Why did Gardai destroy possible burial site of Irelands longest missing child?

Going Forward

DonegalTech wrote: »

I would like to think those with information would have been arrested or threatened with arrest for not co-operating at a later stage, if a Garda knew they had relevant information.

But to be honest, I don't know the intricate details of law enforcement, so maybe there is something I am unaware of that prevented Gardai from doing this.

The same here.

And it may not have made any difference anyway.

Another missing female was mentioned much farther back thread, 4 arrests were made but the case remains open and unsolved.

DonegalTech

Look I can understand people wanting to protect somebody they feel is innocent, and might possibly be made a scapegoat in such a case, because that person is "a bit simple" and could be duped into saying something that might incriminate themselves.

But keeping in mind that a little girl dissapeared and was likely murdered nearly 40 years ago, the protectors could potentially be supporting a greater injustice, that is by potentially protecting a Child murderer and abuser. And that message needs to be put to those protectors loud and clear.

DonegalTech

Going Forward wrote: »

DonegalTech wrote: »

I would like to think those with information would have been arrested or threatened with arrest for not co-operating at a later stage, if a Garda knew they had relevant information.

But to be honest, I don't know the intricate details of law enforcement, so maybe there is something I am unaware of that prevented Gardai from doing this.

The same here.

And it may not have made any difference anyway.

Another missing female was mentioned much farther back thread, 4 arrests were made but the case remains open and unsolved.

Was that case in the same region or nearby? I missed that in earlier posts

tayto lover

But lads how can the Garda arrest someone for witholding information unless they can prove that that information is important and could lead to finding the child?
You would have to know the truth in the case before you could prove that they with-held the relevant information surely.

Going Forward

DonegalTech wrote: »

Was that case in the same region or nearby? I missed that in earlier posts

Totally unrelated, just that the point is that arrests don't always deliver confessions.

jenny smith

tayto lover wrote: »

But lads how can the Garda arrest someone for witholding information unless they can prove that that information is important and could lead to finding the child?
You would have to know the truth in the case before you could prove that they with-held the relevant information surely.

So it goes back to lack of evidence. That seems to be the central issue.

Anjali Kuomo

Hi. I am new to this but have read all posts and would like to contribute. I have followed this tragic story since 1977. G O'D's documentary raises a number of concerns for me and it bothers me that so many people seem to swallow it without question or analysis.
I can well believe that a politician made a phone call. Back in 1977 they felt they had a right, maybe even a duty, to 'put in a word' for someone who requested their help. The real issue here is did that phone call actually influence the investigation. If it did the guilt lies with the Gardai not the politician. I simply do not believe that successive teams of investigators have been hampered by what ANY politician, local or national, requested or ordered in 1977.
I felt it was outrageous to suggest that the Gardai tried to frame an innocent man in 2014. Bryan McMahon is a convicted child molester. He knew the Cashelard area very well and in March 1977 he was living nearby. His name was not mentioned then as his crimes had not come to light then. When they did become known the Gardai had no option but to question him.
In the documentary, Retired Garda Collins expresses his belief that Mary could not have got over the 3 walls without help. The clear message here is that she did not simply follow her uncle, he actually helped her. Yet, Garda Collins was one of the 2 Gardai who, in March 1977, just days after Mary went missing, arranged for her twin to make the same journey. I actually heard Anne herself make reference to this walk. There was no report of Anne having any difficulty with the walls so why should Mary have had difficulty?
I have difficulty with other parts of the documentary as well, especially the parts dealing with the inconsistencies and contradictions, on the day of Mary's disappearance but I do not want this to be too long. Can I just say that, in my own experience, every situation of panic that I ever encountered resulted in all kinds of conflicting reactions. A neatly choreographed account of events would cause me more concern. None of us knows how we would react or behave unless we've been in a similar situation.
Finally, I cannot help wondering about the Justice for Mary slogan. Having read everything I can find on this topic it sounds more like a quest for vengeance. Of course it would satisfy something in ourselves if the person or persons involved could be found and punished. I believe that what this lovely little girl would ask (if she could) would be healing for her family....the family she loved and who clearly loved her.

DonegalTech

tayto lover wrote: »

But lads how can the Garda arrest someone for witholding information unless they can prove that that information is important and could lead to finding the child?
You would have to know the truth in the case before you could prove that they with-held the relevant information surely.

