# teresa treacy - still in jail



## oldnick (29 Sep 2011)

I'm starting to feel a bit guilty about doing nothing about this person. I thought that chucking her in prison for a few days was bad enough ,but that surely she'd be out soon.
It's now two weeks.

I haven't been to a demonstration since student days- CND in the sixties- but feel a numb horror about what the authorities are doing in this case.

Not sure what i can do but surely this is so wrong.


----------



## csirl (29 Sep 2011)

She's in for contempt, so she decides herself when she wants to be released. She will be released as soon as she pruges her contempt, which, I image, means telling the Judge that she will abide by the ruling of the Court.


----------



## ajapale (29 Sep 2011)

Link?


----------



## The_Banker (29 Sep 2011)

While I have no inside knowledge of the case (only what I read in the papers) but if everyone took her attitude with regard to ESB power lines there would be a large area of the country unable to get electricty. 

Maybe there are other things at play here but that is how I read it.


----------



## ajapale (29 Sep 2011)

ajapale said:


> Link?




From the DailyMail.co.uk.


----------



## MrMan (29 Sep 2011)

The_Banker said:


> While I have no inside knowledge of the case (only what I read in the papers) but if everyone took her attitude with regard to ESB power lines there would be a large area of the country unable to get electricty.
> 
> Maybe there are other things at play here but that is how I read it.



Or the flip side could be that if everyone accepted what the powers that be told them then the country could end up in the mire, as it is now for instance.


----------



## oldnick (29 Sep 2011)

What does ajapale mean by "link" ?

This story has appeared in every Irish newspaper in the last two weeks ,has been on news programmes on RTE and TV3. There have been demonstrations outside Mountjoy and on the lady's estate in Tullamore, all widely reported.


----------



## tiroileain (29 Sep 2011)

oldnick said:


> What does ajapale mean by "link" ?
> 
> This story has appeared in every Irish newspaper in the last two weeks ,has been on news programmes on RTE and TV3. There have been demonstrations outside Mountjoy and on the lady's estate in Tullamore, all widely reported.


 
It was the first I had heard of it, so appreciated the link


----------



## ajapale (29 Sep 2011)

oldnick said:


> What does ajapale mean by "link" ?



I never heard of the case and was looking for a link in order to see what its about. In the event I googled her name and came up with the  DailyMail.co.uk link.


----------



## One (30 Sep 2011)

This story was on the radio this morning. I find this type of story very unconfortable. Of course I feel sorry for the woman and her family. But there are two sides to every story. The article in the Daily Mail is very one sided, and emotive. If every landowner in Ireland said that they want pylons and electric wires removed from their land, if every landowner can refuse to sell land when new roads are to be built where would the country be? The new road into Sligo town is a great road for a lot of reasons. However my parents home which is about 100 meters away from it used to be a very quiet house. The difference in the noise is very noticeable on those lazy Sunday evenings spent sitting in the garden. I don't like it, but I accept it. I know our disturbance is not of the same magnitude as this lady is expected to tolerate, but I don't think that the landowner is always right. Every case must be judged on its facts. This case was judged on its facts, and it was judged that she either relents or goes to jail. She choose to go to jail. If we disrespect our courts, what kind of society will we have?


----------



## onq (30 Sep 2011)

If you want to see where unbridled legal power leads - after due considerations of course (but by who, and with what agenda?) - look at Chapter Three of the Land Conveyancing and Law Reform Act 2009.


----------



## Ceist Beag (30 Sep 2011)

onq I don't suppose you could paraphrase briefly the content of that chapter? I tried reading it there (on the attorneygeneral.ie site) and I can't make head nor tail of what it is trying to say!


----------



## ajapale (30 Sep 2011)

Ceist Beag said:


> onq I don't suppose you could paraphrase briefly the content of that chapter?


Lads by all means do that but start a new thread to discuss it! Keep this LoS stream to discuss that unfortunate lady who is unable/unwilling to purge her contempt of court.


----------



## MrMan (30 Sep 2011)

I wonder would she be in jail right now if had a different ethnic origin?


----------



## daithi (30 Sep 2011)

*teresa treacy*

Troll alert..


daithi


----------



## oldnick (30 Sep 2011)

One poster asks what will be the consequences if landowners refuse to sell for needed projects. As far as I know there is no compensation from ESB for destroying her trees as is the case with CPOs . ESB can just come in and plant pylons and destroy trees - accept it or else go to jail. (However, as I write this I feel I must be wrong -it seems so unfair- and will happily stand corrected.)


