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
Murder of Marlhill, New Inn (c.1940)
Options
Comments
-
why was harry brought up by a maternal uncle and then moved to his other uncle. MB book says hew was born to prosperity, what happened his own parents.
I find it unusual a man of 38 would be working for no wage on uncertain the possibility of inheriting the farm eventually
Different times back then .... it was not unusual for a nephew to go live with a couple who had no children of their own, and to work the farm until it became his when they died.0 -
mikeymouse wrote: »or paste this into google and see if it works;
google.co.uk/maps/@52.436915,-7.911966,3a,40.5y,99.79h,84.08t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sivn_HWUAN4BjZEgXTuGvOQ!2e0
Yes, I think you're right there.
If your co-ordinates, 52.436915,-7.911966, are typed into the Google Maps search box and we go to Street view, we can look along the laneway towards where Mary McCarthy's body was found.
I think the people in the picture are standing at 52.436956,-7.908054 with the camera facing towards the motorway.
I think the body of Mary McCarthy was located around 52.037002,-7.908054.0 -
no problem thanksmikeymouse wrote: »there's a sort of ditch in the background of your photo
i think this is where the body was found
google.co.uk/maps/@52.4376467,-7.9111569,485m/data=!3m1!1e3
sorry I can't post links0 -
even without pay? Why did he leave his own familyJohnboy1951 wrote: »Different times back then .... it was not unusual for a nephew to go live with a couple who had no children of their own, and to work the farm until it became his when they died.0 -
52.436915,-7.911966,gives me cannot find. what way should the co ords be enteredRoman Emperor wrote: »Yes, I think you're right there.
If your co-ordinates, 52.436915,-7.911966, are typed into the Google Maps search box and we go to Street view, we can look along the laneway towards where Mary McCarthy's body was found.
I think the people in the picture are standing at 52.436956,-7.908054 with the camera facing towards the motorway.
I think the body of Mary McCarthy was located around 52.037002,-7.908054.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
roman emperor,
I think they are just approaching the motorway
the camera is just outside the underpass facing east away from the motorway ,with the dyke in the background.0 -
ok worked that time. i copied and pasted before it would not workRoman Emperor wrote: »Enter them exactly as they are typed, 52.436915,-7.911966
Don't forget the comma and the minus sign.
The best way is to copy and paste them to Google Maps.
It works just the same for Bing0 -
here?Roman Emperor wrote: »If your co-ordinates, 52.436915,-7.911966, are typed into the Google Maps search box and we go to Street view, we can look along the laneway towards where Mary McCarthy's body was found.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
send me the url in pmRoman Emperor wrote: »No, that doesn't look like it.
The coordinates 52.436915,-7.911966 are correct though.
Unfortunately I can't post any URLs or attachments.0 -
i get the same area with several small pics at bottom of screen
No I don't actually sorry
this one?0 -
-
hg5.jpg updated0
-
Yes.
Around where the bottom arrow is, I reckon.
What do you think ?0 -
seems to be the same place from what i can seeRoman Emperor wrote: »Yes.
Around where the bottom arrow is, I reckon.
What do you think ?
scroll up toward the sky at the url. some strange black shapes0 -
Finished re reading it. It transpires Reid did hear shots when in Harry's company page 104 but Mrs Caesar on confirming Harry and Reid had nothing to do with it told them both not to talk to the garda[page 104 "she issued her orders as she always did in that house"] In so doing she was as much a part of the conspiracy of silence as the rest of the community. If it had been some other innocent and they followed her orders they would do to him what the community did to Harry
i believe, and Reid confirmed, page 105 that Harry recognised Moll and went to the house. The Prime time report says he said "Moll Carty is dead above in the field and half her face is missing" which suggest he knew her without a full face. Because she did not want any involvement with Moll either Mrs Caeser may have told him to go to the garda but say he did not know who it was. Maybe she said to say the dog was on her face.
I find it hard to believe a man who had dogs all his life was afraid of or could not control Moll's dog
If Mrs Caesar had told the solicitors she told Harry and Reid not to talk to the guards and stay away from them she would probably have been called by defence.
