Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Garda Apology

Options
24567…19

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    The high horse brigade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,456 ✭✭✭The high horse brigade


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    You obviously don't know much about how the guards are meant to conduct themselves, they have rules about bringing the uniform into disrepute.

    What about the other party, the father to the child, why wasn't he given the same punishment?


  • Options
    #33
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,935 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    judeboy101 wrote:
    So let's explore this, let's say jimmy arrives in temple more tomorrow and starts to sell legal but highly distasteful German dungeon porn to his fellow recruits. Hq find out and he is kicked off the force for bringing them into disrepute. 5 yrs later German dungeon porn becomes mainstream and popular, everyone watches it. Should he get compo and an apology? No he doesn't, he knew what I would happen, just like she did.


    Here's the problem with the above. It was NOT illegal to have sex outside of wedlock in the 80s. It was NOT illegal to have a baby out of wedlock in the 80s.

    I haven't seen what happened to the father of the child but I'm betting he wasn't sacked at the same time


  • Options
    #34
    Fann Linn
    Registered Users Posts: 7,778 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    The high horse brigade wrote: »
    What about the other party, the father to the child, why wasn't he given the same punishment?

    He was fined £90.


  • Options
    #35
    The high horse brigade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,456 ✭✭✭The high horse brigade


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    Did you listen to the interview, she had no problem bringing other lad to her fathers house for sex and she 'knew' before he left she was pregnant.she was no shrinking violet but a tough cookie who joined the guards and made a mistake. She was legally disciplined by the guards and she choose to give her kid away, no one forced her.

    It's very hard to argue with someone who still believes it's 1930


  • Options
    #36
    judeboy101
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭judeboy101


    The high horse brigade wrote: »
    What about the other party, the father to the child, why wasn't he given the same punishment?

    That's a question for the guards, my question is why he would impregnate a fellow recruit and not stand by her. Spineless man who is no doubt super by now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    judeboy101
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭judeboy101


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Here's the problem with the above. It was NOT illegal to have sex outside of wedlock in the 80s. It was NOT illegal to have a baby out of wedlock in the 80s.

    I haven't seen what happened to the father of the child but I'm betting he wasn't sacked at the same time

    You can't do whatever legal activity you want in your private life as a guard, either then or now. They are supposedly held to higher standards.


  • Options
    #38
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,912 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Documentary is available on podcasts too.

    Nothing surprises me anymore about those days. Was a very dark time for women.

    There is talk about Opus Dei and the higher echelons of the Gardai (and other PS outfits too), but sure who knows anymore. Bet they are still there in the background though. Losing their influence day by day. Hopefully.


  • Options
    #39
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,026 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    riemann wrote: »
    So this lady is talking about getting personal apologies from 2 heads that didn't have anything to do with how she was treated over 30 years ago.

    If she's so keen to move forward why bring all this up after so long?

    Why go after people who didn't do anything to her, instead of pointing the finger at those actually responsible?

    One wonders what the end game is.






    .....taking another lump out of the immunity they've enjoyed for far too long~?


  • Options
    #40
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    I'm surprised they didn't insist the guy, also a garda recruit, marry her.

    It's not all that long ago and many women were keeping their babies then. But not career and baby.


  • Options
    #41
    Fann Linn
    Registered Users Posts: 7,778 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    You can't do whatever legal activity you want in your private life as a guard, either then or now. They are supposedly held to higher standards.


    That standard has been well and truly lowered by themselves alone.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    judeboy101
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭judeboy101


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    I'm surprised they didn't insist the guy, also a garda recruit, marry her.

    It's not all that long ago and many women were keeping their babies then. But not career and baby.

    She made a choice, career vs baby.


  • Options
    #43
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,912 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Has the Iona Institute made a statement on the matter yet?

    Well the Bishop saved her so I doubt it.


  • Options
    #44
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,912 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    She made a choice, career vs baby.

    So did the impregnator. Although he was alright, fined 90 quid and off you go lad. Your seed is in that woman and she alone shall be punished.


  • Options
    #45
    SEPT 23 1989
    Registered Users Posts: 43,028 ✭✭✭✭SEPT 23 1989


    So she gave away her child to keep her job in an organisation who made her do that to her own child?