Most European states now insist that cables (of any sort) go underground. Even here in new estates one will see far less overhead cables/wires compared to older areas. Where I live there are TV cables, phone lines, ESB lines - masses of spaghetti  above gardens and streets. 
Why does ESB still insist on large pylons and overhead cables, and if it is really necessary should not there be some sort of compensation -either fiscally or by replanting mature trees? 
And there is perhaps a difference between pylons being erected on empty fields and going through carefully planted woodland. 

Locking up an old woman who is otherwise completly law-abiding and harmless and who has worked and saved all her life, mainly spending money on trees (which Ireland desperately needs, having one of the lowest percent of forestry in europe) seems barmy.

Quoting the law makes me shudder. In this country gays were recently criminals; selling contraceptives, copies of Playboy, even some of Joyce's works  were all outlawed. "Because it's the law" does not make something just.  

Like most of us I only glanced at the first news articles about this case. Boring, i thought. But the more I read about this, the more I believe this is a case of stupid blind obedience to the letter of the law with no consideration of real justice.


----------



## nai (30 Sep 2011)

oldnick said:


> One poster asks what will be the consequences if landowners refuse to sell for needed projects. As far as I know there is no compensation from ESB for destroying her trees as is the case with CPOs . ESB can just come in and plant pylons and destroy trees - accept it or else go to jail. (However, as I write this I feel I must be wrong -it seems so unfair- and will happily stand corrected.)
> 
> 
> Why does ESB still insist on large pylons and overhead cables, and if it is really necessary should not there be some sort of compensation -either fiscally or by replanting mature trees?


 
i know you said somewhere that you only read the headlines - -- here is a link to a story ...

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/100498

seems like teresa tracey was offered approx 150k to let the esb access her lands.


----------



## Guest105 (30 Sep 2011)

> Bury the powerlines, not the people!


 
It's all there in a nutshell really.


----------



## Guest105 (30 Sep 2011)

> seems like teresa tracey was offered approx 150k to let the esb access her lands.


 
[/QUOTE]

Money has nothing to do with it, she was standing up for her principals, nothing wrong with that.


----------



## One (1 Oct 2011)

I agree with "because it is the law" doen't mean it is right, and I would suggest that some of the bankruptcy laws don't result in a just outcome. However, the law is correct much more often than not. The real question is whether it is correct in this instance? I have yet to see a reason why it is not.

Why not bury the power cables? Because I think that can be up to 10 to 20 times more expensive than pylons. How do you bury pylons through a woodland? By veering left and right of the trees? By digging a tunnel under them? It is complicated.

I live in the west of Ireland. I was recently talking to a friend who works in sustainable energy. We were talking about the potential of wave and wind energy in Mayo, and how it could contribute to the national grid. However there is a practical problem. The grid and pylons in Mayo cannot support the generation of massive amounts of electricity and subsequent supply to the rest of the country. In order to build such a network, it would take a staggering 8 years on average to get planning permission. 8 years! This is mostly because it would involve powerlines running over land owned by many many people, and any one of them has the ability to both hold up such a project and (rightly) stop the proposal in the planning stages if such cessation is justified. 

Putting the network in place is difficult. But power is needed for homes, schools, hospitals, factories, creating jobs, and creating an environment that attract foreign investment, etc.

For the sake of fairness, for the sake of balancing the protection of people's property with the necessity of building the required infrastructure in this country every case must be judged individually with regard to the details of that case. 

In this instance the planning authorities ruled in favour of the development. In this instance the court ruled in favour of the ESB. The planning authorities and courts are not always correct (Henrehan vs Merck, Sharpe and Dohme being a famous example), but for the most part they are correct.

Until I hear one reason why this lady has been wronged, I for one am going to assume that the courts are correct. I won't be influenced by newspaper articles that tend to make the subject overly emotional, and make a people's hero out of the person who stands against the will of a corporation or court. Is this the moral battle of a David vs a Goliath or is it just a person being stubborn and gaining sympathy because of her age and her otherwise law biding demeanour? I don't know.


----------



## Complainer (1 Oct 2011)

One said:


> Why not bury the power cables? Because I think that can be up to 10 to 20 times more expensive than pylons. How do you bury pylons through a woodland? By veering left and right of the trees? By digging a tunnel under them? It is complicated.



Try finding the location of a fault in an underground line.