If somebody disclosed or indicated they knew something in relation to potential suspect to a serving member of the Gardai while they are both sitting in a car, but later denied that statement or refused to go "On the record", then they could possibly be brought in for formal questioning on that basis.

DonegalTech

Anjali Kuomo wrote: »

Hi. I am new to this but have read all posts and would like to contribute. I have followed this tragic story since 1977. G O'D's documentary raises a number of concerns for me and it bothers me that so many people seem to swallow it without question or analysis.
I can well believe that a politician made a phone call. Back in 1977 they felt they had a right, maybe even a duty, to 'put in a word' for someone who requested their help. The real issue here is did that phone call actually influence the investigation. If it did the guilt lies with the Gardai not the politician. I simply do not believe that successive teams of investigators have been hampered by what ANY politician, local or national, requested or ordered in 1977.
I felt it was outrageous to suggest that the Gardai tried to frame an innocent man in 2014. Bryan McMahon is a convicted child molester. He knew the Cashelard area very well and in March 1977 he was living nearby. His name was not mentioned then as his crimes had not come to light then. When they did become known the Gardai had no option but to question him.
In the documentary, Retired Garda Collins expresses his belief that Mary could not have got over the 3 walls without help. The clear message here is that she did not simply follow her uncle, he actually helped her. Yet, Garda Collins was one of the 2 Gardai who, in March 1977, just days after Mary went missing, arranged for her twin to make the same journey. I actually heard Anne herself make reference to this walk. There was no report of Anne having any difficulty with the walls so why should Mary have had difficulty?
I have difficulty with other parts of the documentary as well, especially the parts dealing with the inconsistencies and contradictions, on the day of Mary's disappearance but I do not want this to be too long. Can I just say that, in my own experience, every situation of panic that I ever encountered resulted in all kinds of conflicting reactions. A neatly choreographed account of events would cause me more concern. None of us knows how we would react or behave unless we've been in a similar situation.
Finally, I cannot help wondering about the Justice for Mary slogan. Having read everything I can find on this topic it sounds more like a quest for vengeance. Of course it would satisfy something in ourselves if the person or persons involved could be found and punished. I believe that what this lovely little girl would ask (if she could) would be healing for her family....the family she loved and who clearly loved her.

Look I don't want an innocent person wrongly charged with murder, I don't think anybody on here wants that. But this little girl has been gone for over 39 years now!!, and the existing frustration is simply because a potential suspect was apparently not questioned properly. Had said person been questioned and then officially ruled out as a suspect, then I don't think anybody would be so upset.

As for the Political interference, well as I said above, It's now over 39 years since the little girl vanished, and there is evidence to suggest a potential suspect was not questioned. We will likely never really find out of there was political interference, but the suggestion of it is deeply disturbing and is not beyond the realm of possibility in this Country

DonegalTech

Anjali Kuomo
Registered User

Today 20:25#1,358

G O'D's documentary raises a number of concerns for me and it bothers me that so many people seem to swallow it without question or analysis.

I disagree, I think everybody here is aware that the documentary is edited and the story told from a certain perspective that highlights details not publicised before. For over 30 years this case has been in Limbo, with all alternative avenues supposedly explored and exhausted during this time.

Yet this documentary tells us that maybe not all avenues were explored, and looks at possible reasons why these avenues weren't explored or maybe weren't explored properly. In the interest of justice for a little girl who vanished over 39 years ago, whats the harm in at least exploring these avenues since no other lead has turned up results?

Going Forward

Anjali Kuomo wrote: »

The real issue here is did that phone call actually influence the investigation. If it did the guilt lies with the Gardai not the politician.

That's the first time I've ever seen a suggestion that the politician should be excused.

Interesting.

twill

Anjali Kuomo wrote: »

I can well believe that a politician made a phone call. Back in 1977 they felt they had a right, maybe even a duty, to 'put in a word' for someone who requested their help. The real issue here is did that phone call actually influence the investigation. If it did the guilt lies with the Gardai not the politician.

Politicians should not attempt to interfere with an investigation, full stop. If they attempt to do so, it is called corruption.

