children through separate lawyers appointed by the Guardians.

Grandparents or other family members are also often separately represented.

The court will hear evidence and come to a conclusion.  The test for them is not whether one parent is more suitable than the other its to determine whether either parent is suitable.  These cases are usually protracted and are very thorough.

The point I am making is that we have no idea what happened in this family case and its therefore very unfair to criticise or worse lambast the whole professional

It's a nice big answer, but doesn't actually address the concern I've raised. Well, I suppose it partially might, as you say, its all private, so maybe allegations were made, but if that were the case, would custody decisions not have been paused pending completion of judgement on abuse investigations?

If teachers (who, lets not forget, have a primary role of educating) are expected to be able to identify and raise cases of child abuse, solicitors and barristers who spend their time practicing family law (i.e. their primary role is dealing with relationships in difficulties) should have the exact same expectation of being able to identify and raise instances of abuse. Indeed, one would think the solicitors and barristers working with abuse victims would be much closer to their core role than teachers.

The requirement of the system to only kick in "if allegations are made" is, IMO, either a complete abdication of responsibility or a failure of the system to assign responsibility to both social workers and law practitioners to protect victims who are afraid to make the allegations.

Is it right that any professional whose client highlights abuse becomes a mandated person and is bound by law to report to the relevant authority?