----------



## MrMan (1 Oct 2011)

daithi said:


> Troll alert..
> 
> 
> daithi



I'm just thinking about people who illegally trespass on property and won't move, and people that illegally inhabit property without planning permission, but won't move. Does anyone for one minute think that if this land was owned by travellers that wanted to stay on the land, that they would be chucked in jail? sure it would be infringing on their human rights wouldn't it?


----------



## oldnick (1 Oct 2011)

Fair and reasoned comment from ONE . And thanks to NAI who introduced me to that interesting website Indymedia- just spent ages on this rainy day reading it.

Both posts caused me to lessen my ire at lady's imprisonment, though still think that throwing her in jail is OTT.

And I still believe that far more electricity cables should be underground.  According to really boring websites like europacable.com the extra cost of cabling underground is diminishing,  and is now between 2- 4 times more than overground depending on ground conditions -rock being a problem but soft soil being a doddle. Fair point about underground cables in forests, ONE.


----------



## daithi (2 Oct 2011)

This case has nothing to do with travellers though...On the face of it, the lady in question is refusing to obey a court ordered directive, and in doing so, has been found to be in contempt..I imagine the anger at her imprisonment has more to to with the fact that certain individuals who have cost this country dearly through their arrogance,ineptitude and greed are never likely to see the inside of a jail cell for their actions.,whilst Ms Treacy is seen to be a defender of her own property.


daithi


----------



## Shawady (3 Oct 2011)

daithi said:


> I imagine the anger at her imprisonment has more to to with the fact that certain individuals who have cost this country dearly through their arrogance,ineptitude and greed are never likely to see the inside of a jail cell for their actions.,whilst Ms Treacy is seen to be a defender of her own property.


 
This is part of it alright. I heard on the radio this morning that a homeless guy that has stolen 1,100 euro from church collection boxes over time has been given a 6 month sentence. Even the guards were shocked.


----------



## werner (5 Oct 2011)

An elderley lady has spent weeks in Mountjoy jail, due to a disgraceful action brought by the ESB and the heavy handed sentence by a judge.

Meanwhile, the bankers/developers and politicians who wrecked the economy have spent the last three years enjoying their freedom, with not so much as a single charge brought against them for their reckless mismanagement of billions in others’ money.

Truly there is a two tiered joke system of "Justice" in  Ireland

Glad to say I have pulled my account from the ESB due to their disgraceful actions !


----------



## bullbars (5 Oct 2011)

werner said:


> Meanwhile, the bankers/developers and politicians who wrecked the economy have spent the last three years enjoying their freedom, with not so much as a single charge brought against them for their reckless mismanagement of billions in others’ money.


 
So it's a free-for-all until all bankers/developers & politicians are hung from the rafters?


----------



## Mpsox (5 Oct 2011)

werner said:


> An elderley lady has spent weeks in Mountjoy jail, due to a disgraceful action brought by the ESB and the heavy handed sentence by a judge.
> 
> Meanwhile, the bankers/developers and politicians who wrecked the economy have spent the last three years enjoying their freedom, with not so much as a single charge brought against them for their reckless mismanagement of billions in others’ money.
> 
> ...


 
pulling your account from the ESB is irrelevant as this issue is being driven by Eirgrid, who all the power companies use

I really fail to see what relevance it has to property developers, other then that if the forest was owned by one, insteasd of by a pensioner, would you be so sympathetic?

If Eirgrid do re-route the lines, I'm sure the other landholders who will now end up with pylons on their land will appreciate this womans NIMBYism approach


----------



## Complainer (5 Oct 2011)

werner said:


> An elderley lady has spent weeks in Mountjoy jail, due to a disgraceful action brought by the ESB and the heavy handed sentence by a judge.


So what do you expect to happen when progress on the national grid is held up by individual landowners, in defiance of the law?


----------



## micmclo (5 Oct 2011)

> Teresa Treacy stood to gain up to approximately 150,000 euro in 3 staged payments if she agreed to the project and on condition that no legal costs were incurred by the ESB if they had to go to court, in which case the last 2 payments would be 'forfeited'.
> 
> This deal, negotiated by the IFA over the course of 2 years, seemed to appease most of the landowners



If Eirgrid choose another route and the other landowners on this route miss out on their compensation she'll be making enemies in the locality.

Well maybe she doesn't care but her decision will mean a lot for her neighbours who might be waiting for that money to be paid out


----------



## oldnick (5 Oct 2011)

The answer, complainer, to your question "_so what do you expect to happen..." _is what has happened in the last 24 hours ,as reported in todays Offalyexpress (online).

