Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

John O Brien not guilty?

24

Comments

  • #32
    Sherifu
    Registered Users Posts: 17,727 ✭✭✭✭Sherifu


    First i've seen of this case. Lack of evidence ftl.


  • #33
    _blank_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    And in the family suicide cases, if the father did it he's a "monster" if the mother did it she's "mentally ill".

    Double standards ftl.


  • #34
    Eoin
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 21,238 CMod ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    mike65 wrote: »
    Careful whats said here, its not unknown for new evidence to come to light.

    Of course if he didn't do it then the police will have to start again, interesting to see how much effort they put in.

    Mike.

    I wonder can/do the Gardai still consider such cases closed even if a guilty verdict wasn't returned against who they liked for it?


  • #35
    Marksie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,395 ✭✭✭Marksie


    Dudess wrote: »
    Important notice: The man has been found not guilty - under no circumstances can anyone make any remarks implying he's guilty. That is libel and he would be well within his rights to sue.

    We do not know the full facts as presented in court, we have been presented with essentially executive summaries. The jury in this case was presented with everything, the judge was also clear in his summing up.

    Thus presented with the evidence, the jury has reached a unanimous verdict based on much more information than has been presented here: that verdict was not guilty.

    Sometimes threads like these just go to show that if someone throws enough mud it will stick.


  • #36
    TheNog
    Registered Users Posts: 4,160 ✭✭✭TheNog


    eoin_s wrote: »
    I wonder can/do the Gardai still consider such cases closed even if a guilty verdict wasn't returned against who they liked for it?

    No it is back to work on it again in the hope of getting new information/evidence.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Caoimhín
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,789 ✭✭✭Caoimhín


    TheNog wrote: »
    No it is back to work on it again in the hope of getting new information/evidence.

    Can someone be tried twice on the same charge?


  • #38
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    TheNog wrote: »
    In this case the husband had the motive when Meg Ryan was caught kissing another man

    I googled that name to :o

    Mike.


  • #39
    Naos
    Registered Users Posts: 4,728 ✭✭✭Naos


    keen wrote: »
    http://www.rte.ie/news/

    Bookmark that they have all the daily news.

    Oh really? You're a smart one, eh?

    For future reference, some workplaces restrict access to certain sites. Therefore it's easier for all if the OP posts the article in a quote or at leasts provides a link so we know what we are working off.


  • #40
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,204 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    caoibhin wrote: »
    Can someone be tried twice on the same charge?

    I dont think so but i wouldnt know


  • #41
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    caoibhin wrote: »
    Can someone be tried twice on the same charge?
    In this country, yes afaik, provided that the DPP can show some significant new evidence which changes the facts of the case that was previously presented.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    godtabh
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,204 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    seamus wrote: »
    In this country, yes afaik, provided that the DPP can show some significant new evidence which changes the facts of the case that was previously presented.

    I thought you couldnt be charged for the same thing twice?


  • #43
    _feedback_
    Registered Users Posts: 4,269 ✭✭✭_feedback_


    that'd be a bit of a pain in the arse wouldn't it?!


  • #44
    kaizersoze1980
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭kaizersoze1980


    kearnsr wrote: »
    I thought you couldnt be charged for the same thing twice?

    the law of double jeapardy .

    as far as i know its a US law

    you cant be done for a crime youve already been acquitted for


  • #45
    _blank_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    kaizersoze1980 wrote: »
    the law of double jeapordy
    I'll take "US Laws not applicable in Ireland" for 400 please Alex.


  • #46
    Quigs Snr
    Registered Users Posts: 4,128 ✭✭✭Quigs Snr


    Locals who would have known the couple, or even just the ex-wife will be fairly astonished and dissappointed with this verdict. But thats the legal system for you, when all of the evidence was put together it just looked very circumstantial. They needed more than they had. I feel sorry for the daughter, but what can you do. At the end of the day they were not able to proved anything beyond reasonable doubt, as a consequence the guy has pulled in OJ and thats the end of it for now.

    One would hope for a different outcome at some stage in the future.


  • #47
    kaizersoze1980
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭kaizersoze1980


    DesF wrote: »
    I'll take "US Laws not applicable in Ireland" for 400 please Alex.

    smart ass :p
    thats what i meant :pac:


  • #48
    kaizersoze1980
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭kaizersoze1980


    Quigs Snr wrote: »
    the guy has pulled in OJ and thats the end of it for now.

    careful now..innocent until proven guilty and all that.

    What i will say is that, if he did it, then i hope he is done eventually


  • #49
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    The jury can only find someone guilty if they are sure BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT. If there is ANY doubt then the jury have to find the person not guilty, in this there appears to have been doubt on several pieces of evidence.


  • #50
    My name is Mud
    Registered Users Posts: 647 ✭✭✭My name is Mud


    elviscostello wrote: »
    Do you have anything to back up that 50% figure?!

    According to Womens Aid, 50% of women murdered in Ireland are murdered by husband/partner. Thats what the whole silent vigil outside the dail was about a couple of months ago on international womens day.