Or did Macbride know and is that why the Caesars were not called? Macbride hinted 35 years later that Harry was someplace else page 105
Reid lied in the district court hearing in Clonmel when he gave a different account of the period between 6.30-7pm on the Wednesday Page 26 vpage 104. No mention of that on Prime Time. The garda should not have hit Reid but he should not have lied in court. In the account of the trial in Dublin it says Reid was a very difficult witness. Seemingly on the order of Mrs Caesar and possibly on threat from garda
She would have been possibly found to have perverted the course of justice,if such a charge existed then and Harry and Reid may have been foiund to have lied.But Harry would not have been hanged
No one seemed to want to tell all the truth and all wanted to blame Moll,the IRA and the Guards
None of that makes Harry a killer but his own did as much as anyone to hang him,litertally
I don't see any reason why Harry should have controlled Molls' dog. If I stumble across a body with a dog on it, or any crime scene for that matter, I wouldn't intervere with it. So maybe Harry didn't want to intervere with the body, dog, or scene for that matter.
Also, could you clarify exactly what Tommy Reid was lying about in the District Court? I know he wasn't willing to answer any questions and when he did, he did so reluctantly. Maybe that was because he was severity beaten by the Gardai and forced to make a false statement!0 -
Lawstudent007 wrote: »I don't see any reason why Harry should have controlled Molls' dog. If I stumble across a body with a dog on it, or any crime scene for that matter, I wouldn't intervere with it. So maybe Harry didn't want to intervere with the body, dog, or scene for that matter.
Also, could you clarify exactly what Tommy Reid was lying about in the District Court? I know he wasn't willing to answer any questions and when he did, he did so reluctantly. Maybe that was because he was severity beaten by the Gardai and forced to make a false statement!
About the period between 6.30 to 7 pm on the Wednesday. He told Marcus Bourke he was with Gleeson when he heard the two shots.Chapter 9 "Tommy Reid Gives Harry an alibi" on page 104
Page 26 says he told the judge in the district court he came in at 6.15pm and did not see Gleeson between 6.15pm and 7 pm on the Wednesday. But he was with Gleeson during this period and heard the shots. Mrs Caesar told him and Gleeson not to talk to the guards
Being beaten by the garda may have also stopped him talking. But on page 104 he clearly says he did not tell of his alibi for Gleeson because Mrs Caesar told them both to say nothing to the garda
On page 105 MB says it was irrelevant if the shots were the fatal shots. If the jury had heard Reid story of them and believed him the case against Harry was finished. But since Reid did not tell they did not have an opportunity to believe him.
If you have not done so you should read all the book to get the context0 -
About the period between 6.30 to 7 pm on the Wednesday. He told Marcus Bourke he was with Gleeson when he heard the two shots.Chapter 9 "Tommy Reid Gives Harry an alibi" on page 104
Page 26 says he told the judge in the district court he came in at 6.15pm and did not see Gleeson between 6.15pm and 7 pm on the Wednesday. But he was with Gleeson during this period and heard the shots. Mrs Caesar told him and Gleeson not to talk to the guards
Being beaten by the garda may have also stopped him talking. But on page 104 he clearly says he did not tell of his alibi for Gleeson because Mrs Caesar told them both to say nothing to the garda
On page 105 MB says it was irrelevant if the shots were the fatal shots. If the jury had heard Reid story of them and believed him the case against Harry was finished. But since Reid did not tell they did not have an opportunity to believe him.
If you have not done so you should read all the book to get the context
Tommy Reid in his deposition in the District Court said that he saw Harry at about 6pm - Tommy just finished his supper, when Harry came in to have his with the Ceasers. Tommy also states that 'before [Harry came in] I heard the dog house door shutting'
In the Central Criminal Court, Tommy Reid again stated the saw Harry at about 6pm when he came into the house to have his supper. In his evidence, q169 - 'Did you hear anything before Gleeson came in?.' Q170 - Yes, 'I heard a galvanised door.' This galvanised door is attached to one of the outhouses in which they kept the greyhounds. Tommy then stated that he left the house after supper.
Harry in his deposition/statement marked as 'Exhibit 10' states that he took the dogs for a walk on the Wednesday and arrived back at the farm at about 5:30pm. He brushed, and fed the dogs, and then went for supper at about 6pm. He also states that he was reading the newspaper until 6:30pm, when William Ryan came in for a visit. Harry, William, and the Ceasers remained in the house in front of the fire until about 8pm. Harry then got up to tend to the horse/pony, after which he returned briefly to the fire where Willie and John Ceaser were still talking. Harry went to bed at 8:30pm. Harry gave the same evidence in the Central Criminal Court.
