Rory Gallagher

[Armaghtothebone]

Is the famous tweet from Maguires' wife which was issued at the time genuine?
If it is he has no pmave anywhere near a GAA manager's job

[nrico2006]

This is an extremely difficult and sensitive set of circumstances. On the one hand, RG was never convicted of a crime (assuming through lack of evidence) and also has custody of his children. To the outsider looking in, that would suggest that he has been wrongly accused. On the other hand, there seems to be this local knowledge that suggests that RG did everything that he is accused of, and everybody bar the Police know about it. As David pointed out above, that's not how the Law works, but at this moment in time, and possibly forever more, RG will not be able to outrun these rumours. For that reason, Derry would be making a big mistake by taking him back

Agree it's a very difficult situation and my view is probably more grounded in idealism than realism (which I accept) also I'm not local so am completely basing this on what has been reported. My issue though and it's not specific to the RG situation is that when you have a scenario where allegations have been made, investigated, reviewed and a no prosecution decision has been made (which in my experience are rare) and a family case has arrived at a conclusion like it has then preventing someone from moving on with their life, particularly if a potential employer does due diligence is a slap in the face of the presumption of innocence. Therefore public opinion sometimes has to take a back seat.

All that said. No investigation or court process or due diligence is infallible. So it's a difficult balancing exercise.

Imagine a scenario where a coach in your club was accused of being a paedophile. Witnesses had made some statements etc. However there was not enough evidence to get a prosecution. Would you be ok with that coach returning to coach in your club? I doubt it. Not unless those accusations were proven to be malicious and false. There's a bit of common sense required in the example above and the same with RG. Dogs on the street know what he was at and Derry GAA know too. Appointing him as he was convicted of no crime is pathetic snf insulting to women. But seems to be no moral leadership in Derry from what I can see.

Were there witnesses other than Gallaghers wife?

[tyrone08]

I'll say as a Derry man I have huge reservations on him coming back but just to change the subject slightly, are Fermanagh and Donegal Gaa not getting off a bit light on this if it was common knowledge. People queuing up to get digs in at Derry

Fair enough question. Why aren't clonduff getting the same questions considering they willingly took him after the alleged allegations

[nrico2006]

I'll say as a Derry man I have huge reservations on him coming back but just to change the subject slightly, are Fermanagh and Donegal Gaa not getting off a bit light on this if it was common knowledge. People queuing up to get digs in at Derry

Fair enough question. Why arenr clonduff getting the samw questions considering they willingly took him after the alleged allegations

Good point. Unless those in Fermanagh and Donegal are just those type of slabbers who will always say they knew everything that was going on after something is revealed.

What are county boards to do if they hear of allegations though? If they are not formal employers and are not the police, surely its not their responsibility to sort it out.

[quit yo jibbajabba]

I'll say as a Derry man I have huge reservations on him coming back but just to change the subject slightly, are Fermanagh and Donegal Gaa not getting off a bit light on this if it was common knowledge. People queuing up to get digs in at Derry

Fair enough question. Why arenr clonduff getting the samw questions considering they willingly took him after the alleged allegations

Also true.

@nrico - I remember posts under her original post at the time to the effect of "you don't know how long we have waited for you to say something" and that has always stayed with me. Why would people put their opinions out there unless they knew it to be true...

[Duine Inteacht Eile]

This is an extremely difficult and sensitive set of circumstances. On the one hand, RG was never convicted of a crime (assuming through lack of evidence) and also has custody of his children. To the outsider looking in, that would suggest that he has been wrongly accused. On the other hand, there seems to be this local knowledge that suggests that RG did everything that he is accused of, and everybody bar the Police know about it. As David pointed out above, that's not how the Law works, but at this moment in time, and possibly forever more, RG will not be able to outrun these rumours. For that reason, Derry would be making a big mistake by taking him back

Agree it's a very difficult situation and my view is probably more grounded in idealism than realism (which I accept) also I'm not local so am completely basing this on what has been reported. My issue though and it's not specific to the RG situation is that when you have a scenario where allegations have been made, investigated, reviewed and a no prosecution decision has been made (which in my experience are rare) and a family case has arrived at a conclusion like it has then preventing someone from moving on with their life, particularly if a potential employer does due diligence is a slap in the face of the presumption of innocence. Therefore public opinion sometimes has to take a back seat.

All that said. No investigation or court process or due diligence is infallible. So it's a difficult balancing exercise.

Imagine a scenario where a coach in your club was accused of being a paedophile. Witnesses had made some statements etc. However there was not enough evidence to get a prosecution. Would you be ok with that coach returning to coach in your club? I doubt it. Not unless those accusations were proven to be malicious and false. There's a bit of common sense required in the example above and the same with RG. Dogs on the street know what he was at and Derry GAA know too. Appointing him as he was convicted of no crime is pathetic snf insulting to women. But seems to be no moral leadership in Derry from what I can see.

Were there witnesses other than Gallaghers wife?

The statement from Sheila Maguire (wife of Stephen) was pretty damning I thought.

[Duine Inteacht Eile]

I'll say as a Derry man I have huge reservations on him coming back but just to change the subject slightly, are Fermanagh and Donegal Gaa not getting off a bit light on this if it was common knowledge. People queuing up to get digs in at Derry

Fair enough question. Why arenr clonduff getting the samw questions considering they willingly took him after the alleged allegations

I think it's Corduff you're looking for.....and I'm not sure people could think less of them if they put the devil himself in as manager.