I felt it was outrageous to suggest that the Gardai tried to frame an innocent man in 2014. Bryan McMahon is a convicted child molester. He knew the Cashelard area very well and in March 1977 he was living nearby. His name was not mentioned then as his crimes had not come to light then. When they did become known the Gardai had no option but to question him.

They didn't just question him, they arrested him. The only arrest in connection with the case, as far as I am aware.

I believe that what this lovely little girl would ask (if she could) would be healing for her family....the family she loved and who clearly loved her.

Ignoring the fact that it's easy to attribute sentiments to someone who is most likely long dead, what about the members of the family who want the truth?

jenny smith

Gemma on South East Radio http://www.southeastradio.ie/podcast/items/2/GemmaODohertyInterview25thJuly2016.mp3

says there may be more info put into public domain unless justice is done fairly soon. She also says she did not particularly seek to have her documentary on RTE as she wanted to retain editorial control

Originally Posted by Anjali Kuomo

Yet, Garda Collins was one of the 2 Gardai who, in March 1977, just days after Mary went missing, arranged for her twin to make the same journey. I actually heard Anne herself make reference to this walk

@Anjali Kuomo where did you hear Anne make reference to the walk

Collins should be questioned about that too as well as why the crying man in the car was not arrested for witholding evidence

DonegalTech

jenny smith wrote: »

Gemma on South East Radio http://www.southeastradio.ie/podcast/items/2/GemmaODohertyInterview25thJuly2016.mp3

says there may be more info put into public domain unless justice is done fairly soon. She also says she did not particularly seek to have her documentary on RTE as she wanted to retain editorial control

Originally Posted by Anjali Kuomo

Yet, Garda Collins was one of the 2 Gardai who, in March 1977, just days after Mary went missing, arranged for her twin to make the same journey. I actually heard Anne herself make reference to this walk

@Anjali Kuomo where did you hear Anne make reference to the walk

Collins should be questioned about that too as well as why the crying man in the car was not arrested for witholding evidence

It would be interesting to find out who the Crying man in the car was, and also to hear the full Garda testimony un-edited. Perhaps Collins did explain in greater detail, but that may have needed to be edited out for legal reasons.

tayto lover

jenny smith wrote: »

Gemma on South East Radio http://www.southeastradio.ie/podcast/items/2/GemmaODohertyInterview25thJuly2016.mp3

says there may be more info put into public domain unless justice is done fairly soon. She also says she did not particularly seek to have her documentary on RTE as she wanted to retain editorial control



Why is she holding back if she has more information which may advance the case? Doesn't make much sense to keep drip-feeding stuff. All of it should be published.

Anjali Kuomo

I heard Anne refer to the walk in a video clip. I think it is still available on Internet ( one of the Nicola Tallant /Sunday World clips). I will do a search and let you know if I find it. The rationale for the reconstruction walk was that Anne, being Mary's twin, might act as Mary did and thereby give some insight into what might have happened to Mary. Barry Cummins gives the story in his book.

oranbhoy67

replies in bold

Anjali Kuomo wrote: »