    Am I missing something here?


  • Options
    #46
    judeboy101
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭judeboy101


    Fann Linn wrote: »
    That standard has been well and truly lowered by themselves alone.

    Yes it has, but they still have one rule for themselves and another for the rest us us.


  • Options
    #47
    Edgware
    Registered Users Posts: 5,875 ✭✭✭Edgware


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    That's a question for the guards, my question is why he would impregnate a fellow recruit and not stand by her. Spineless man who is no doubt super by now.

    You obviously havent a clue. The father of the child wanted them to get married and keep the child but she declined. I know this doesn't suit your agenda but it is the facts.


  • Options
    #48
    Nobelium
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭Nobelium


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    That's a question for the guards, my question is why he would impregnate a fellow recruit and not stand by her. Spineless man who is no doubt super by now.

    Never let the facts get in the way of gender politics. He asked her to marry him. He also faced a severe disciplinary hearing.


  • Options
    #49
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    She was 22. The type of questioning she faced means she deserves every penny she can get.


  • Options
    #50
    Fann Linn
    Registered Users Posts: 7,778 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    Yes it has, but they still have one rule for themselves and another for the rest us us.

    My point entirely.


  • Options
    #51
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,488 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    The woman herself has received no apology.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    judeboy101
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭judeboy101


    SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »
    So she gave away her child to keep her job in an organisation who made her do that to her own child?

    Am I missing something here?

    Guards suggested, at the behest of the bishop that if she gave the baby up she could keep her job, she could have said no.


  • Options
    #53
    Collie D
    Registered Users Posts: 11,314 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    dudara wrote: »
    What penance do you want from her? The only thing she did wrong was to sleep with a fellow employee. Everything else was as a result of the typical backwards mindset of the time.

    Not just of the time judging by some of the posts in here.


  • Options
    #54
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,412 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    Guards suggested, at the behest of the bishop that if she gave the baby up she could keep her job, she could have said no.


    The Bishop probably had a buyer.


  • Options
    #55
    Bobtheman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭Bobtheman


    Deleted


  • Options
    #56
    Nobelium
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭Nobelium


    judeboy101 wrote: »
    Guards suggested, at the behest of the bishop that if she gave the baby up she could keep her job, she could have said no.

    This is partly accurate. The Gardai commissioner wanted her sacked. Moynihan only kept her job at the intervention of the archbishop of Dublin, who feared firing her would lead to more gardaí travelling to England for abortions, if they became pregnant outside of marriage.


  • Options
    #57
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    So her choices were

    1) get married and keep child, would she still be able to keep career ?
    2) keep child and leave job
    3) keep job

    Aren't they the same choices endless women made, why is this so different ?


  • Options
    #58
    Bobtheman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭Bobtheman


    Harassing unmarried mothers was common all over Europe. We just did it longer. She is looking for money or fame. You can't undo the past.
    Ironically the church prevented her from being fired.
    Its a news filler. But the media love this **** even though the media were as Conservative as everybody else at the time.
    No doubt many women going for abortions in Ireland today will go looking for an apology /cash in decades time.

    Yes it should not have happened. But Apologies from people not involved is pointless unless its a prelude to a legal case.
    Though public figures love to grovel and would apologise for rain if it gets them on the airwaves


  • Options
    #59
    Nobelium
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭Nobelium


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    So her choices were

    1) get married and keep child, would she still be able to keep career ?
    2) keep child and leave job
    3) keep job

    Aren't they the same choices endless women made, why is this so different ?

    she also had

    4) keep child, keep job and stay unmarried

    She chose what she chose.


  • Options
    #60
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    Also I think when people speak about giving up their babies, it's always the emotional side of it they refer to but I always think back at the actual time of being pregnant practicalities are what was more important then. Did she have the means to provide for the child, accommodation, money, childcare while she worked, support system.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    Nobelium wrote: »
    she also had

    4) keep child, keep job and stay unmarried

    She chose what she chose.

    Would that have been allowed for her to stay in AGS unmarried and keep the baby ?


Advertisement