Latest news with #O'Higgins
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
🚨 Line-ups confirmed: U de Chile v O'Higgins at the Nacional
Universidad de Chile welcomes O'Higgins at the National Stadium for matchday 13 of the 2025 First League, where the blue team is going all out to compete in the top zone of the table. The team led by Gustavo Álvarez comes into this duel intending to turn the page, after the painful elimination from the Copa Libertadores, despite a good group stage that left them, with 10 points, qualified for the Copa Sudamericana playoffs. Advertisement On the other hand, the "Capo de Provincia" comes from defeating Ñublense 1-0 at the Nelson Oyarzún Stadium in Chillán, this for matchday 12 of the National Tournament, and now is one point above the U in the table, although they have already played two more matches (the Blues have pending the clash against Unión Española from matchday 4 and the Superclásico from the seventh). The starting XI of U de Chile against O'Higgins It should be noted the absence of Rodrigo Contreras, so Lucas Di Yorio returns to the starting lineup in the attack. With the return of Matías Zaldivia, Nicolás Ramírez leaves the defensive line and goes to the bench; also Israel Poblete is a substitute, for the return of Javier Altamirano to the starting lineup. Advertisement La U comes out with Castellón in goal; Hormazábal, Calderón, Zaldivia and Sepúlveda in defense; Aránguiz and Díaz in the middle; Guerrero, Altamirano and Leandro Fernández further forward; Di Yorio as the attacking reference. This is how O'Higgins lines up against la U The coach Francisco Meneghini must make a mandatory change in the team that just beat Ñublense: Juan Ignacio Díaz suffered a tear and is ruled out. The coach moves Felipe Faúndez to defense, to include Joaquín Montecinos as a winger. They play with Carabalí in goal; Faúndez, González, Robledo and Pavez in defense; Leiva and Lugo in the double pivot; Montecinos and Godoy on the wings; Rabello more loose and up front Calderón. This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇪🇸 here.
The Independent
11-04-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Court told line between IS sympathiser and member ‘crossed' by ex-Irish soldier
The line between a sympathiser and member of the so-called Islamic State (IS) 'was crossed' by a former Irish soldier, a Dublin court has heard. Defence barrister for Lisa Smith had earlier argued her IS membership conviction 'falls short of Irish law' and compared it with how membership of the IRA and organised crime groups is defined. The prosecution countered that 'the parameters of the GAA club' cannot be applied to the case as if there was a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to memberships. Lisa Smith, 43, from Dundalk in Co Louth, is appealing against her conviction for membership of the IS terror group at the Court of Appeal. The ex-Defence Forces member was found guilty of IS membership in 2022, but was cleared of financing terrorism, after a nine-week trial at Dublin's non-jury Special Criminal Court. Smith, a convert to Islam, went to Syria in 2015 after terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi called on Muslims to travel there. She had pleaded not guilty to charges of membership of IS and providing funds to benefit the group. Smith was sentenced to 15 months in prison and lost an appeal against the severity of the sentence in 2023. Opening the case at the Court of Appeal on Thursday, her barrister Michael O'Higgins SC said there was no 'smoking gun or burning match' that Smith did anything for IS while she lived in Syria. He said it was not possible to join a terrorist organisation by 'osmosis' and said she had led a 'totally anonymous' life as a housewife during her time there, where she was subjected to serious assaults by her former husband. Continuing his submissions to the three-judge court on Friday, Mr O'Higgins compared Smith's IS membership conviction with the way membership of the IRA and of crime gangs is defined. He said it was 'a flawed approach' to conclude someone was an IS member because they travelled to an area where Sharia law is applied. 'To put women in jail for cooking and cleaning for their husband, and believing what their husband believes in, is not a legal basis for convicting a person of serious offences,' he said. He said that none of the women in communities in Northern Ireland who 'submitted to the jurisdiction of paramilitaries' and benefited from a reduction in antisocial behaviour would be deemed IRA members. 'This passive business of living in the house and living among them falls way short of participating in the group,' Mr O'Higgins said. 'Not always but invariably the conduct that is at the heart of an IRA membership (case) does involve moving weapons, it's crime involved, it's hiring houses for the purpose of furthering some IRA operation down the line. 'All involve acts that are overtly criminal or lawful acts with the purposes of obtaining a criminal result,' he said, such as renting a car to be used in a getaway. Mr Justice John Edwards said Smith went to IS territory 'desiring to submit to their jurisdiction and live under their regime, is that not enough?' Mr O'Higgins replied that it was not and the argument 'falls short of Irish law'. He said there are several steps to joining an organisation, such as wanting to join it, the organisation accepting you, and then joining it. He said if you bring that argument to its logical conclusion, what does it mean for organised criminal gangs that operate in communities, sometimes linked to local boxing clubs. 'At what point do members of the community become involved in a criminal gang?' he said. 