Hi. I am new to this but have read all posts and would like to contribute. I have followed this tragic story since 1977. G O'D's documentary raises a number of concerns for me and it bothers me that so many people seem to swallow it without question or analysis.
I can well believe that a politician made a phone call. Back in 1977 they felt they had a right, maybe even a duty, to 'put in a word' for someone who requested their help. The real issue here is did that phone call actually influence the investigation. If it did the guilt lies with the Gardai not the politician. I simply do not believe that successive teams of investigators have been hampered by what ANY politician, local or national, requested or ordered in 1977. even if that politican was in power that whole time and is locally nicknamed "the godfather" because of his vast influence- not to mention wealth ?
I felt it was outrageous to suggest that the Gardai tried to frame an innocent man in 2014. Bryan McMahon is a convicted child molester.should every convicted child molester be ARRESTED for the crime then, McMahon is a child molester but the actaul crime he was convicted for is very dodgy to say the least but thats not for me to deal with He knew the Cashelard area very well and in March 1977 he was living nearby.he was STATIONED at Finner Army camp, he was an alcoholic with no access to a car and all cars on that road were accounted for that day His name was not mentioned then as his crimes had not come to light then. When they did become known the Gardai had no option but to question him. question him yes.. but to arrest him?? on what evidence yet they wont question our suspect on the word of her twin sister and two retired guards?
In the documentary, Retired Garda Collins expresses his belief that Mary could not have got over the 3 walls without help. The clear message here is that she did not simply follow her uncle, he actually helped her. Yet, Garda Collins was one of the 2 Gardai who, in March 1977, just days after Mary went missing, arranged for her twin to make the same journey. I actually heard Anne herself make reference to this walk. There was no report of Anne having any difficulty with the walls so why should Mary have had difficulty? why would that be reported on before Sgt Collins made his claims? have you any reports the contrary that Ann made it over the wall easy for the reconstruction, ive been at the walls im 6"2..id Struggle with them
I have difficulty with other parts of the documentary as well, especially the parts dealing with the inconsistencies and contradictions, on the day of Mary's disappearance but I do not want this to be too long. Can I just say that, in my own experience, every situation of panic that I ever encountered resulted in all kinds of conflicting reactions. A neatly choreographed account of events would cause me more concern. None of us knows how we would react or behave unless we've been in a similar situation.
Finally, I cannot help wondering about the Justice for Mary slogan. what do you suggest instead ? Having read everything I can find on this topic it sounds more like a quest for vengeance. Of course it would satisfy something in ourselves if the person or persons involved could be found and punished. ie justice I believe that what this lovely little girl would ask (if she could) would be healing for her family....the family she loved and who clearly loved her. you cant speak for her and by you clearly stating that last line you obviously have led yourself up the wrong path .. and thats from someone from the part of her Family who would have loved her had he got to meet her and cares for her and will not stop till I find out what happened to her and who is responsible


I appreciate your points but so many are so far from the reality.. and then theres others that you havent even explained

oranbhoy67

tayto lover wrote: »

jenny smith wrote: »

Gemma on South East Radio http://www.southeastradio.ie/podcast/items/2/GemmaODohertyInterview25thJuly2016.mp3

says there may be more info put into public domain unless justice is done fairly soon. She also says she did not particularly seek to have her documentary on RTE as she wanted to retain editorial control



Why is she holding back if she has more information which may advance the case? Doesn't make much sense to keep drip-feeding stuff. All of it should be published.

she does like to drip feed does Gemma .. there is much more info but I doubt much of it could be published without going over the line of potentially affecting a mistrial

Johnboy1951

If the Gardai want to question, even as a witness, someone who is incarcerated, what options do they have?
Do they need to arrest that person to be able to gain custody in order to question?

I have no knowledge, just wondering why they might have arrested McMahon when they obviously did not have sufficient evidence to charge him.

Going Forward

Anjali Kuomo wrote: »

I heard Anne refer to the walk in a video clip. I think it is still available on Internet ( one of the Nicola Tallant /Sunday World clips). I will do a search and let you know if I find it. The rationale for the reconstruction walk was that Anne, being Mary's twin, might act as Mary did and thereby give some insight into what might have happened to Mary. Barry Cummins gives the story in his book.

That reconstruction took place.

There was no confirmation that Anne climbed any walls though.
No mention of walls at all actually.

And Ann did manage to get back to the house.



https://books.google.ie/books?id=QNz4AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT134&lpg=PT134&dq=barry+cummins+ann+boyle+reconstruction&source=bl&ots=U-dlf84sQB&sig=cUlmlD8pVu5RcIatzkaVQWgr4r4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwirsNWq3pTOAhVJI8AKHZQVC6oQ6AEIKTAE#v=onepage&q=barry%20cummins%20ann%20boyle%20reconstruction&f=false

Giacomo McGubbin

Men who might have said something in cars, politicians that might or might not have phoned Gardai stations, and will never be proven either way. All very entertaining and thrilling no doubt, better than a soap opera, as it goes round in circles of blame and denial, and good for publicity/scandal . . . however the real search for Mary is in danger of getting forgotten about again.

What can be done right away is professionally excavate and professionally examine the spot that should have excavated 39 years ago but wasn't. The spot just down the lane from the house where the original tracker dog kept running to over and over, as emphasised again recently by the postman who was present, and who still can't believe no one ever bothered following it up to this day.