William Ryan in the District Court affirmed Harry's version of events. Also worth noting though is that William stated that Harry 'brought nothing out with him.' William also confirms that himself and the Ceasers were still at the fire when Harry returned about 5 or 10 minutes later. William also states that he was stop at the Ceasers when Harry went to bed at about 8:30pm.
Now, bear in mind that the original charge against Harry was that he committed the murder between 5:30 and 6pm on Wednesday 20th November. This charge was amended in the CCC and the 'new' charge against Harry was that he murdered Moll 'on or about the 20th and the 21st of November.
There was shots fired on Wednesday the 20th of November.
Thomas Hennessy, in his deposition in the District Court, stated that he heard two shots fired on Wednesday 20th November at about 5:45pm - 6pm. It later transpired that these shots were in fact fired by a Mr. John Fitzgerald. Mr. Fitzgerald was shooting at a cat.
It was these shots that Tommy Reid heard. And it was for these shots that he could give an alibi to Harry. It has been well documented that Harry was hard of hearing and this explains why Tommy may have heard the shots and Harry didn't. It is evident from Tommy's deposition and evidence, as well as Harry's deposition and evidence in the CCC, that Harry was already on the farm at the time those shots were fired.
Tommy didn't want to say anything about anything because he didn't want to assist the guards in any way, especially after the abuse suffered at their hands. Equally, and in hindsight, his silence didn't help Harry. Crucially however, he didn't lie as you suggest.
Also, if you've read the depositions and trial transcripts you'll note that Tommy never said anything about not seeing Harry between 6:15pm and 7pm. Tommy only stated that he left the house at about 6pm after his supper. In reference to all of the above then, you'll also note that Harry was accounted for from 5:30pm onwards on Wednesday 20th of November, as he was at home in the presence of the Ceasers and indeed William Ryan. Also from the above, we know that the shots fired on the Wednesday was not the shots that killed Moll as Mr. Fitzgerald fired them at a cat.
It is possible that the State knew about this and therefore one can explain the change in charge to 'on or about the 20th and 21st of November 1940.' However, even this new charge is unable to assist the State in framing Harry.
Joseph Maloney, and Patrick Coman gave statement that they heard 'shots fired in quick succession' on Thursday morning 21st November 1940, at about 8:30am.
The above is significant for two reasons. Firstly, John Ceaser had a single barrel shotgun - anyone who knows their shotguns knows that it is not possible to fire two shots in quick succession from a single barrel shotgun, as it takes time to reload. Secondly, these shots was fired on Thursday morning 21st November 1940 at 8:30am - a time that both Harry and Tommy were together on the farm feeding the horses and milking cows - Tommy Reids deposition/statement and Harry's depositions/statement. Also, if these shots were the fatal shots, it certainly supports the pathologist report which was recently obtained by the Irish Innocence Project - mentioned in the Independent a few months back. From what I can gather, the 'new' pathologist report suggests that time of death occurred round about the same time those shots were fired on the Thursday morning.
It is worth noting however, that the statements by Joseph Maloney and Patrick Coman was only obtained after Harry's trial by a solicitor called John Timoney. The statements was submitted to the Department of Justice when Mr. Timoney sought to
petition the Department for a reprieve. That reprieve was obviously not granted.
I along with many many others believe in Harry's innocence. There is not a single shred of evidence implicating him in the brutal murder of Mary McCarthy. On the other hand, there are loads of evidence suggesting that he was framed and unlawfully hanged for a crime he didn't commit.
If you have not done so you should read all of the trial transcripts and depositions available in the national archives, and not just a book, to get the context.0 -
you do not know what shots Reid heard. It was not determined for certainLawstudent007 wrote: »Tommy Reid in his deposition in the District Court said that he saw Harry at about 6pm - Tommy just finished his supper, when Harry came in to have his with the Ceasers. Tommy also states that 'before [Harry came in] I heard the dog house door shutting'
In the Central Criminal Court, Tommy Reid again stated the saw Harry at about 6pm when he came into the house to have his supper. In his evidence, q169 - 'Did you hear anything before Gleeson came in?.' Q170 - Yes, 'I heard a galvanised door.' This galvanised door is attached to one of the outhouses in which they kept the greyhounds. Tommy then stated that he left the house after supper.