It appears that a compromise is being reached where the amount of forestry being destroyed  has will be halved. prior to that ,and due to the long battle of this lady, Eirgrid has agreed to re-planting , some compensation and other things that they never normally agree unless one fights.

I am surprised and saddened by the attitude of some posters who feel "because its the law " it was wrong of this lady to fight against the  actions of this semi-state body and that she is being justly punished. 

Even more surprising is the lack of understanding concerning the propriety of this person being jailed whilst far worse offenders are free -and even being rewarded for actions that have greatly damaged this state and its people. Justice is only justice when it is even handed. This lady in prison , Fingleton free with millions of our money ? Come on !

And what is wrong with a bit of NIMBYism ? Should one not protect one's home, land, possessions, family, or whatever is nearest and dearest ?


----------



## Firefly (5 Oct 2011)

oldnick said:


> I am surprised and saddened by the attitude of some posters who feel "because its the law " it was wrong of this lady to fight against the  actions of this semi-state body and that she is being justly punished.



Hi oldnick. Whilst I agree with you in principle (that's how many laws  are changed afterall), I must say I find this story bizzare. It's not  like some unique historical monument is being destroyed or even a newly  founded snail...but some trees and not even rare hardwood, deciduous trees, but boring olf conifers, which the ESB have promised to replace.  Why oh why does the lady attach so much to these trees?


----------



## csirl (5 Oct 2011)

oldnick said:


> I am surprised and saddened by the attitude of some posters who feel "because its the law " it was wrong of this lady to fight against the actions of this semi-state body and that she is being justly punished.


 
There is nothing wrong with this lady fighting the decision of the semi-state. What is wrong is that when she lost the fight, she decided not to adhere to the decision. Nobody has the right to take the law into their own hands.




oldnick said:


> Even more surprising is the lack of understanding concerning the propriety of this person being jailed whilst far worse offenders are free -and even being rewarded for actions that have greatly damaged this state and its people. Justice is only justice when it is even handed. This lady in prison , Fingleton free with millions of our money ? Come on !


 
Just because someone else has done something wrong, it does not give all of us the right to break the law. Are you saying that nobody in this country should be sent to jail until the banking crisis is resolved to your satisfaction? Should we free all the murderers and rapists who have been convicted since the banking crisis began?



oldnick said:


> And what is wrong with a bit of NIMBYism ? Should one not protect one's home, land, possessions, family, or whatever is nearest and dearest ?


 
There is a lot wrong with it.

NIMBYism = Selfishness and disrespect for your fellow citizens.


----------



## Mpsox (5 Oct 2011)

oldnick said:


> And what is wrong with a bit of NIMBYism ? Should one not protect one's home, land, possessions, family, or whatever is nearest and dearest ?


 
when you go home this evening and turn on your TV and lights, be grateful that the people who live along the course of your powerlines didn't agree with you.


----------



## Leo (5 Oct 2011)

Folks, bankers/developers have nothing to do with this story, so please keep the thread focused to the facts of this case.


----------



## Latrade (6 Oct 2011)

Plenty of people put themselves and or their families first in the face of a greater good. Of course it's selfish, it still doesn't mean it's wrong beyond a basic human instict to protect what you have. Not everyone can be bought off with money, sometimes what they have built up and made for themselves is more important than just money. If this wasn't true and justifiable, we wouldn't have the Croke Park Agreement.

So like Oldnick is saying, this isn't black and white, this isn't good/bad ESB vs irrational/heroic woman. Do I want a better, efficient and maybe cheaper electrical service? Of course. Would I want my land dug up and overhead lines put in? No. 

It wouldn't be because of any fears or love of trees, I just wouldn't want them on my land and I don't think the compensation package would change that.

It's easy to accuse people of NIMBYism when you're not affected. I'm not affected either, but I can sympathise with her as I can understand the reason for the power lines and Eirgrid's initial refusal to change its compensation package. But they both played poker thinking the other would back down and unfortunately she lost, but shame on Eirgrid for letting it go that far. 

Anyway. I worked and saved hard so we could get the house we wanted. I work hard(ish) so we can keep it and enjoy it as a family, that's my priority. If someone came along and said it was compulsory that a pylon, or anything else that would spoil what I have in the name of progress, went in my back garden, absolutely I'd fight it tooth and nail. I'm sorry, it isn't rational in the sense of the greater good, but then as humans we aren't rational when it comes to something as fundamental as a home we create for ourselves.