'There must be strict criteria, there must be moral culpability, there must be legal culpability.' He said there was no evidence that Smith made bay'ah, a ceremony in which a person swears an oath to the caliph, not IS, nor evidence she received special treatment or benefits. He added: 'Even if you were some type of Hollywood celebrity walking around wearing the outer normality of the regime as a badge of honour, if you weren't doing it as a part of membership duties, if you did that all day every day, it could never make you a member, especially if the life you led there was completely and utterly anonymous.' Mr O'Higgins said the UK had criminalised travel to parts of Syria, and while an EU directive had been prepared to criminalise travel, that legislation has not been enacted 'in any way shape or form' in Ireland, meaning that Smith's travel was lawful. Prosecuting barrister Tony McGillicuddy SC said Mr O'Higgins was 'trying to apply the parameters of the GAA club or so forth to a question of fact'. He said the idea that there is 'one set of criteria' for all memberships was 'not appropriate', and cannot be applied as if there was a 'one-size-fits-all' approach. He said that trying to compare Smith's case with 'events on this island in the past 40 years are just inapposite' and the trial court was 'right to reject them'. 'In this trial what you have was evidence of a group that was operating as a proto-state but also with murderous intent towards those who were a non-believer … and whether the appellant was a participant to the extent that she was a member, and we say that she was.' He accepted that the court would need to be careful in considering whether someone is a member or a sympathiser, but he said 'that line was crossed by the appellant'. He acknowledged there must be adherence and 'some evidence of participation', and said that the profession by Smith was 'the act of travelling' to Syria and her social media posts. He referred to what he said were 'revealing' social media interactions by Smith that were presented during the 2022 trial. 'I don't agree with Mr O'Higgins on this. One single act by a person is enough to establish membership,' he said. The case is due for mention on April 29 at 10.30am for the purpose of fixing a date later in the term when the case can conclude.
The Independent
11-04-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Ex-Irish soldier's IS membership conviction falls short of Irish law, court told
The conviction of a former Irish soldier for membership of the so-called Islamic State (IS), because she travelled to Syria in 2015, 'falls short of Irish law', a Dublin court has heard. Lisa Smith, 43, from Dundalk in Co Louth, is appealing against her conviction for membership of the IS terror group at the Court of Appeal. The former Defence Forces member was found guilty of IS membership in 2022, but was cleared of financing terrorism, after a nine-week trial at Dublin's non-jury Special Criminal Court. Smith, a convert to Islam, went to Syria in 2015 after terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi called on Muslims to travel there. She had pleaded not guilty to charges of membership of IS and providing funds to benefit the group. Smith was sentenced to 15 months in prison and lost an appeal against the severity of the sentence in 2023. Opening the case at the Court of Appeal on Thursday, her barrister Michael O'Higgins SC said there was no 'smoking gun or burning match' that Smith did anything for IS while she lived in Syria. He said it was not possible to join a terrorist organisation by 'osmosis' and said she had led a 'totally anonymous' life as a housewife during her time there, where she was subjected to serious assaults by her former husband. Continuing his submissions on Friday, Mr O'Higgins compared Smith's IS membership conviction with the way membership of the IRA and of organised crime gangs is defined. He said it was 'a flawed approach' to conclude someone was an IS member because they travelled to an area where Sharia law is applied. 'To put women in jail for cooking and cleaning for their husband, and believing what their husband believes in, is not a legal basis for convicting a person of serious offences,' he said. He said that none of the women in communities in Northern Ireland who 'submitted to the jurisdiction of paramilitaries' and benefited from the 'stamping out' of antisocial behaviour in their area would be deemed IRA members. 'This passive business of living in the house and living among them falls way short of participating in the group,' Mr O'Higgins said. 'Not always but invariably the conduct that is at the heart of an IRA membership (case), does involve moving weapons, it's crime involved, it's hiring houses for the purpose of furthering some IRA operation down the line. 'All involve acts that are overtly criminal or lawful acts with the purposes of obtaining a criminal result,' he said, such as renting a car to be used in a getaway. Mr Justice John Edwards said that Smith went to an IS-controlled part of Syria 'desiring to submit to their jurisdiction and live under their regime, is that not enough?' Mr O'Higgins replied that it was not and the argument 'falls short of Irish law'. He said there are several steps to joining an organisation, such as wanting to join it, the organisation accepting you, and then joining it. He said if you bring that argument to its logical conclusion, what does it mean for organised criminal gangs that operate in communities, sometimes linked to local boxing clubs. 'At what point do members of the community become involved in a criminal gang?' he said. 'There must be strict criteria, there must be moral culpability, there must be legal culpability.' He said there was no evidence that Smith made bay'ah, a ceremony in which a person swears an oath to the caliph, not IS, nor evidence she received special treatment or benefits. He added: 'Even if you were some type of Hollywood celebrity walking around wearing the outer normality of the regime as a badge of honour, if you weren't doing it as a part of membership duties, if you did that all day every day, it could never make you a member, especially if the life you led there was completely and utterly anonymous.' He said the UK had criminalised travel to parts of Syria, and while an EU directive had been prepared to criminalise travel, that legislation has not been enacted 'in any way shape or form' in Ireland, meaning that Smith's travel was lawful.