[p3427977]

I'll say as a Derry man I have huge reservations on him coming back but just to change the subject slightly, are Fermanagh and Donegal Gaa not getting off a bit light on this if it was common knowledge. People queuing up to get digs in at Derry

Clearly they didn't care until it was in the media. The same with their fans.

[nrico2006]

On his managerial ability, always thought he was just a generic assistant to McGuiness but the improvement he made with Derry was astronomical and they were still progressing under his watch. So from a selfish, anti-Derry POV, I was glad he went as they haven't been the same without him. That's my reason for hoping he isn't reinstated.

[Mikhailov]

I'll say as a Derry man I have huge reservations on him coming back but just to change the subject slightly, are Fermanagh and Donegal Gaa not getting off a bit light on this if it was common knowledge. People queuing up to get digs in at Derry

Fair enough question. Why arenr clonduff getting the samw questions considering they willingly took him after the alleged allegations

Need to be careful mentioning other clubs especially when you mention the wrong one. It is Corduff he is coaching

[Itchy]

This is an extremely difficult and sensitive set of circumstances. On the one hand, RG was never convicted of a crime (assuming through lack of evidence) and also has custody of his children. To the outsider looking in, that would suggest that he has been wrongly accused. On the other hand, there seems to be this local knowledge that suggests that RG did everything that he is accused of, and everybody bar the Police know about it. As David pointed out above, that's not how the Law works, but at this moment in time, and possibly forever more, RG will not be able to outrun these rumours. For that reason, Derry would be making a big mistake by taking him back

Agree it's a very difficult situation and my view is probably more grounded in idealism than realism (which I accept) also I'm not local so am completely basing this on what has been reported. My issue though and it's not specific to the RG situation is that when you have a scenario where allegations have been made, investigated, reviewed and a no prosecution decision has been made (which in my experience are rare) and a family case has arrived at a conclusion like it has then preventing someone from moving on with their life, particularly if a potential employer does due diligence is a slap in the face of the presumption of innocence. Therefore public opinion sometimes has to take a back seat.

All that said. No investigation or court process or due diligence is infallible. So it's a difficult balancing exercise.

Imagine a scenario where a coach in your club was accused of being a paedophile. Witnesses had made some statements etc. However there was not enough evidence to get a prosecution. Would you be ok with that coach returning to coach in your club? I doubt it. Not unless those accusations were proven to be malicious and false. There's a bit of common sense required in the example above and the same with RG. Dogs on the street know what he was at and Derry GAA know too. Appointing him as he was convicted of no crime is pathetic snf insulting to women. But seems to be no moral leadership in Derry from what I can see.

Were there witnesses other than Gallaghers wife?

Yes there were.

[JoG2]

On his managerial ability, always thought he was just a generic assistant to McGuiness but the improvement he made with Derry was astronomical and they were still progressing under his watch. So from a selfish, anti-Derry POV, I was glad he went as they haven't been the same without him. That's my reason for hoping he isn't reinstated.

Be the same reason for 99% of Tyrone men wouldn't it? Hopefully this statement doesn't offend them too much
Should find out the new management team in 3 weeks.. Alot depends on it

[p3427977]

This is an extremely difficult and sensitive set of circumstances. On the one hand, RG was never convicted of a crime (assuming through lack of evidence) and also has custody of his children. To the outsider looking in, that would suggest that he has been wrongly accused. On the other hand, there seems to be this local knowledge that suggests that RG did everything that he is accused of, and everybody bar the Police know about it. As David pointed out above, that's not how the Law works, but at this moment in time, and possibly forever more, RG will not be able to outrun these rumours. For that reason, Derry would be making a big mistake by taking him back

Agree it's a very difficult situation and my view is probably more grounded in idealism than realism (which I accept) also I'm not local so am completely basing this on what has been reported. My issue though and it's not specific to the RG situation is that when you have a scenario where allegations have been made, investigated, reviewed and a no prosecution decision has been made (which in my experience are rare) and a family case has arrived at a conclusion like it has then preventing someone from moving on with their life, particularly if a potential employer does due diligence is a slap in the face of the presumption of innocence. Therefore public opinion sometimes has to take a back seat.

All that said. No investigation or court process or due diligence is infallible. So it's a difficult balancing exercise.

Imagine a scenario where a coach in your club was accused of being a paedophile. Witnesses had made some statements etc. However there was not enough evidence to get a prosecution. Would you be ok with that coach returning to coach in your club? I doubt it. Not unless those accusations were proven to be malicious and false. There's a bit of common sense required in the example above and the same with RG. Dogs on the street know what he was at and Derry GAA know too. Appointing him as he was convicted of no crime is pathetic snf insulting to women. But seems to be no moral leadership in Derry from what I can see.

Were there witnesses other than Gallaghers wife?

Yes there were.

The police should talk to them.

[red hander]

Fair play to Gary Colman.

[Delgany 2nds]

It comes down to how you interpret the following - the CPS did not action  the case as there wasn't enough evidence to secure a prosecution  versus there was some evidence of DV.

Again custody of children in family courts is focused on the best interests of the children.