But it's good to judge people, so keep up the love of the fellow man and all his foibles. You're right, there should be no limit to the machine of progress or compromise on something as irrational as sentimentality.


----------



## ajapale (6 Oct 2011)

Has anyone heard the ESB spokeswoman on the issue? I must say I was impressed by her practical and concillatory response. Narrowing the corridoor by 50% planting native hazel bushes and dogwood under the power line and some other measures to mitigate the impact on the environment.


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

Latrade said:


> Anyway. I worked and saved hard so we could get the house we wanted. I work hard(ish) so we can keep it and enjoy it as a family, that's my priority. If someone came along and said it was compulsory that a pylon, or anything else that would spoil what I have in the name of progress, went in my back garden, absolutely I'd fight it tooth and nail. I'm sorry, it isn't rational in the sense of the greater good, but then as humans we aren't rational when it comes to something as fundamental as a home we create for ourselves.



This lady's home is not at risk.

You are entitled to defend your property rights but not in defiance of a court order.


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

ajapale said:


> Has anyone heard the ESB spokeswoman on the issue? I must say I was impressed by her practical and concillatory response. Narrowing the corridoor by 50% planting native hazel bushes and dogwood under the power line and some other measures to mitigate the impact on the environment.



The lady I heard on radio the other evening stressed that she was from Eirgrid, not the ESB. She sounded perfectly reasonable and conciliatory.


----------



## Latrade (6 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> This lady's home is not at risk.
> 
> You are entitled to defend your property rights but not in defiance of a court order.


 
I didn't say it was at risk. I'm just not judging her harshly on the basis of what a court order, compulsory purchase order or blinkered accusations of NIMBYism. I'm saying I understand her feelings completely and that I too probably wouldn't be easily bought if it meant everything I'd worked for was to be ruined by some pylons being plonked on my land. 

It's great too that Eigrid are so compassionate and accomodating after forcing the issue through the courts and putting her in a no win situation.


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

Latrade said:


> It's great too that Eigrid are so compassionate and accomodating after forcing the issue through the courts and putting her in a no win situation.


What should they have done? Abandoned altogether their plans to upgrade the power line? A national power grid does not build itself.


----------



## Latrade (6 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> What should they have done? Abandoned altogether their plans to upgrade the power line? A national power grid does not build itself.


 
Maybe I'm not being clear in my posts, but what I'm trying to get across is that this isn't a black and white you're with one or the other side. I understand Eirgrid's needs. I understand why they couldn't (openly) give in to the compensation she wanted. I understand the nation's needs for new power lines. I understand why underground is not workable. I. Get. It.

I don't get why people can't put themselves in her shoes and see that sometimes you just want your land and property exactly as you made it. Yes it's selfish, but when it comes to me and my family and what we have, I get selfish too. 

I don't get why Eirgrid had to wait nearly 2 weeks of her being in prison before they changed their offer. I don't see why they had to let it get that far. 

Here's my deal then for progressing the grid and power lines. Open up to everyone in the country where they can opt in to having pylons and lines in their front or back garden. Would you opt in?


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

Latrade said:


> I don't get why people can't put themselves in her shoes and see that  sometimes you just want your land and property exactly as you made it.  Yes it's selfish, but when it comes to me and my family and what we  have, I get selfish too.



This is why, in all developed economies, there are laws that restrict personal property rights for the common good.



Latrade said:


> Here's my deal then for progressing the grid and power lines. Open up to  everyone in the country where they can opt in to having pylons and  lines in their front or back garden. Would you opt in?



Funny you mention that. I have a power line directly crossing my garden and drive.


----------



## Latrade (6 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> This is why, in all developed economies, there are laws that restrict personal property rights for the common good.


 
So just to be clear, even though I have acknowledged it is for a greater good, never said anything negative about the law as it stands, the condescention is because I sympathise with her and understand that people may feel upset when their land is aquired and spoilt, that they may take issue with it and that it's too easy to call NIMBYism when you're not the one affected?  




T McGibney said:


> Funny you mention that. I have a power line directly crossing my garden and drive.


 
With all due sincerity, kudos. I wouldn't, but if you had the choice would you have one?


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

Latrade said:


> So just to be clear, even though I have acknowledged it is for a greater good, never said anything negative about the law as it stands, the condescention is because I sympathise with her and understand that people may feel upset when their land is aquired and spoilt, that they may take issue with it and that it's too easy to call NIMBYism when you're not the one affected?