Harry in his deposition/statement marked as 'Exhibit 10' states that he took the dogs for a walk on the Wednesday and arrived back at the farm at about 5:30pm. He brushed, and fed the dogs, and then went for supper at about 6pm. He also states that he was reading the newspaper until 6:30pm, when William Ryan came in for a visit. Harry, William, and the Ceasers remained in the house in front of the fire until about 8pm. Harry then got up to tend to the horse/pony, after which he returned briefly to the fire where Willie and John Ceaser were still talking. Harry went to bed at 8:30pm. Harry gave the same evidence in the Central Criminal Court.
William Ryan in the District Court affirmed Harry's version of events. Also worth noting though is that William stated that Harry 'brought nothing out with him.' William also confirms that himself and the Ceasers were still at the fire when Harry returned about 5 or 10 minutes later. William also states that he was stop at the Ceasers when Harry went to bed at about 8:30pm.
Now, bear in mind that the original charge against Harry was that he committed the murder between 5:30 and 6pm on Wednesday 20th November. This charge was amended in the CCC and the 'new' charge against Harry was that he murdered Moll 'on or about the 20th and the 21st of November.
There was shots fired on Wednesday the 20th of November.
Thomas Hennessy, in his deposition in the District Court, stated that he heard two shots fired on Wednesday 20th November at about 5:45pm - 6pm. It later transpired that these shots were in fact fired by a Mr. John Fitzgerald. Mr. Fitzgerald was shooting at a cat.
It was these shots that Tommy Reid heard. And it was for these shots that he could give an alibi to Harry. It has been well documented that Harry was hard of hearing and this explains why Tommy may have heard the shots and Harry didn't. It is evident from Tommy's deposition and evidence, as well as Harry's deposition and evidence in the CCC, that Harry was already on the farm at the time those shots were fired.
Tommy didn't want to say anything about anything because he didn't want to assist the guards in any way, especially after the abuse suffered at their hands. Equally, and in hindsight, his silence didn't help Harry. Crucially however, he didn't lie as you suggest.
Also, if you've read the depositions and trial transcripts you'll note that Tommy never said anything about not seeing Harry between 6:15pm and 7pm. Tommy only stated that he left the house at about 6pm after his supper. In reference to all of the above then, you'll also note that Harry was accounted for from 5:30pm onwards on Wednesday 20th of November, as he was at home in the presence of the Ceasers and indeed William Ryan. Also from the above, we know that the shots fired on the Wednesday was not the shots that killed Moll as Mr. Fitzgerald fired them at a cat.
It is possible that the State knew about this and therefore one can explain the change in charge to 'on or about the 20th and 21st of November 1940.' However, even this new charge is unable to assist the State in framing Harry.
Joseph Maloney, and Patrick Coman gave statement that they heard 'shots fired in quick succession' on Thursday morning 21st November 1940, at about 8:30am.
The above is significant for two reasons. Firstly, John Ceaser had a single barrel shotgun - anyone who knows their shotguns knows that it is not possible to fire two shots in quick succession from a single barrel shotgun, as it takes time to reload. Secondly, these shots was fired on Thursday morning 21st November 1940 at 8:30am - a time that both Harry and Tommy were together on the farm feeding the horses and milking cows - Tommy Reids deposition/statement and Harry's depositions/statement. Also, if these shots were the fatal shots, it certainly supports the pathologist report which was recently obtained by the Irish Innocence Project - mentioned in the Independent a few months back. From what I can gather, the 'new' pathologist report suggests that time of death occurred round about the same time those shots were fired on the Thursday morning.
It is worth noting however, that the statements by Joseph Maloney and Patrick Coman was only obtained after Harry's trial by a solicitor called John Timoney. The statements was submitted to the Department of Justice when Mr. Timoney sought to
petition the Department for a reprieve. That reprieve was obviously not granted.
I along with many many others believe in Harry's innocence. There is not a single shred of evidence implicating him in the brutal murder of Mary McCarthy. On the other hand, there are loads of evidence suggesting that he was framed and unlawfully hanged for a crime he didn't commit.
If you have not done so you should read all of the trial transcripts and depositions available in the national archives, and not just a book, to get the context.