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Court told line between IS sympathiser and member ‘crossed' by ex-Irish soldier
The line between a sympathiser and member of the so-called Islamic State (IS) 'was crossed' by a former Irish soldier, a Dublin court has heard. Defence barrister for Lisa Smith had earlier argued her IS membership conviction 'falls short of Irish law' and compared it with how membership of the IRA and organised crime groups is defined. The prosecution countered that 'the parameters of the GAA club' cannot be applied to the case as if there was a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to memberships. Lisa Smith, 43, from Dundalk in Co Louth, is appealing against her conviction for membership of the IS terror group at the Court of Appeal. The ex-Defence Forces member was found guilty of IS membership in 2022, but was cleared of financing terrorism, after a nine-week trial at Dublin's non-jury Special Criminal Court. Smith, a convert to Islam, went to Syria in 2015 after terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi called on Muslims to travel there. She had pleaded not guilty to charges of membership of IS and providing funds to benefit the group. Smith was sentenced to 15 months in prison and lost an appeal against the severity of the sentence in 2023. Opening the case at the Court of Appeal on Thursday, her barrister Michael O'Higgins SC said there was no 'smoking gun or burning match' that Smith did anything for IS while she lived in Syria. He said it was not possible to join a terrorist organisation by 'osmosis' and said she had led a 'totally anonymous' life as a housewife during her time there, where she was subjected to serious assaults by her former husband. Continuing his submissions to the three-judge court on Friday, Mr O'Higgins compared Smith's IS membership conviction with the way membership of the IRA and of crime gangs is defined. He said it was 'a flawed approach' to conclude someone was an IS member because they travelled to an area where Sharia law is applied. 'To put women in jail for cooking and cleaning for their husband, and believing what their husband believes in, is not a legal basis for convicting a person of serious offences,' he said. He said that none of the women in communities in Northern Ireland who 'submitted to the jurisdiction of paramilitaries' and benefited from a reduction in antisocial behaviour would be deemed IRA members. 'This passive business of living in the house and living among them falls way short of participating in the group,' Mr O'Higgins said. 'Not always but invariably the conduct that is at the heart of an IRA membership (case) does involve moving weapons, it's crime involved, it's hiring houses for the purpose of furthering some IRA operation down the line. 'All involve acts that are overtly criminal or lawful acts with the purposes of obtaining a criminal result,' he said, such as renting a car to be used in a getaway. Mr Justice John Edwards said Smith went to IS territory 'desiring to submit to their jurisdiction and live under their regime, is that not enough?' Mr O'Higgins replied that it was not and the argument 'falls short of Irish law'. He said there are several steps to joining an organisation, such as wanting to join it, the organisation accepting you, and then joining it. He said if you bring that argument to its logical conclusion, what does it mean for organised criminal gangs that operate in communities, sometimes linked to local boxing clubs. 'At what point do members of the community become involved in a criminal gang?' he said. 'There must be strict criteria, there must be moral culpability, there must be legal culpability.' He said there was no evidence that Smith made bay'ah, a ceremony in which a person swears an oath to the caliph, not IS, nor evidence she received special treatment or benefits. He added: 'Even if you were some type of Hollywood celebrity walking around wearing the outer normality of the regime as a badge of honour, if you weren't doing it as a part of membership duties, if you did that all day every day, it could never make you a member, especially if the life you led there was completely and utterly anonymous.' Mr O'Higgins said the UK had criminalised travel to parts of Syria, and while an EU directive had been prepared to criminalise travel, that legislation has not been enacted 'in any way shape or form' in Ireland, meaning that Smith's travel was lawful. Prosecuting barrister Tony McGillicuddy SC said Mr O'Higgins was 'trying to apply the parameters of the GAA club or so forth to a question of fact'. He said the idea that there is 'one set of criteria' for all memberships was 'not appropriate', and cannot be applied as if there was a 'one-size-fits-all' approach. He said that trying to compare Smith's case with 'events on this island in the past 40 years are just inapposite' and the trial court was 'right to reject them'. 'In this trial what you have was evidence of a group that was operating as a proto-state but also with murderous intent towards those who were a non-believer … and whether the appellant was a participant to the extent that she was a member, and we say that she was.' He accepted that the court would need to be careful in considering whether someone is a member or a sympathiser, but he said 'that line was crossed by the appellant'. He acknowledged there must be adherence and 'some evidence of participation', and said that the profession by Smith was 'the act of travelling' to Syria and her social media posts. He referred to what he said were 'revealing' social media interactions by Smith that were presented during the 2022 trial. 'I don't agree with Mr O'Higgins on this. One single act by a person is enough to establish membership,' he said. The case is due for mention on April 29 at 10.30am for the purpose of fixing a date later in the term when the case can conclude.
