A RETIRED ASSISTANT Garda Commissioner, who was previously involved in investigating complaints of alleged disciplinary breaches in the force, told how it is a “terrifying” ordeal for a serving Garda to be put on suspension accused of wrongdoing.

Fintan Fanning was giving evidence at the trial of retired Superintendent, Eamon O’Neill, and four serving gardaí, including, Sergeant Anne Marie Hassett, Sergeant Michelle Leahy, Garda Tom McGlinchey and Garda Colm Geary.

The five accused, who are on trial at Limerick Circuit Court, have denied a total of 39 counts of the unlawful quashing of pending or potential summonses for alleged motoring offences including speeding, holding a mobile phone while driving, non-wearing of seat-belts, driving without insurance.

Fanning, who retired from the force on 5 August 2019, said the penalties for alleged garda disciplinary breaches were serious and often included warnings, a reduction in salary, or ultimately dismissal from the force on the direction of the Garda Commissioner.

Fanning told the court that in his almost 40 years of garda service, he had never heard of any member being criminally prosecuted before the courts in respect of the administration of fixed charge penalty notices or traffic summonses.

He said that suspension from the force pending the outcome of internal enquires has “severe career implications” for any garda.

The four serving gardai on trial have been on suspension for the past six years.

Answering John Byrne, senior counsel for Garda McGlinchey, Fanning agreed that when a garda is suspended on foot of an allegation, the garda is effectively “locked” out of the garda organisation.

“It’s terrifying, you’re told you can no longer go near your garda station, and the stigma attached is horrendous,” Fanning said.

“The reality is (the suspended garda) is on their own, their confidence is on the ground, all the steam goes out of you.”

Fanning said that suspended gardaí remain on a basic pay, but they often find themselves on a financial “cliff-edge” because they are no longer entitled to claim a host of additional allowances, such as overtime.

Fanning said a suspended garda, is “almost walking in a dead man’s shoes”, because they may be innocent but still have to suffer the penalties of being on suspension.

“It breaks your spirit, it breaks your heart, it breaks your values, you feel just worthless,” Fanning added.

The retired senior garda explained that gardaí who are found innocent of alleged disciplinary breaches, must then take litigation if they ultimately seek an apology or compensation, “and that isn’t easy”.

“You might get a handshake, if you’re lucky”.

The witness agreed with Byrne that even though a garda can be acquitted of a criminal allegation, “the next battle starts” in being acquitted by an internal garda disciplinary hearing.

They can remain “locked” out of the force due to these internal disciplinary procedures taking “a considerable amount of time” to conclude, Fanning said.

Fanning agreed with prosecuting barrister, senior counsel Carl Hanahoe, that up until 2014 all garda at the rank of superintendent had the power to cancel fixed charge penalty notices (FCPNs), which are served to people allegedly detected in breach of the road traffic act and summoned before a district court.

Hanahoe put it to Fanning that, since 2014, due to a change in garda policy this power was removed from the hands of local superintendents and given to three superintendents working out of a cancelling authority, based in Thurles, Co Tipperary.

Fanning said that, in his opinion, he understood that a local Superintendent could still “make a decision to cancel” a FCPN and send their direction in correspondence to Thurles.

Hanahoe put it to Fanning that it was only the superintendent’s in the cancelling authority that made this decision, but Fanning replied: “I don’t necessarily see it that way.”

Fanning said, in his opinion, he regarded local superintendents as still being a “decision-maker” in the cancelling of FCPNs.

“I wouldn’t envisage that Thurles would make the decision without consulting back to the Superintendent, it’s not as simple as that.”

The prosecution has alleged that Eamon O’Neill, serving as a Superintendent, was contacted by people seeking discretion in respect of FCPNs, and that Supt O’Neill forwarded these requests to the co-accused to sort out.

 Hanahoe has told the trial that what all of the offences have “in common” is the alleged unlawful “interference or involvement of Eamon O’Neill”.

Hanahoe put it to Fanning that discretion was vested solely with a prosecuting garda, however, Fanning said, in his opinion, “line management have a responsibility” in the process.

Fanning said, in his view, discretion was “complex”.

The witness argued that a person who interacts with a garda “on the side of the road” during a traffic stop, might feel “vulnerable” at that moment in time.

He agreed with Felix McEnroy, senior counsel for O’Neill, that a person stopped by a garda was entitled to approach a different garda later on that they “knew” or “trusted” and enquire about discretion.

“There’s two sides to every story/the truth, we (gardai) hear a version of the facts, then we have to consider it,” Fanning said.

The trial continues Wednesday.