If you have information that confirms this is false you should contact the puiblisher. It appears from the book he lied in the district court. However if the court transcripts say otherwise I withdraw thatPage 26 says he told the judge in the district court he came in at 6.15pm and did not see Gleeson between 6.15pm and 7 pm on the Wednesday. But he was with Gleeson during this period and heard the shots. Mrs Caesar told him and Gleeson not to talk to the guards
And because Mrs Cassar told him not to as he confirmed to Marcus Bourke. He did not want to help the police even before he was beaten on the orders of Mrs CTommy didn't want to say anything about anything because he didn't want to assist the guards in any way, especially after the abuse suffered at their hands. Equally, and in hindsight,
So do I but that does not alter the fact that Reid was told to not co operate with the police and it does not alter the fact HG knew Moll and knew she was dead. If you want the truth you want all the truth. The point I am making is Mrs Caesar was partly responsible by telling Reid not to talk to the police. I do not know of any valid reason an ionnocent person would be told not co operate with police in a murder investigationI along with many many others believe in Harry's innocence. There is not a single shred of evidence implicating him in the brutal murder of Mary McCarthy. On the other hand, there are loads of evidence suggesting that he was framed and unlawfully hanged for a crime he didn't commit
I will re read you post later whn I have more time0 -
Advertisement
-
I do not know of any valid reason an ionnocent person would be told not co operate with police in a murder investigation
I think you need to consider that time and how recent in memory were the events of the previous few decades, as well as current happenings at the time.
There was a lot of negative feeling towards 'authority' at the time ..... and indeed for a couple of decades afterwards.
Based on a couple of your comments, you seem to be considering the events out of time context.
I suggest that is a mistake ..... people's usual living conditions etc as well as attitudes and loyalties at the time, are very relevant when attempting to 'look back' and make some sense of events.0 -
you do not know what shots Reid heard. It was not determined for certain
If you have information that confirms this is false you should contact the puiblisher. It appears from the book he lied in the district court. However if the court transcripts say otherwise I withdraw that
And because Mrs Cassar told him not to as he confirmed to Marcus Bourke. He did not want to help the police even before he was beaten on the orders of Mrs C
So do I but that does not alter the fact that Reid was told to not co operate with the police and it does not alter the fact HG knew Moll and knew she was dead. If you want the truth you want all the truth. The point I am making is Mrs Caesar was partly responsible by telling Reid not to talk to the police
I will re read you post later whn I have more time
It doesn't matter which shots Tommy heard. Harry was accounted for at the times the shots was fired on Wednesday and Thursday.
Whether or not Tommy was told not to cooperate is a moot point as people are told all the time not to cooperate with the police. If the police accuses anyone it's for them to prove that persons guilt beyond all reasonable doubt - This was not done in this case. Tommy and Harry gave their statements at different locations and at the same time, even at that, their statements are extremely similar when you have regard to the timeframe of events. So I don't see how the fact that Tommy was told not to cooperate makes any difference. Furthermore, it's common sense that Harry knew Moll, she was a neighbour after all. Also, it's no secret that Moll had 'foxy red hair' as described in the trial transcripts and indeed Marcus Bourkes' book. Harry recognised Moll by her 'foxy red hair' and so did Superintendent Mahony and Garda Ruth - the first Garda at the scene, when they were about 'ten feet away from the body' - Garda Ruth deposition in District Court and Statement in Central Criminal Court.
So, Harry stating that 'he saw a body laying in the gap and a dog on top of the body' and that he thinks it could be Moll, is not that significant as you might think it is. Also, it doesn't mean he knows the 'body' was dead. She could have been sleeping - as mention in the his deposition/statements.
I am also not quite sure what you're blaming Mrs. Ceaser for?
All the evidence proving Harry's innocence is in the trial transcripts,depositions, and statements gathered by Timoney, all of which was presented to the Department of Justice when a reprieve was sought. All of those documents proves Harry's innocence. It also suggest that there was a blatant and successful attempt by the State to frame, convict, and hang an innocent man.
You're right, I want all the truth and so did Harry Gleeson. Unfortunately Harry's wish to have the truth prevail was not granted. I hope that the Justice for Harry Gleeson Group and the Irish Innocence Project are successful in clearing Harry's name and that the Department of Justice will finally accept that they've committed a wrong.0 -
Lawstudent007 wrote: »It doesn't matter which shots Tommy heard. Harry was accounted for at the times the shots was fired on Wednesday and Thursday.