Johnboy1951

The dogs would have lost the scent if the child was lifted and carried so the spot where they stopped is not necessarily significant in relation to the search for her now.

Going Forward

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

If the Gardai want to question, even as a witness, someone who is incarcerated, what options do they have?
Do they need to arrest that person to be able to gain custody in order to question?

I have no knowledge, just wondering why they might have arrested McMahon when they obviously did not have sufficient evidence to charge him.

Why stop at McMahon? Why start with him even?

They could be arresting suspects all day long if they wanted to start using him as a yardstick:

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/10/22/a-corner-of-ireland/

Giacomo McGubbin

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

The dogs would have lost the scent if the child was lifted and carried so the spot where they stopped is not necessarily significant in relation to the search for her now.

It still should be a priority for checking out, if nothing else to make sure its eliminated properly. It still irks the postman that witnessed this search going on 39 years ago. There is no logic whatsoever in continually ignoring it, then or now. From my understanding, it's down the lane, near the house, but under good cover, and in the opposite direction to what was alleged, which makes it very plausible indeed. It's the one thing that stands out from all the recent interviews, that can be relatively easily checked out without the usual politics and drama getting in the way.

Burtman

just on the incident about the dog returning to the same spot over and over again, Ive always had the notion that the child was murdered and then hid in a hurry for a very short time then her body was relocated before the garda were involved, the garda are well aware of all the players in this drama, for them it was like the game of cluedo, someone done it and all potential suspects were known quickly and the number of potential suspects was very small...this should have been a slam dunk case for AGS but it wasnt ...so huge questions must be asked why not!

oranbhoy67

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

The dogs would have lost the scent if the child was lifted and carried so the spot where they stopped is not necessarily significant in relation to the search for her now.

that's what I thought too, but supposedly these cadaver dogs are completely different from sniffer or tracker dogs and can detect bone fragments buried deep in the ground, even ancient ones, I need to do a bit more research into them but I have to say I'm very excited at the slight possibility of bringing them into this case

Johnboy1951

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

that's what I thought too, but supposedly these cadaver dogs are completely different from sniffer or tracker dogs and can detect bone fragments buried deep in the ground, even ancient ones, I need to do a bit more research into them but I have to say I'm very excited at the slight possibility of bringing them into this case

I was referring to the significance, now, of the dogs losing scent at a particular spot, not to the use of cadaver dogs.
The scent could be lost back then for several reasons, such as the child being carried; the child turning back, or even the child wading through a few inches of water.
No significant conclusion can be drawn now from the fact the dogs lost the scent at that place back then.

Johnboy1951

Giacomo McGubbin wrote:

It still should be a priority for checking out, if nothing else to make sure its eliminated properly. It still irks the postman that witnessed this search going on 39 years ago. There is no logic whatsoever in continually ignoring it, then or now. From my understanding, it's down the lane, near the house, but under good cover, and in the opposite direction to what was alleged, which makes it very plausible indeed. It's the one thing that stands out from all the recent interviews, that can be relatively easily checked out without the usual politics and drama getting in the way.

"Checking out" in what way? What makes you think it was ignored? Because there was nothing significant found? or do you have information no one else seems to have?

Macca07

Going Forward wrote: »

Why stop at McMahon? Why start with him even?
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/10/22/a-corner-of-ireland/

He was living and working in Fermanagh in 1977 in an Army barracks. At the time, supposedly, he was off, but had told Gardai that he was working, which gave him an alibi... However, Gardai claimed he wasn't working, but was down for "off-duty". What he said happened was that odd-duty is still needing to be in the barracks, but not patrolling, similar to "on-call" I presume. Gardai didn't beleive this initially. Then was arrested for it.

tayto lover

Burtman wrote: »

just on the incident about the dog returning to the same spot over and over again, Ive always had the notion that the child was murdered and then hid in a hurry for a very short time then her body was relocated before the garda were involved, the garda are well aware of all the players in this drama, for them it was like the game of cluedo, someone done it and all potential suspects were known quickly and the number of potential suspects was very small...this should have been a slam dunk case for AGS but it wasnt ...so huge questions must be asked why not!

When i read about the dog going back to the same spot I wondered if Mary was put into a car or van at that spot and then driven away. Hence the scent disappearing. Now who had access to transport at that spot?