Irish Law is a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing.
national | crime and
justice | opinion/analysis
Thursday November 29, 2007 00:53
by Setanta - Victims of the Legal Profession Society.
setantasetantaone
at yahoo dot ie
0877522838 
The Illicit Law in Ireland.
An evil monster is growing in our legal
society which encourages a dogma of belief that there is no wrong in
Slander,Liable,Deformation,Secrecy, Corruption,Threat,Deception, Perjury
,Theft and a host of other perversions in our justice system that
combine together and destroy the common good.
Irish Law is a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing!
It is
generally assumed that the law consists of certain fundamental principles,
abstract bodies of reason, and a repository of wisdom, which serve the
interests of justice in every society. It is held that the principle of
fair play informs judicial decisions and opinions, and that due process
and procedure is carried out dispassionately without personal, political
or professional prejudice. However, not all of these assumptions can be
justified. In fact, on many occasions the opposite is chillingly the case.
The law is often executed arbitrarily in the interests of the few who
dispense it, rather than for the benefit of the many that it is supposed
to serve. It is shot through with discrepancies, inconsistencies,
irregularities and peculiarities. If the law is an ass, it is a very
clever and devious one.
The law acts as a mechanism for class
control. It consolidates the hierarchical order that governs humanity,
protecting the privileges of the elite and the powerful at the expense of
many others. In every society there exists a certain group of people who,
for all practical purposes, are outside the influence of the judicial
process. The law therefore operates too often as a vehicle of the
establishment. It is engaged in a conscious and surreptitious strategy to
reshape culture, and to transform society in general. By constantly
twisting the precepts that many people hold to be absolute, it will
eventually change reality itself. If the truth is turned on its head often
enough it will inevitably assume the shape that most accords with the
demands of the moment. When this happens, any perversion of thought can be
practised.
The law consists of a set of codes and rules that guide
society, and help to regulate its operations on a daily basis. Those who
interpret and implement these standards exercise enormous influence over
people in general. The more obscure the rules, the more power is vested in
the hands of those who translate them. More often than not the objective
is to turn simple truths into a maze of complications, ordinary tenets
into a tapestry of confusion. This way no one understands. When
information is continually convoluted, even the most determined will
eventually resign to the fact that they cannot even understand the most
basic truths.
The law is therefore knowledge which is being
constantly moulded and used as a weapon against the supposed common herd.
It creates a mystique which, apparently, only the most brilliant legal
minds can fathom. Its objective is not to enlighten, but to disempower. It
garners power to the top. It burrows its claws into every interest,
economic, social and political. It is an invisible monster, parasitical on
society and dangerous too.
If the institutions of a nation are the
vehicle, 'jurisprudence' is the engine. The 'devil's advocates' have an
intimate knowledge of the inner workings of all the mechanisms of state.
They know where power resides and how it can be retained. They appreciate
the subtleties that have to be invoked to preserve the appearance of
conformity. Having formulated the laws that constitute the fundamental
ethos of the state, they are in a great position to manipulate them.
The legal fraternity inveigles their way into everything. They
bring within their sphere of influence family, finance, farm and firm. No
area of privacy escapes their clutches. No level of intrusiveness is
considered too embarrassing for their gaze. By penetrating into every
organ of the state, they cement together a pyramidal structure of power
that is almost invincible.
In contributing to, and sharing in a pool of
knowledge, many advocates cross all ethical boundaries. They tamper with
information that should never leave the precincts of the private
individual. However, by passing the bloodied knife, everyone is
implicated. Operating within a system more insidious than the Masonic
lodges, very few can afford to be pure. Principle is thus displaced by
expediency, and morality by might.
Only by surrendering the weight
of personal identity to the bigger group can power be attained, and held
indefinitely. When all influence emanates from the centre, control can be
exercised much more rigorously. The weakness of the individual cell then
becomes the strength and vigour of the overall organism. The lone legal
functionary has power only in so far as he ceases to be his real self. If
he does not forfeit his higher inclinations he can be very easily squeezed
out. This process of isolation can be effected with remarkable ease.
When the mills of the legal profession start to grind, they do so
comprehensively and ruthlessly. Very few within their ranks can challenge
this potency. Only occasionally do the dark secrets that lurk beneath the
portals of jurisprudence become manifest. The law is not only a
profession; it also embraces many of the attributes of a cult orientation.