The Independent
10-04-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Ex-soldier Lisa Smith's terror conviction based on ‘housewife' role, court told
The only 'overt act' which the prosecution in the trial of former Irish soldier Lisa Smith relied on was her status as a housewife in Syria, her lawyer has told a Dublin court. She is appealing against her conviction for being a member of the so-called Islamic State (IS) terror group. Her barrister Michael O'Higgins told the Court of Appeal that the only act of association to the unlawful organisation was cooking and cleaning for her former husband. Smith, 43, from Dundalk in Co Louth, is outlining her case at the Court of Appeal. The former member of the Defence Forces was found guilty of IS membership in 2023, but was cleared of financing terrorism, after a nine-week trial at Dublin's Special Criminal Court. Smith, a convert to Islam, went to Syria in 2015 after terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi called on Muslims to travel there. She had pleaded not guilty to charges of membership of IS and providing funds to benefit the group. Smith was sentenced to 15 months in prison and lost an appeal against the severity of the sentence. The appeal court also heard that Smith led a 'totally anonymous' life in Syria and there was no 'smoking gun' that she did anything for IS. Outlining the appeal, Mr O'Higgins said the prosecution claimed Smith was a part of the terror group because she is a western woman who answered the call of terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to travel to the Islamic State. He told the court that it was not a sound legal principle to convict a person of being a member of an illegal organisation. He said Smith travelled to Syria out of a religious obligation, but the court had dismissed that as 'irrelevant'. Mr O'Higgins said the court cannot ignore and deem inadmissible what the person's motive was to travel to Syria, adding that it was a 'flaw' to assume Smith was going there to do something unlawful. He told the court that a prosecution witness in Smith's trial, Dr Florence Gaub, who is an expert on Middle Eastern conflicts, accepted that some women did travel to Syria for religious reasons and to live under Sharia law. 'Is it accepted that Lisa Smith did that and is she entitled to do that without being branded a member of one of the most notorious organisations worldwide? I submit she is,' Mr O'Higgins added. He said that she led a 'totally anonymous' life in Syria, adding that there was no 'smoking gun or burning match' that she did anything for IS. The court was told that Smith shopped and bought food and was subjected to serious assaults by her former husband during her time there. Mr O'Higgins questioned what membership of an organisation looked like, saying that membership is not nor could ever include 'avid supporters' of a group. He said that membership did not include someone who agreed with an unlawful organisation's aims, or members of a community who benefited from the actions of the illegal organisation. Mr O'Higgins gave the example of paramilitaries in Northern Ireland who ran a parallel justice system during the Troubles. He said that some communities benefited from a decrease in anti-social behaviour but that those people did not become members of the IRA or UDA. Mr O'Higgins told the court that a fanatic who attacked a former RUC station or planted a bomb or did anything that mirrored the actions of the IRA did not automatically become a member. The court was told that membership is not a state of mind or a virus. He added that membership is not done by osmosis, that there must be some sort of application and acceptance to become a member. Mr Justice John Edwards interjected and said that illegal organisations would not keep a register of membership, and proof of membership of the IRA is never adduced by the production of records. Mr O'Higgins said that a person must make an act of adherence which is made directly to a person who is aware of the declaration and agrees that the person is a member. He said it does not require a record or any degree of formality, but that it requires a 'meeting of minds', and that it does not occur by some level of affinity. Mr O'Higgins claimed that the reasons to convict Smith have Dr Gaub 'all over them', but the court did not acknowledge that prominence. He said the court says exactly what Dr Gaub said in her evidence to the court, that Smith went to Syria, she remained there and received benefits from and was, therefore, a member of IS. Mr O'Higgins said it does not address sweeping generalisations which allow a person to be convicted without showing 'one single thing they did to assist' the unlawful organisation, other than going to Syria. 'I would say that is unsafe,' he told the court. He said the court may have 'coincidentally' reflected Dr Gaub's thoughts. He added that Dr Gaub is a prosecution witness who 'never stepped foot' in Syria during the turmoil.