Whether or not Tommy was told not to cooperate is a moot point as people are told all the time not to cooperate with the police. If the police accuses anyone it's for them to prove that persons guilt beyond all reasonable doubt - This was not done in this case. Tommy and Harry gave their statements at different locations and at the same time, even at that, their statements are extremely similar when you have regard to the timeframe of events. So I don't see how the fact that Tommy was told not to cooperate makes any difference. Furthermore, it's common sense that Harry knew Moll, she was a neighbour after all. Also, it's no secret that Moll had 'foxy red hair' as described in the trial transcripts and indeed Marcus Bourkes' book. Harry recognised Moll by her 'foxy red hair' and so did Superintendent Mahony and Garda Ruth - the first Garda at the scene, when they were about 'ten feet away from the body' - Garda Ruth deposition in District Court and Statement in Central Criminal Court.
So, Harry stating that 'he saw a body laying in the gap and a dog on top of the body' and that he thinks it could be Moll, is not that significant as you might think it is. Also, it doesn't mean he knows the 'body' was dead. She could have been sleeping - as mention in the his deposition/statements.
I am also not quite sure what you're blaming Mrs. Ceaser for?
All the evidence proving Harry's innocence is in the trial transcripts,depositions, and statements gathered by Timoney, all of which was presented to the Department of Justice when a reprieve was sought. All of those documents proves Harry's innocence. It also suggest that there was a blatant and successful attempt by the State to frame, convict, and hang an innocent man.
You're right, I want all the truth and so did Harry Gleeson. Unfortunately Harry's wish to have the truth prevail was not granted. I hope that the Justice for Harry Gleeson Group and the Irish Innocence Project are successful in clearing Harry's name and that the Department of Justice will finally accept that they've committed a wrong.
re read what i saidI am also not quite sure what you're blaming Mrs. Ceaser for?
you said itwas Mr. Fitzgerald was shooting at a cat as if it was factIt doesn't matter which shots Tommy heard
Reid told MB Harry knew it was Moll and knew she was dead. Were you talking to Reid?So, Harry stating that 'he saw a body laying in the gap and a dog on top of the body' and that he thinks it could be Moll, is not that significant as you might think it is. Also, it doesn't mean he knows the 'body' was dead. She could have been sleeping - as mention in the his deposition/statements.
Tommy told MB he was told not to cooperate and i am referring to this case not " people are told all the time "Whether or not Tommy was told not to cooperate is a moot point as people are told all the time not to cooperate with the police
MB says in the CCC he was reluctant to answer and had to be reminded he was on oath.-So I don't see how the fact that Tommy was told not to cooperate makes any difference0 -
Johnboy1951 wrote: »I think you need to consider that time and how recent in memory were the events of the previous few decades, as well as current happenings at the time.
There was a lot of negative feeling towards 'authority' at the time ..... and indeed for a couple of decades afterwards.
Based on a couple of your comments, you seem to be considering the events out of time context.
I suggest that is a mistake ..... people's usual living conditions etc as well as attitudes and loyalties at the time, are very relevant when attempting to 'look back' and make some sense of events.
I think it's fair to say that Mrs Caesar's attitude to the Garda would be fairly typical of that generation.
I remember my own grandfather telling us to never talk to the "Peelers", as he called them, and to never trust anyone who was seen regularly in their company.
Most of them were perceived by ordinary country people as parasites who were out for what they could scrounge from people....drink, usually, but also the odd cart of turf, potatoes,firewood or anything else that might take their fancy.0 -
re read what i said
you said itwas Mr. Fitzgerald was shooting at a cat as if it was fact
Reid told MB Harry knew it was Moll and knew she was dead. Were you talking to Reid?
Tommy told MB he was told not to cooperate and i am referring to this case not " people are told all the time "
MB says in the CCC he was reluctant to answer and had to be reminded he was on oath.-
It is a fact that tommy Reid heard shots on the Wednesday, the shots, as I've mentioned earlier, which was fired by Mr. Fitzgerald. The only shots fired that day.