Those who break the rules do so at their peril.
The objective of
many in the legal profession is to operate at a certain level of
inefficiency. An all-round slowing down of the process is an effective
method of control. But incompetence does not impair their ability to turn
over a big clientele, or a quick profit. Two and two can amount to five,
but only when it affects the welfare of the public. Once this version of
logic is accepted any perversion of truth can be tolerated.
There
is nothing as lethal as a mixture of wilful arrogance and professional
incompetence. But, policed as they are by their own body, they are, in the
main, unaccountable, untouchable to a great extent. The grandiloquent
tones they affect hide a deep truth. Bar the misappropriation of funds,
which no amount of gobbledegook can explain, they can be brought to book
for virtually nothing. In the meantime they can manipulate every area of
life. Like every cartel, their remit is without end.
In many
instances lawyer's allegiance to their colleagues supersedes the duty of
care to their respective clients. In a conflict of interest that loyalty
is always honoured. The alliance therefore is more horizontal in nature
with the respective professionals on top, and the public beneath, rather
than the vertical relationship of advocate and client on either side of
the line. The power association is one of top to bottom across the board.
Just like in the Cold War, where those in control of the competing power
structures had an understanding, the real war was often waged against
their own people. The intonation 'understanding' exerts a strong resonance
in the legal world. It also carries a higher moral charge than does
confidentiality.
The legal elite live in a self-contained
universe. The more they become estranged from ordinary people, the more
they have to rely on their own colleagues for succour and support. This
further reinforces their delusions. They are presently changing the way
many people conduct their lives. With the threat of compensation claims,
in time it will be impossible to do almost anything. The legal fraternity
is thus controlling society by stealth. Their brilliance is remarkable in
that they can effect this process with such panache, and with such
bravado. Criminals also try to dictate, but not with such impertinence.
However, there are many in the legal fields who work diligently
for the greater good of humanity. They strive, against the odds, to bring
into existence a more equitable system of justice. They labour tirelessly
on behalf of their clients, and do not succumb to the expediency of the
moment. They represent the proud standard bearers of a profession that
has, to a great extent, lost its way.
By Seamus
Power.0877522838.Wexford.28-11-2007
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (8 of 8)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Thank you for this article Seamus.
Though (like you) I still believe that there must be some decent lawyers somewhere in the Republic of Ireland's legal profession, I still cannot find one who is willing to even discuss my case with me.
"However, there are many in the legal fields who work diligently for the greater good of humanity. They strive, against the odds, to bring into existence a more equitable system of justice. They labour tirelessly on behalf of their clients, and do not succumb to the expediency of the moment. They represent the proud standard bearers of a profession that has, to a great extent, lost its way."
Unfortunately, in the legal field of "human rights law", I fear your statement in the paragraph immediately above, might not be true at the present time.
By way of evidence, please note that I have STILL not received any reply from our Chief Justice John L. Murray (or from any of his senior law officer colleagues) to the registered letter I sent him on August 28th last (copy at http://www.europeancourtofhumanrightswilliamfinnerty.com/ChiefJusticeMurray/28August2007/Letter.htm ).
As can be seen at the above address, one paragraph of my registered letter of August 28th 2007 to Chief Justice Murray reads as follows:
"With due regard to what I am relating to you in this letter, it would be much appreciated if you could provide me with written advise, within the coming 14 days please, as to where I stand exactly regarding my legal rights under the Republic of Ireland's "European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003". As things stand, it appears (to me) that, in practice, and despite all the time-consuming efforts I have made to secure such rights during the past five years or so, I still don't have them."
If by any chance you happen to know of a lawyer who might be willing to help me, please let me know.
"Liable,Deformation"?
Don't you mean "Libel, Defamation"?
William,
you engage legal advice, you do not write to a legal professional and expect a written reply, free, gratis and for nothing. You meet with a solicitor/barrister/whoever with a substantial cash down-payment ( yes, its as common as that) and you take it from there.
Good Luck!
80 years after gaining our independence there are many aspects of Irish life that are still, almost
inextricably, linked to our monarchical past. When these links interfere with the administration of our
legal system, as already mentioned, or our democracy, then we have cause to be concerned.
