[ad_1]
The anti-eviction activist Ben Gilroy was jailed for three months for failing to comply with the High Court's order to complete 80 hours of community service after admitting the criminal contempt.
On Wednesday, Judge Brian McGovern noted that Mr. Gilroy had committed a "deliberate and conscious" violation of the community service order of October 2017, resulting from his admission at the beginning of the year of disdain criminal.
The disdain for the fact that Mr. Gilroy, in an affidavit filed in a proceeding by Allied Irish Bank seeking to plead a EUR 3.2 million sentence against another man, accused the court of "intimidation and criminal threats" and compared the action of a court with that of "A thief pointing a gun at his head and stealing his wallet".
Mr Gilroy, Riverview, Athlumney Abbey, Navan, Co Meath, had also claimed to have been "threatened by members of a semi-secret society wearing black wigs and cloaks" who believe they are "superior to other members of society" and "they act clandestinely to hide their crime".
In July 2017, the judge had said that Mr. Gilroy had accused the judge of being "in violation of his oath" and of having taken part and allowing criminal activity to take place in front of him.
The affidavit also contained additional threats against the judge, the solicitor and the legal counsel for AIB, he said.
Mr. Gilroy's affidavit was "to say the least a direct attack on the court and the administration of justice" and was "calculated to discredit the administration of justice and diminish the authority of the court" .
After Mr. Gilroy admitted the disdain, he apologized and said he was willing to undertake the service to the community, the matter was updated and the October 2017 order then directed the completion of 80 hours of service to the community.
In evidence to the judge, two agents of the probation service stated that Mr. Gilroy had not performed any social assistance service since the order was issued.
Both agreed that Mr. Gilroy had told them he was willing to do the service, but he had raised issues that claimed that AIB's title on the judicial order was incorrect and had also referred to a appeal by the Supreme Court.
Mr. Gilroy, with an oath, said he was willing to perform the civil service and that he had informed the probation service. He said that there was "no animosity" between him and the service, he had arrived for every meeting with what had been requested and had also contacted charity shops for the hours of service.
His difficulty arises from the ordination of October 2017 that erroneously identifies the AIB title, he said. He said that he had previously successfully raised the question of AIB using an incorrect title with another High Court judge and claimed that the bank had fraudulently acted on the title.
He referred to a problem on a comma, he said it was a "very serious" thing to guarantee "the real title" and he wanted the October 2017 order to reflect the "true title".
In his ruling, the judge said that what was before him was the October 2017 order against which there was no appeal and he was not interested in any other order. He had been kind to Mr. Gilroy not to send him to jail and the problem now was whether he had respected the order of October 2017.
This order provided that, in case of non-fulfillment of the service to the community, Mr. Gilroy would be imprisoned for three months for non-fulfillment or refusal to fulfill.
Since then, the probation service has informed the chief clerk of the High Court that Mr. Gilroy had not been in the service of the community and had provided a report to that effect.
He was "quite satisfied" that there had been a conscious and deliberate refusal to respect the order and that he would follow Mr. Gilroy now serving a sentence of three months imprisonment.
Source link
