Liam Adams convicted of child rape.

SoulandForm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-24348798

Serious questions around this about both the behaviour of the RUC and Gerry Adams. Good though to see justice finally being done- society and the law needs to take sexual violence a lot more seriously.

timthumbni

Out if interest I wonder where an animal like adams (Liam) will serve his time. (Assuming he is jailed)

Normally I would expect him to be lumped in with the republicans but due to the nature of his crimes I assume this wouldn't happen this time.

Hope he gets a hard time regardless. He deserves it richly.

Sand

That should put a serious spanner in any dreams Gerry Adams had about running for President. A whole heap of awkward questions could be asked about what he knew and when.

As for where Liam Adams does his time, I cant see why the nature of his crimes would prevent him serving it with Republicans (are there that many left these days bar the dissidents?). Plenty of them killed or maimed children and it never caused any problems with their colleagues. Cant see them getting too worked up about Liam Adams.

Banjo String

Sand wrote: »

That should put a serious spanner in any dreams Gerry Adams had about running for President. A whole heap of awkward questions could be asked about what he knew and when.

As for where Liam Adams does his time, I cant see why the nature of his crimes would prevent him serving it with Republicans (are there that many left these days bar the dissidents?). Plenty of them killed or maimed children and it never caused any problems with their colleagues. Cant see them getting too worked up about Liam Adams.

Wait.

A republican prisoner should have no qualms about being celled with a child molester

Are you serious?

Sand

They were fine about sharing cells with child murderers. If they can handle that, I don't see that they'd get too bothered about sharing a cell with a child abuser. They're both horrific crimes against children.

Banjo String

Sand wrote: »

They were fine about sharing cells with child murderers. If they can handle that, I don't see that they'd get too bothered about sharing a cell with a child abuser. They're both horrific crimes against children.

I'm not aware of any particular republican operation where a child/children was an intended target.

Undeniable but regrettably and tragically that happened, many civilians, from infants to pensioners got caught up in a long running conflict, on both sides (British military/loyalist/and republican).

I don't see (by your logic) why, say an American/British soldier who dropped a bomb on a (suspected) insurents house, wiping out an entire family, shouldn't be housed in a paedophile wing of a prison. Simply because a child became caught up in the operation.

I see no difference. Ridiculous suggestion tbh.

Happyman42

Serious questions to be answered by Adams, but I can imagine how conflicted I would be if my family was being pulled apart like that. He has to show that he did the right thing though.

Sand

Banjo String wrote: »

I'm not aware of any particular republican operation where a child/children was an intended target.

No, I dare say you aren't.

SoulandForm

Sand wrote: »

No, I dare say you aren't.

There are lots of threads dealing with the rightness and wrongness of the armed campaign. Maybe it would be best to keep that debate out of this thread?

Manassas61

Happyman42 wrote: »

Serious questions to be answered by Adams, but I can imagine how conflicted I would be if my family was being pulled apart like that. He has to show that he did the right thing though.

And you expect truthful answers? Getting the truth out of Gerry Adams is like trying to get blood out of a stone.

Banjo String

Sand wrote: »

No, I dare say you aren't.

No, and I dare say you aren't either.

Would you like to hazard a guess as to why that is?

timthumbni

Utv 11 pm tonight if anyone is interested. They are repeating a program broadcast a while back regarding aine's abuse by her father and also Gerry adams knowledge/actions/lack of action on the matter.

Manassas61

timthumbni wrote: »

Utv 11 pm tonight if anyone is interested. They are repeating a program broadcast a while back regarding aine's abuse by her father and also Gerry adams knowledge/actions/lack of action on the matter.

So Gerry Adams actually had knowledge of this and decided to not do anything about it?

COYW

Banjo String wrote: »

I'm not aware of any particular republican operation where a child/children was an intended target.

Well, anyone with an ounce of intelligence would realise that it not beyond the bounds of possibility, putting it mildly, that children could be hurt if you plant a bomb in the middle of a busy shopping area at peak time.