Sorry, I condescended nobody, nor did I make any mention NIMBYism. I merely made a point in response to your comments, ie that personal property rights are restricted for the common good.



Latrade said:


> With all due sincerity, kudos. I wouldn't, but if you had the choice would you have one?



Well I built my house on a site where an existing power line crossed. We got independent scientific advice on safety etc before building and proceeded on that basis.


----------



## werner (6 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> This is why, in all developed economies, there are laws that restrict personal property rights for the common good.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny you mention that. I have a power line directly crossing my garden and drive.


 
I would personally not like to have an overhead power line near my home if I had children living there, at least when they are undergorund the emf field is earthed.

British Medical Journal
http://www.bmj.com/content/330/7503/1290.full

News Item
[broken link removed]
_Power Lines Linked To Child Cancer_
_Sky News has learned that the Government has known for three years that high voltage power lines double the risk of childhood cancer.   A study for the Department of Health shows children living within 100m of overhead cables are more likely to suffer from leukaemia._


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

werner said:


> I would personally not like to have an overhead power line near my home if I had children living there, at least when they are undergorund the emf field is earthed.
> 
> British Medical Journal
> http://www.bmj.com/content/330/7503/1290.full
> ...



You pays your money and you makes your choices.


----------



## Latrade (6 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> Sorry, I condescended nobody, nor did I make any mention NIMBYism. I merely made a point in response to your comments, ie that personal property rights are restricted for the common good.


 
That's fair enough, I had never contradicted those points, I'd even agreed with them in my posts, I merely said I sympathised with her and that the general (again didn't indicate you) negative reaction to her was in my opinion harsh and unjustified.




T McGibney said:


> Well I built my house on a site where an existing power line crossed. We got independent scientific advice on safety etc before building and proceeded on that basis.


 
Couldn't agree more, I never mentioned safety, and I don't believe her concerns were safety either, but if we had a choice would we have a pylon? The reason for the compulsory legislation is because most people would object, so we need legislation to force it through. That doesn't mean people have to be happy having it on their land.


----------



## Ceist Beag (6 Oct 2011)

werner said:


> It highlights a two tier system of justice in this country where the full might of the state is brought to bear upon an individual woman whilst the above go totally unpunished despite being involved in wrecking the economy
> 
> Ms Treacy’s disgraceful incarceration in prison may be "lawful", it is certainly not just.



+1 werner. That is the crux of the issue here I think. It's not so much whether Ms Treacy was right or wrong, it's more that she was thrown in jail for standing up for her beliefs when so many others in this country haven't even been brought to court over much much worse deeds. I guess the problem boils down to who it is you are up against. If you are a corrupt politician then more often than not it is the people of the state you are against and sure they would never be organised enough to bring them to court. Whereas if it is a large organisation you are up against then you're most likely to end up in jail. So whilst I don't necessarily agree with the stance taken by Ms Treacy I most certainly have sympathy for her situation and I think it reflects poorly on Eirgrid that it got to this point.


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

Ceist Beag said:


> If you are a corrupt politician then more often than not it is the people of the state you are against and sure they would never be organised enough to bring them to court. Whereas if it is a large organisation you are up against then you're most likely to end up in jail. So whilst I don't necessarily agree with the stance taken by Ms Treacy I most certainly have sympathy for her situation and I think it reflects poorly on Eirgrid that it got to this point.



Er, Liam Lawlor was jailed for contempt of court, just as way Ms Treacy.


----------



## Ceist Beag (6 Oct 2011)

That's just one example - I did say "more often than not"!


----------



## T McGibney (6 Oct 2011)

Okay then, find me two examples of people who were found to be in contempt of court but not jailed until they purged their contempt.


----------



## Firefly (6 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> You pays your money and you makes your choices.



Given the conflicting viewpoints out there about something with such potentially adverse health implications, I do hope you are right sir...


----------



## Ceist Beag (6 Oct 2011)

T McGibney said:


> Okay then, find me two examples of people who were found to be in contempt of court but not jailed until they purged their contempt.



I think you missed my point. I was pointing out that the little person against a big organisation is much more likely to be brought to court in the first place, compared to the likes of politicians (or lawyers, bankers, etc). Anyway I fear we're straying again from the original post.


----------



## Leo (6 Oct 2011)

Thread closed due to failure to stay on-topic.


----------

