Shell to Sea Court Cases - 19 Oct

by me myself and I Fri Oct 19, 2007 20:26

The first thing one has to ask themselves is why charges were dropped against JM, the excuse of a lesser burden of proof was needed to pursue a conviction in the District court than in the Circuit court doesn't really make sense.
If the DPP believed he had sufficient evidence to charge JM with assault, he (DPP) would have undoubtedly assumed that if convicted JM would have appealed to the CC, Judge Devins making "excuses" for the DPP is laughable in light of this fact.
Secondly, the case of the bellanaboy three been adjourned until December, here again something is not right, the judge has as much evidence now as she had when she convicted them in the district court!
So why the attention to detail now?

Here is my theory.
The government/Shell/Gardai and others are well aware that if JM or the Bellanaboy 3 are convicted and jailed it will give a new lease of life to the S2S campaign, they believe that the campaign has lost momentum and that without a major development (jailing a S2S'r) this campaign is waning.
By deferring the case until December the EPA will have announced its decision on the IPPC licence, as this announcement will have a huge impact on the campaign.
I am not usually one for conspiracies, but this series of events in recent days are unusual and unlikely coincidental,

by Niall Fri Oct 19, 2007 22:07

Another very informative court report from Belmullet/Bellanaboy. So important for people around the country to get the insight you're giving.

Thanks again.

by Seán Ryan Fri Oct 19, 2007 22:37

If the video camera got a 'knock' that put it into standby, the last bit of footage, before the 7 minute gap appears, would have recorded the alleged 'knock.'

It's my bet that no such knock appears in the footage. Also, it's stated that the Garda who was using the camera didn't notice that the camera had gone into standby and just continued to film thinking the camera to be working normally. Complete bullshit. If the camera was in standby, you'd not get a picture in the viewfinder or the display panel. Unless the Garda was aiming blind he could not have been unaware that the camera was in standby. It's quite unbelievable the amount of crimes the Gardaí allege, the amount of video footage recorded and the fact that not one singular crime has been recorded.

Remember folks, tis a possible 7 year stint for perjury. That's probably why the Gardaí used guesswork with regard to explaining the missing 7 minutes rather than detective work. Guesswork has no place in a Courtroom.

Perjury might be hard to prove, however, perversion of the course of justice amongst other things only requires a preponderance of evidence. Throw in defamation and you get a jury to decide the issue.

You reap what you sow.

by Niall Fri Oct 19, 2007 22:59

And it's not the first time that Garda Greg Burke MY165 has claimed 'a camera fault' in an important case.

by Jimbob Sat Oct 20, 2007 01:49

Always good to hear what's going on. Beir bua.

by Mr. G - mindfreedom Sun Oct 21, 2007 09:58

I see that Garda DA51 was back in Belmullet for the case but wearing different numbers , I think they were DB23. Anybody know what part of the country this relates to ?

by Ljcool - S2S Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:43

I also saw Sgt. Chisolm in court on friday. However no sign of his tacky camper van. I think DA51 may be from Limerick side.

by madam k Sun Oct 21, 2007 16:18

`>"The official garda explanation of this missing video section is that the video camera must have received a knock which put the camera on standby and that the camera operator, Garda Greg Burke believed that he was recording as normal."

The defense should obtain master copy of tape and check the time line.If the 7 missing minute have been edited out the timeline will have changed .
It is also be possible to determine if a tape is master or an edited duplicate.

by wal Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:21

"the camera operator, Garda Greg Burke believed that he was recording as normal"

anybody who has ever used a modern video recorder will know that this is rubbish. You can clearly whether a camera is recording. To miss this for 7 minutes is incredible. Let's have the make and model of the camera and put it to the test.

by Pat - none Mon Oct 22, 2007 13:59 none none

Correct me if I am wrong. As far as I know, all moderen cameras automatacally shut down after five minutes.
After five minutes this action would come into play and the screen would go blank. The camera shuts down.
At this point the opperater would realise the error and switch it back on. He would then press the record button stright away. This action just taks seconds, so he sholud only be missing a little over five minutes.
Oh what a tangled web we wieve, when we set out to decieve.

Leave it to the Garda shitinthecorner

by Pat - none Mon Oct 22, 2007 14:04 none none

PS.........I meant to say that the camera shuts down after five minutes when left on stanby.
I hope this makes it a little clearer

by Eoin - RSC Mon Oct 22, 2007 18:33

Today, Shell have moved their drilling machine and equiptment even closer to the camp and are continuing boring test holes. Where they are boring now is almost certainly on the SAC. Here's some photos I took today, the first being from the camp.

Photo from the Camp

Boring on an SAC

Scene from Glengad road

by JM Mon Oct 22, 2007 23:50 Rossport

If RPS are test-drilling for Shell anywhere on the old Glengad wayleave (which forms part of all three re-routing options) then they are within the Glenamoy Bog Complex Special Area of Conservation.

Proposed Glengad landfall (SAC shaded yellow)

by Mr. G Sat Oct 27, 2007 09:45

The courts will decide about the Garda camera , your are entitled to your views but they are not based on the full facts. This is the reason that we have a court system . This is the reason that we have laws. Remember the Clash song ' I FOUGHT THE LAW ,BUT........