Surprised how little coverage this has received down here. The media must be storing this up for a raining day, if you pardon the pun as I look out my window.

timthumbni

Manassas61 wrote: »

So Gerry Adams actually had knowledge of this and decided to not do anything about it?

Per the news earlier he did not tell the police that Liam had confessed to him about the child rape when they interviewed him, only telling them just before the program that exposed the issue publicly was to be broadcast.

Can't remember the other details but the program tonight will shed a lot of light on the matter for those interested.

Banjo String

COYW wrote: »

Well, anyone with an ounce of intelligence would realise that it not beyond the bounds of possibility, putting it mildly, that children could be hurt if you plant a bomb in the middle of a busy shopping area at peak time.

I don't think there was ever a single war/conflict anywhere on earth where innocent civilians didn't get caught up in the violence.

Sadly, and regrettably this included children all too many times.

Not condoning it. But its a harsh reality.

This is going off topic here, but I'd like some clarification as to how someone could possibly link a paedophile and a republican as being "as bad as each other"?

Liam Adams will be housed in a sex offender wing. Good enough for him too imo.

Manassas61

Banjo String wrote: »

I don't think there was ever a single war/conflict anywhere on earth where innocent civilians didn't get caught up in the violence.

Sadly, and regrettably this included children all too many times.

Not condoning it. But its a harsh reality.

This is going off topic here, but I'd like some clarification as to how someone could possibly link a paedophile and a republican as being "as bad as each other"?

Liam Adams will be housed in a sex offender wing. Good enough for him too imo.

The bomb happened after the Good Friday Agreement was signed.

Banjo String

Manassas61 wrote: »

The bomb happened after the Good Friday Agreement was signed.

What bomb are you referring to?

SoulandForm

Can we leaves the troubles out of this?

Banjo String

SoulandForm wrote: »

Can we leaves the troubles out of this?

Honestly.

Did you start a thread on Gerry Adams brother, and seriously not expect some form of anti republicanism, IRA and the troubles references?

Hand on your heart?

SoulandForm

Banjo String wrote: »

Honestly.

Did you start a thread on Gerry Adams brother, and seriously not expect some form of anti republicanism, IRA and the troubles references?

Hand on your heart?

Fair cop but the issue of child rape should transcend people's views on the troubles.

But the fact is that there do exist Republicans and Unionists who both believe that Gerry should have had Liam shot. Other people were by the PIRA for similar deeds.

Next there is the whole way that the RUC handled the case- basically just trying to use it to recruit the mum and not taking it seriously at all; could this have been because the British state saw Adams as a man they could do business with and wanted to protect him?

There are lots of questions that could be and probably need to be asked.

micosoft

Banjo String wrote: »

I don't think there was ever a single war/conflict anywhere on earth where innocent civilians didn't get caught up in the violence.

Sadly, and regrettably this included children all too many times.

Not condoning it. But its a harsh reality.

This is going off topic here, but I'd like some clarification as to how someone could possibly link a paedophile and a republican as being "as bad as each other"?

Liam Adams will be housed in a sex offender wing. Good enough for him too imo.

You are condoning it. There is a difference between collateral damage when attacking a military target and placing a bomb in a civilian shopping area to specifically target, wait for it, civilians.
Putting a bomb in a civilian area to kill pregnant women and children puts you in exactly the same category as a Paedophile.

If you don't get this I suggest you go through the "regrettable" "harsh reality" of this list and come back to us....

Hannibal

micosoft wrote: »

You are condoning it. There is a difference between collateral damage when attacking a military target and placing a bomb in a civilian shopping area to specifically target, wait for it, civilians.
Putting a bomb in a civilian area to kill pregnant women and children puts you in exactly the same category as a Paedophile.

If you don't get this I suggest you go through the "regrettable" "harsh reality" of this list and come back to us....

These two things although wrong are not in the category, they're not even in the same game.