For instance, we would consider Freedom of The Press to be one of the pillars of our democracy yet...
almost all journalists are members of the National Union of Journalists NUJ. The Nation referred to is
not Eire or ROI, it is in fact Britain. The NUJ is administered (controlled?) from London.
This link may have no effect on the day-to-day workings of the press but here have been a number of
occasions, including the fall of a government, when the loyalty of this Union has been called into
question, but not by journalists. The NUJ has adopted policies which are at odds with Irish law and has policies, voted for by its British members, of instigating social change (in Ireland).
The NUJ in Ireland would prefer that the link to the Crown was not widely known.
Please note that all of the legal papers connected with my home in County Galway have been lodged with law firm Patrick Hogan & Company (Dunlo Street, Ballinasloe) since the mid-1980s, and that I do not owe any money on my home.
Consequently, Patrick Hogan & Company know that there is absolutely no danger whatsoever that I could avoid paying them for any work they do on my behalf.
Despite this, Mr John Glynn (Barrister & Principle Lawyer at Hogan & Company) appears to be COMPLETELY unwilling to reply to the registered letter I sent to him on April 3rd last, a copy of which can be viewed at http://www.europeancourtofhumanrightswilliamfinnerty.com/JohnGlynn3April2007/EmailLetter.htm .
Even more disturbing, and worrying (in my view), Mr Glynn is not replying to a registered letter sent to him some weeks later by my half-sister (Ms Margie Dolan), and my brother (Mr Gerald Finnerty), which SPECIFICALLY relates to my particular case. A copy of their REGISTERED letter to Mr Glynn can be seen at: http://www.europeancourtofhumanrightswilliamfinnerty.com/JohnGlynn14May2007/Letter.htm
William,
I don't wish to tell you your business but I suggest -
-Ring the legal professional you wish to do business with,
talk to his/her secretary and make an appointment to meet.
Ask how much is consultation fee. (How much!)
Go along to said meeting with fee, in cash, not cheque/iou or you won't even make it to the chair.
Take it from there.
If you cannot attend then get a family member/friend to attend.
You can waste the rest of your life on registered letters, frustration and indignation or you can address your problem.
You may also tell me to stuff my advice.
'You let me down, man. Now I don't believe in nothing no more. I'm going to law school.' - Jimbo Jones
Seamus,
If you saw prime time this week have a look at the speech by the President of the Law Society on the link below, or look up Sub-Prime Nation on this site.
Good luck with your quest.
Slan
Domhain Sceadaman
"It cannot be too often repeated that I am not for sale. I was bought in 1921 and the transaction was final and conclusive." Myles na gCopaleen
Thank you for your suggestion.
Please note though that what you have suggested has already (in effect) been done for me by a senior social worker (Mr Gerard Madden) while acting on my behalf in June 2005.
Mr Madden, who works for the Northern Ireland Health Service, booked an appointment to see solicitor Adrian O'Kane (Solicitor at Patrick Fahy & Co., Omagh, County Tyrone) on June 30th 2005.
In an effort to try and make it absolutely clear to Mr O'Kane that I wished to discuss my legal rights, under "human rights law", with him at the meeting, I sent him an e-mail on June 23rd 2005 - a copy of which can be seen at http://www.europeancourtofhumanrightswilliamfinnerty.com/AdrianKane23June2005/Email.htm .
In the event, when myself and Mr Madden got to the meeting a week later, on June 30th 2005, Mr O'Kane was not willing to discuss the "human rights" law issues with me (which I went to the meeting SPECIFICALLY to discuss with him, and after having informed him so well in advance).
After the June 30th 2005 meeting with Mr O'Kane, Mr Madden then went on to try other possible channels available to him PROFESSIONALLY through the Northern Ireland Health Service; however, and although I am very firmly of the belief that he has tried his VERY best, Mr Madden's efforts in this regard have not been successful to date.
I have also continued on with my own efforts to find a lawyer who is willing to discuss my legal rights (under human rights law) with me, e.g. the "European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003" (Republic of Ireland) - but, as in Mr Madden's case, to date I have not had any success either.
The fact that I cannot find a lawyer who is willing to discuss with me my legal rights (under human rights law) does not appear (to me) to be anything whatsoever to do with the payment of lawyers' consultation fees.