In flagrante delicto in Dublin – Ireland: update 15/5/24

On 10th November 2023 the victim received this decision of Paul Comerford.  In flagrante delicto in Dublin – Ireland will legally break what this gentleman wrote into smithereens. Unquestionably, the four page-document along with documentation in this post speak whether what happened could be classified as In flagrante delicto in Dublin -Ireland, or everything was legal. Ergo the two names stand out:

  • Paul Comerford, complaints and resolutions officer of the Legal Services Regulatory Authority in Ireland. Having in mind the facts this website points to it is, extremely, important to establish whether  Paul Comerford, complaints and resolutions officer meets the criteria required for the post he occupies.
  • Leo Fay (of Michael J. Kennedy Solicitors)

Facts of this post explain whether these individuals are In flagrante delicto individuals or not. On the front page Paul Comerford writes……

We have already pointed to in 9th post published on 7th November 2023 that the first set of documents Mr Michael Doran received on 25th August 2023 at 09:18. Furthermore, the second set of documents Ms Shannon Hallissey of the Legal Services regulatory Authority received on 17th October 2023 at 10:28. Equally important, we will start uploading  documentation of both sets immediately after publishing this post.  Then the Court of International Public will have the clear insight into what happened in this In flagrante delicto in Dublin – Ireland and will easily determine whether Mr Paul Comeford of the Legal Services Regulatory Authority  honestly and impartially ….

….and whether his assertion….

….is true or false. We also would love to point out that these two sets contain several analyses and what documents say at certain places….well, you will see …..this presentation of evidence will last…. Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 in its section 10 refers to several important notions….

We note the key concepts that this section refers to: “dishonestly” and “intention”. Let us see what they mean. defines dishonesty and in Cambridge dictionary intention refers to “something that you want and plan to do…” In addition the Act in section 10.- (1) (a) also points to the concept of falsification explaining it more  in section  2 (a)….

Section (2) (b) stresses the concept of omission…..

Section 10.- (1) (c) further clarifies the circumstances….

We, 33rd time, call on both Brian Doherty (Chief Executive Officer of Legal Services Regulatory Authority) and Fay Leo to publicly explain, defend and justify Appendixes 24 and 28. If they continue ignoring this call somebody could understand it as their own acknowledgement that Paul Comerford of Legal Services Regulatory Authority and Leo Fay are caught in the very act of perpetrating criminal offences in light of undeniable exhibits this post refers to. In flagrante delicto is a very interesting formulation having, particularly, in mind Sections 7 and 8 in Criminal law Act, 1997. More enthralling content follows….stay with us…

      Analysis – pages 1 to 27      Appendixes:      1 – 29      30 – 40      42 – 44      69 – 72      74                                          

To be continued….



Share on Social Media:

Similar Posts