Anyway why on earth is this thread in Politics?? this isn't a political thread. The family connection by both the victim and the offender to Gerry Adams doesn't make this a political issue

Banjo String

micosoft wrote: »

You are condoning it.

No, I'm not.

I said I didn't in my earlier post. How could you misinterpret what I said any other way?

micosoft wrote: »

There is a difference between collateral damage when attacking a military target and placing a bomb in a civilian shopping area to specifically target, wait for it, civilians.

So the Americans and British when they use 'smart' bombs, drones, cruise missiles etc, that do, and have exploded on civilian buildings, or areas, due to misinformation or human error can count their mistakes as collateral damage?

Mmm.

micosoft wrote: »

Putting a bomb in a civilian area to kill pregnant women and children puts you in exactly the same category as a Paedophile.

It really doesn't. I don't think you understand what a paedophile actually is at this stage.

Sand

@Banjo String

No, I'm not.

I said I didn't in my earlier post. How could you misinterpret what I said any other way?

Ah, the great infinity loop begins.

This is going off topic here, but I'd like some clarification as to how someone could possibly link a paedophile and a republican as being "as bad as each other"?

You are going off-topic.

For what its worth though, two points.

One - Id didn't rank the crimes. I said I couldn't see how Republicans would get worried about a child abuser (certainly didn't bother Gerry and friends for the last few decades) when they were happy to share cells with a child murderer. "Ordinary decent criminals" for what its worth have a far less nuanced view of serious crimes against children than Republicans seem to have.

Two - As you go through life you're going to have to recognise that people hold different views to you. For starters some people cant understand why leaving a bomb in a shopping high street at rush hour could be seen as a deliberate attack on women and children. That's inexplicable to me but I've gathered by now that its like talking to a brick wall so I don't let it bother me anymore. I suggest you do the same for the stuff that you find inexplicable.

Happyman42

Manassas61 wrote: »

And you expect truthful answers? Getting the truth out of Gerry Adams is like trying to get blood out of a stone.

What has he lied about specifically?

K-9

Sand wrote: »

You are going off-topic.

Mod:
Indeed, though the poster was just looking for clarification from you.

Anyway, there are threads on here to debate about Warrington and stuff like that, best we leave this to the points raised in the OP.

There has been a couple of reported posts about the suitability of this thread to politics, if it was a FG/FF/Labour politician and involved the Gardai it would have political interest so therefor this has as well.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Serious questions to be answered by Adams, but I can imagine how conflicted I would be if my family was being pulled apart like that. He has to show that he did the right thing though.

I wouldn't be conflicted at all, he would have been in jail years ago.

The Adams brothers are a disgrace.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

I wouldn't be conflicted at all, he would have been in jail years ago.

The Adams brothers are a disgrace.

Well I don't have a penchant for locking people up for association. I know a number of people who have remained in contact with family members who have committed heinious crimes, who won't turn their backs even if the relationship may fraught. That is family for you, it isn't always black and white.
Gerry Adams didn't witness the assaults, he had to decide if what he was being told was true, that is always a difficult position to be in if it involves family.
I asked earlier what has he specificially lied about? Seems to me that he clarified what he said about 'contact' with his brother and that it is a matter of interpretation what he originally said. The jounalist involved practically said the same thing last night on Primetime.
I think bigger questions have to be asked of the PSNI here actually, which is not to excuse Gerry Adams and what he might have done.

keeponhurling

Anyways, I don't think this crime will be seen as political in any way, so no reason he would be jailed in a particular prison any wing organisations from the troubles.

Must have been tough for the daughter to testify, glad it's over, and hopefully she can get on with her life.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Well I don't have a penchant for locking people up for association. I know a number of people who have remained in contact with family members who have committed heinious crimes, who won't turn their backs even if the relationship may fraught. That is family for you, it isn't always black and white.
Gerry Adams didn't witness the assaults, he had to decide if what he was being told was true, that is always a difficult position to be in if it involves family.
I asked earlier what has he specificially lied about? Seems to me that he clarified what he said about 'contact' with his brother and that it is a matter of interpretation what he originally said. The jounalist involved practically said the same thing last night on Primetime.
I think bigger questions have to be asked of the PSNI here actually, which is not to excuse Gerry Adams and what he might have done.