As I've mentioned, he knew it was Moll as he could distinguish her by her 'foxy red hair' - depositions/trial transcripts. I weren't talking to Reid but I actually bothered reading the true facts of the case as well as the book by Marcus Bourke. I, unlike you, do not just follow the book verbatim as I believe people, no matter who they are, have different ways of communicating particular facts. That's why I tend to believe the trial transcripts and depositions more so than the book. The trial transcripts and depositions are more accurate.
MB said Tommy was reluctant to answer questions in the CCC and that he had to be reminded that he was under oath. And your point on this being? For your information, the prosecution was twice ordered, by the Judge, in the CCC to produce vital evidence, evidence the State deliberately withheld. - gun register. Nothing was done. So, I'm not too sure where you're going with that. Reminding someone they're under oath or being reluctant to answer questions is not a criminal offence.
I think it may be in your interest to read the trial transcripts and depositions. Marcus Bourke, as good a barrister as he was, gave a very good and detailed account of what happened, but to be honest the trial transcripts and depositions provides a more accurate and complete account of what happened in a more complete and contextual way.0 -
wait till you are qusalified in law before you start preaching it. He claimed he did not know it was moll or that she was deadLawstudent007 wrote: »It is a fact that tommy Reid heard shots on the Wednesday, the shots, as I've mentioned earlier, which was fired by Mr. Fitzgerald. The only shots fired that day.
As I've mentioned, he knew it was Moll as he could distinguish her by her 'foxy red hair' - depositions/trial transcripts. I weren't talking to Reid but I actually bothered reading the true facts of the case as well as the book by Marcus Bourke. I, unlike you, do not just follow the book verbatim as I believe people, no matter who they are, have different ways of communicating particular facts. That's why I tend to believe the trial transcripts and depositions more so than the book. The trial transcripts and depositions are more accurate.
MB said Tommy was reluctant to answer questions in the CCC and that he had to be reminded that he was under oath. And your point on this being? For your information, the prosecution was twice ordered, by the Judge, in the CCC to produce vital evidence, evidence the State deliberately withheld. - gun register. Nothing was done. So, I'm not too sure where you're going with that. Reminding someone they're under oath or being reluctant to answer questions is not a criminal offence.
I think it may be in your interest to read the trial transcripts and depositions. Marcus Bourke, as good a barrister as he was, gave a very good and detailed account of what happened, but to be honest the trial transcripts and depositions provides a more accurate and complete account of what happened in a more complete and contextual way.0 -
wait till you are qusalified in law before you start preaching it. He claimed he did not know it was moll or that she was dead
Funny how you have to get nasty when someone disagree with you. Maybe you should read the trial transcripts and depositions before you feel the need to comment. Is pretty clear that you have a very very limited knowledge of the facts of the case.0 -
you are the one who began the nasty comments because i said Hg lied about knowing MC and pointed out other issue around MRSC and Tommy RLawstudent007 wrote: »Funny how you have to get nasty when someone disagree with you. Maybe you should read the trial transcripts and depositions before you feel the need to comment. Is pretty clear that you have a very very limited knowledge of the facts of the case.
clear to a law student. youare out of your depth contradicting Marcus Bourke. you cannot accpet anything other than hg and tr being 100% perfect.Is pretty clear that you have a very very limited knowledge of the facts of the case0 -
you are the one who began the nasty comments because i said Hg lied about knowing MC and pointed out other issue around MRSC and Tommy R
clear to a law student
You're the one who started saying that Tommy Reid was lying and that Mrs. Ceaser was also guilty. Get your facts straight. I won't be wasting anymore time with you until you've read all the necessary material and facts. It was you after all that said if you want the truth you must hear all of it. Good luck.0 -
Advertisement
-
i said mrs c had some responsibilty as did tommy. and it was you who began wasting your time i did not ask you. MB says reid told himharry was lying whenhe said he did not recognise moll. You were not talking to reid, you like to play lawyer but do not like it when you lack of legal knowledge is shownLawstudent007 wrote: »You're the one who started saying that Tommy Reid was lying and that Mrs. Ceaser was also guilty. Get your facts straight. I won't be wasting anymore time with you until you've read all the necessary material and facts. It was you after all that said if you want the truth you must hear all of it. Good luck.
The people who are caaling for a posthumous pardon say he knew Moll.
http://tinypic.com/player.php?v=358b9ya%3E&s=8#.U9lt7FesQ8E
He said in court he did'nt0
Advertisement