    On the flipside it does mean that 50% of Irish women murdered, were killed by someone else, but I think the statistic is more relevant in terms of male murder victims vs female murder victims.


  • #51
    JackieO
    Registered Users Posts: 334 ✭✭JackieO


    Imhof Tank wrote: »
    Well, the pojnt in the Joe O'Reilly case wasnt that his whereabout were different to what he first said, it was that he was shown to have been at the murder scene at the relevant time.

    Regarding the jury, in this case, I believe its 7 men and 5 women; whereas in the McLoughlin case,there was a huge female majority on the jury

    What would be so difficult about introducing a rule requiring 6 men and 6 women for juries in this type of case?

    From what I remember of the O'Reilly trial - the whole point the case turned on was the fact that the phone records showed he was in the vaccinty of his home at the relevant time whereas he claimed to be somewhere completely different. Apparently if he had admitted to being in the area doing something else for example, they would never have convicted him. It was all down to the fact that he lied and the evidence placed him there.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    _blank_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    My name is Mud wrote: »
    According to Womens Aid, 50% of women murdered in Ireland are murdered by husband/partner. Thats what the whole silent vigil outside the dail was about a couple of months ago on international womens day.

    On the flipside it does mean that 50% of Irish women murdered, were killed by someone else, but I think the statistic is more relevant in terms of male murder victims vs female murder victims.
    I reckon 0% of Irish Male Murder Victims were killed by their husband, tbh.


  • #53
    Dellboy2007
    Registered Users Posts: 812 ✭✭✭Dellboy2007


    I didn't read much about this case but the one thing i did read was that she was kissing another man in their house the night she went missing. Now, I know this would have been only a very very small part of the case but when i was reading that, i was full sure he'd be found guilty. Not saying that i would have convicted on this if i was in the jury but i would have thought others would.


  • #54
    _feedback_
    Registered Users Posts: 4,269 ✭✭✭_feedback_


    My name is Mud wrote: »
    According to Womens Aid, 50% of women murdered in Ireland are murdered by husband/partner. Thats what the whole silent vigil outside the dail was about a couple of months ago on international womens day.

    Is there a link to that info anywhere? Might be an interesting read ...


  • #55
    kaizersoze1980
    Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭kaizersoze1980


    Dellboy2007 wrote: »
    I didn't read much about this case but the one thing i did read was that she was kissing another man in their house the night she went missing. Now, I know this would have been only a very very small part of the case but when i was reading that, i was full sure he'd be found guilty. Not saying that i would have convicted on this if i was in the jury but i would have thought others would.

    ah come off it will you.

    You'd send a man down for life based on evidence of his wife being caught kissing another man the night she went missing?
    You cold bastárd :pac:
    Who's to say her new lover didn't do it?
    Jaysus i woulnt like to have you in a jury if i was up for something! :eek:


  • #56
    Villain
    Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    elviscostello wrote: »
    Is there a link to that info anywhere? Might be an interesting read ...
    Almost 50pc of women who are murdered are killed by a partner or ex-partner and 80pc will have been severely physically abused through stangulation, abuse during pregnancy, or being forced to have sex

    From http://www.independent.ie/national-news/blanketed-by-grief-aid-group-ensures-our-many-murdered-women-are-not-forgotten-70413.html

    Probably better sources available though


  • #57
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,710 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    i'd be very surprised if he could be tried again - I recall the DPP entering a "null prosequie" (or whatever its called) in cases in the past when they realised they had little chance of getting a conviction but wanted to have the option to prosecute again in the future.

    EDIT - according to Wikipedia, the european convention on human rights contains a provision on double-jeopardy:

    No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offence for which he has already been finally acquitted or convicted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of that State.

    We're signed up to this.


  • #58
    DoubleJoe7
    Registered Users Posts: 375 ✭✭DoubleJoe7


    kaizersoze1980 wrote: »
    Who's to say her new lover didn't do it?


    He wasn't a "new lover" and there was never any suggestions to suggest this. He had been out for the night with the couple, and was offered a room in their house for the night. They shared a drunken kiss as she showed him his room.

    Hardly a "new lover."


  • #59
    TheNog
    Registered Users Posts: 4,160 ✭✭✭TheNog


    caoibhin wrote: »
    Can someone be tried twice on the same charge?

    on foot of new evidence only


  • #60
    DoubleJoe7
    Registered Users Posts: 375 ✭✭DoubleJoe7


    loyatemu wrote: »
    i'd be very surprised if he could be tried again - I recall the DPP entering a "null prosequie" (or whatever its called) in cases in the past when they realised they had little chance of getting a conviction but wanted to have the option to prosecute again in the future.

    EDIT - according to Wikipedia, the european convention on human rights contains a provision on double-jeopardy:

    No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offence for which he has already been finally acquitted or convicted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of that State.

    We're signed up to this.

    Ah but does the law and penal procedure of this State not have a provision for new evidence coming to light?


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    ruskin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 400 ✭✭ruskin


    OJ Simpson was also found not guilty of murder


Advertisement