His niece came to him, he asked his brother, his brother confirmed the abuse, what did he have to decide?

As for what he lied about, read this:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/suzanne-breen-adamss-silence-on-his-brothers-abuse-strips-him-of-all-credibility-29626650.html

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

His niece came to him, he asked his brother, his brother confirmed the abuse, what did he have to decide?

As for what he lied about, read this:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/suzanne-breen-adamss-silence-on-his-brothers-abuse-strips-him-of-all-credibility-29626650.html

You are posting an article which rather than being 'journalism' is an 'opinion' piece with the usual Independent bias and contains no rebuttal from Adams. As I said above the 'estranged' quote is open to interpretation and was discussed with the original journalist on Primetime last night.
I fully agree that Adams needs to further clarify what went on here though.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

You are posting an article which rather than being 'journalism' is an 'opinion' piece with the usual Independent bias and contains no rebuttal from Adams. As I said above the 'estranged' quote is open to interpretation and was discussed with the original journalist on Primetime last night.
I fully agree that Adams needs to further clarify what went on here though.

The straws being clutched to are running out.

If it had been Enda Kenny or Micheal Martin, they would be gone. End of.

I wonder if we went back and looked at the resignation calls made by Adams himself and other SF leaders when there was strong evidence about Ahern but no proof would we be further exposing the hypocrisy of SF?

SoulandForm

Happyman42 wrote: »

You are posting an article which rather than being 'journalism' is an 'opinion' piece with the usual Independent bias and contains no rebuttal from Adams. As I said above the 'estranged' quote is open to interpretation and was discussed with the original journalist on Primetime last night.
I fully agree that Adams needs to further clarify what went on here though.

The British government responsible for the RUC also has questions to answers-there needs to be an investigation into their behaviour around this case.

Godge

SoulandForm wrote: »

The British government responsible for the RUC also has questions to answers-there needs to be an investigation into their behaviour around this case.

The British government doesn't have any questions to answer.

The RUC may have questions to answer but the RUC would have had no case to bring if they were refused co-operation in the prosecution by family members such as Gerry Adams. RUC answers are likely to condemn him even more.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

The British government doesn't have any questions to answer.

The RUC may have questions to answer but the RUC would have had no case to bring if they were refused co-operation in the prosecution by family members such as Gerry Adams. RUC answers are likely to condemn him even more.

Gerry Adams was only a witness to what the daughter said, not to the crime itself, so he was limited in what he could help the police with. Accusations within families are notoriously difficult to sort out.

SoulandForm

Happyman42 wrote: »

Gerry Adams was only a witness to what the daughter said, not to the crime itself, so he was limited in what he could help the police with. Accusations within families are notoriously difficult to sort out.

There was though a medical report which showed she had been raped.

Happyman42

SoulandForm wrote: »

There was though a medical report which showed she had been raped.

Which was the responsibility of the police to act on.

Again I am not trying to exonerate Adams from wrongdoing here, I'm just trying to sort the usual biased witch-hunt from the facts.

SoulandForm

Happyman42 wrote: »

Which was the responsibility of the police to act on.

Again I am not trying to exonerate Adams from wrongdoing here, I'm just trying to sort the usual biased witch-hunt from the facts.

Yes it was- have any of my posts on this let them off hook?

It does seem that some people are posting here merely out of hatred for Sinn Fein rather than any real concern for the issue at hand- however at the time this happened Gerry Adams was not just an ordinary citizen.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Gerry Adams was only a witness to what the daughter said, not to the crime itself, so he was limited in what he could help the police with. Accusations within families are notoriously difficult to sort out.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Which was the responsibility of the police to act on.

Again I am not trying to exonerate Adams from wrongdoing here, I'm just trying to sort the usual biased witch-hunt from the facts.

SoulandForm wrote: »

Yes it was- have any of my posts on this let them off hook?

It does seem that some people are posting here merely out of hatred for Sinn Fein rather than any real concern for the issue at hand- however at the time this happened Gerry Adams was not just an ordinary citizen.

Nobody has exonerated the police but some people are trying to drag the British government into the frame for being blamed. The questions I have for the police are simple:

Why did you not prosecute?
Did all potential witnesses co-operate in full?
Was any representation made by anyone in a political position in relation to this case?

timthumbni

Adams didn't seem to think advising the police his filthy animal brother had confessed to him about the rape of his daughter was important. That is until just before the original insight programme was to to be broadcast in 2009 and everything was going to hit the fan. Trying to save his skin springs to mind.

That idiot priest also again showed up the so called church for what it really is. A bunch of self serving hypocrits. Telling the family to not go to the police as it would be used against her uncle Gerry. I wonder if he was put up to this by anyone..... What a disgusting affair!!

Anyone else at the head of a political party would be away or quietly retired because of this. However when you see the sort of other people high up in that party ( SF ) maybe they won't see this as a big issue. Their morality compass was smashed beyond repair many, many years ago.

That girl aine is a very, very brave woman to see this through. I hope this can bring at least some closure for her on the matter but what that scumbag did is beyond comprehension for me. I hope he gets as long a sentence as is legally possible. Especially considering he didn't admit this guilt.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

Nobody has exonerated the police but some people are trying to drag the British government into the frame for being blamed. The questions I have for the police are simple:

Why did you not prosecute?
Did all potential witnesses co-operate in full?
Was any representation made by anyone in a political position in relation to this case?

Totally agree, and would add that it is from the police that the first point of investigation should start and let the chips fall from there. If your concern is with the victim that is where the buck must stop first.
The British Government aren't immune from responsibility either, remember how Brendan Smyth brought down a government here?

R P McMurphy

timthumbni wrote: »

Adams didn't seem to think advising the police his filthy animal brother had confessed to him about the rape of his daughter was important. That is until just before the original insight programme was to to be broadcast in 2009 and everything was going to hit the fan. Trying to save his skin springs to mind.

That idiot priest also again showed up the so called church for what it really is. A bunch of self serving hypocrits. Telling the family to not go to the police as it would be used against her uncle Gerry. I wonder if he was put up to this by anyone..... What a disgusting affair!!

Anyone else at the head of a political party would be away or quietly retired because of this. However when you see the sort of other people high up in that party ( SF ) maybe they won't see this as a big issue. Their morality compass was smashed beyond repair many, many years ago.

That girl aine is a very, very brave woman to see this through. I hope this can bring at least some closure for her on the matter but what that scumbag did is beyond comprehension for me. I hope he gets as long a sentence as is legally possible. Especially considering he didn't admit this guilt.

Is that the entire catholic church you are referring to there? If it is, is a bit early for full on sectarian bile, no?

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Totally agree, and would add that it is from the police that the first point of investigation should start and let the chips fall from there. If your concern is with the victim that is where the buck must stop first.
The British Government aren't immune from responsibility either, remember how Brendan Smyth brought down a government here?

The British Government did not run the RUC in Northern Ireland, that is not the way the police work in the UK, it is one of the advantages of the regionalised police forces. The chances of any British Government culpability are remote. Why is it that every time an accusation against SF/IRA or a member of SF/IRA is brought up the default reaction is that "they were at it too" no matter how ridiculous that is? No questions to answer for the British government unless you know something everyone else doesn't or there is some elaborate conspiracy theory.

The questions for the police relate to why it took so long to prosecute. The evidence in the public domain suggest that it was a lack of co-operation from the extended Adams family to provide supporting evidence that prevented an early prosecution. I would like confirmation that this is true. However, in the light of having secured a conviction, the questions for the police are not as serious as the questions for others, most particularly Adams. And while the police should answer these questions as soon as possible, most of the questions facing Adams should be answered first.

The questions for Adams are the most serious of all. Did he put his own political future ahead of his niece's safety? Did he lie about disowning his brother? Did he frustrate the police investigation through non-cooperation? Did he break SF rules on the reporting of sexual abuse/ most seriously of all, what was he thinking in exposing other children to contact with someone who he at the very least strongly suspected to be a paedophile? The list of questions for him is longer than that but one final one is why hasn't he resigned because of his disgraceful behaviour?

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

The British Government did not run the RUC in Northern Ireland, that is not the way the police work in the UK, it is one of the advantages of the regionalised police forces. The chances of any British Government culpability are remote. Why is it that every time an accusation against SF/IRA or a member of SF/IRA is brought up the default reaction is that "they were at it too" no matter how ridiculous that is? No questions to answer for the British government unless you know something everyone else doesn't or there is some elaborate conspiracy theory.

You where the one who suggested this question be asked and I agree.

Was any representation made by anyone in a political position in relation to this case?

the difference is I want an answer to that question, whatever it might be.

The questions for the police relate to why it took so long to prosecute. The evidence in the public domain suggest that it was a lack of co-operation from the extended Adams family to provide supporting evidence that prevented an early prosecution.

They had a medical report and the willingness of the daughter to testify, what else did they need to proceed, btw Gerry Adams wasn't called to give evidence at the sucessful trial afaik, which means what he knew wasn't criticial to a conviction, no?

timthumbni

R P McMurphy wrote: »

Is that the entire catholic church you are referring to there? If it is, is a bit early for full on sectarian bile, no?

Actually I'm not religious as I stopped believing in that nonsense as a child. In fact I actually believed in Santa longer than I believed in the religious mumbo jumbo.

If I'm not mistaken the Catholic Church has a history of covering up abuse (is it sectarian to say this now?) so it's not surprising in this case that they were again trying to "cover" things up.

If you want to take that as sectarian then that's up to you. I would say the same about any of the other churches as they are equally capable of being self serving hypocrits. I hope that has cleared up any confusion.

golfball37

Reading this dirge I'm beginning to wonder which of the Adams' brothers was actually on trial for rape this week?:(

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

They had a medical report and the willingness of the daughter to testify, what else did they need to proceed, btw Gerry Adams wasn't called to give evidence at the sucessful trial afaik, which means what he knew wasn't criticial to a conviction, no?

But this is where his culpability in respect of the criminal case lies. It took years to get a conviction. It would have happened 20 years ago if Gerry had gone to the police as a willing witness.

That is also separate from the question of his fitness to lead a political party.

Manassas61

timthumbni wrote: »

Actually I'm not religious as I stopped believing in that nonsense as a child. In fact I actually believed in Santa longer than I believed in the religious mumbo jumbo.

If I'm not mistaken the Catholic Church has a history of covering up abuse (is it sectarian to say this now?) so it's not surprising in this case that they were again trying to "cover" things up.

If you want to take that as sectarian then that's up to you. I would say the same about any of the other churches as they are equally capable of being self serving hypocrits. I hope that has cleared up any confusion.

Its true. Gerry Adams actually knew what was happening and said nothing? Unless I have got that wrong, that is disgraceful.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

But this is where his culpability in respect of the criminal case lies. It took years to get a conviction. It would have happened 20 years ago if Gerry had gone to the police as a willing witness.

That is also separate from the question of his fitness to lead a political party.

As a witness to what?
They had a medical report and I assume medical testimony and the statements of the daughter and I assume Liam Adams.

Einhard

So Gerry Adams beleved his niece when she told him her father had raped her, and yet a decade later, he allowed said brother to live with him in Belfast after the brother got job in a youth centre? If this was any other party, there'd be outrage. But when it comes to SF and their most diehard supporters, the usual norms never seem to apply.