Philip Cairns' Murder finally confirmed?

Allyall

Strumms wrote: »

As far as I know the scumbag had been incarcerated for 10 years or whatever up until his death. He could have had no hold on the woman who gave up the information.

He could have had a psychological hold over her.
He could have been abusing her for years and told her that because she was there when whatever alledgedly happened to Philip Cairns, that she was also liable, if she was to tell anybody.
She has come forward before, at least once in 2011 and possibly other times before that.

You cannot pretend to know the reasons that she hasn't come forward before, or the reasons that the Gardaí have stated that she showed "Incredible Courage" to come forward at all.
We don't know anything about this Woman.
Is she living with somebody known to be an associate of Cooke?
Is she fully aware of her surroundings. What age is she, was she one of Cookes victims, did Cooke teach her a lesson before? Did someone else?

Etc..

Strumms

Allyall wrote: »

He could have had a psychological hold over her.
He could have been abusing her for years and told her that because she was there when whatever alledgedly happened to Philip Cairns, that she was also liable, if she was to tell anybody.
She has come forward before, at least once in 2011 and possibly other times before that.

You cannot pretend to know the reasons that she hasn't come forward before, or the reasons that the Gardaí have stated that she showed "Incredible Courage" to come forward at all.
We don't know anything about this Woman.
Is she living with somebody known to be an associate of Cooke?
Is she fully aware of her surroundings. What age is she, was she one of Cookes victims, did Cooke teach her a lesson before? Did someone else?

Etc..

All fair points and to be honest it's only unless you were inside her head, or were the Gardai investigating the case could you know I suppose. I could have been a bit quick to judge the woman.

Either way I'd love to think that maybe this information can take the investigation down the road a bit to the point where Philip can be found and given a proper burial and a resting place.

Some animal that Cooke... You would think in that situation for all the wrongs you did in your life that sometime towards the end of it you could feel it in your heart to say where Philip was and do one good thing for his poor mother and family. I guess he was just that big of an evil monster that it meant nothing.

freshpopcorn

I posted earlier that I Googled Philip Cairns back in May. I remember why I did it now. I was watching a ITV drama called Scott & Bailey.
The episode was about a woman coming forward after thirty years saying she helped her father bury her brothers body in the cellar and she was too afraid to coming forward until then. (He father ended up in prison for killing his wife)
The police took her claim seriously and started digging up the cellar and they found I think at least eight bodies. The couple were abusing and killing young men. Philip Cairns was mentioned because a man came forward who was called Philip Cairns saying he was held in the cellar but broke free and he reported it to the police at the time but his claim wasn't taken seriously enough!
Sorry for being off topic!

Aineoil

Strumms wrote: »

Some animal that Cooke... You would think in that situation for all the wrongs you did in your life that sometime towards the end of it you could feel it in your heart to say where Philip was and do one good thing for his poor mother and family. I guess he was just that big of an evil monster that it meant nothing.

I had the same thoughts myself. You'd imagine on your deathbed you'd try to make some sort of amends. He was given ample opportunity to do so but was defiant to the end.

About the woman who came forward with information about this puzzling case....we don't have the full facts. I could make many assumptions about why she did or didn't come forward at any time in the past but she did at last.

Hopefully there will be closure for the family.

anewme

Cynthia Murphy came forward 22 years later to tell the truth about her daughter baby Noleen who had been murdered by being stabbed up to 40 times and dumped in a lane way. She had a horrific life and showed great courage in coming forward when many of the abusers were people of power. Should she also be prosecuted for not coming forward earlier and taking 22 years.??

The statement that the witness is showing incredible courage is very telling and anyone who can't read between the lines here. I believe the witness is very close to home.

Before the conviction for 42 sexual offences against children including attempted rape, attempted unlawful carnal knowledge sexual and indecent assault Cooke had 8 previous convictions spanning 51 years including shooting with intent, arson, malicious damage and contempt of court. He tried to shut someone up by setting fire to their house for God's sake!

There could now be a murder of a child on top of this.( if this witness is to be believed and the Gardai(who know more about the detail than anyone))

what else do we not know about?

To call this person a "barstool republican" is a grave error of judgement. To say it's not a patch on the McCarthy Dundon gangland behaviour is also an underestimation. I think this guy is fifty times more malicious, dangerous and and out and out monster.

A family member of mine was involved in The Industrial schools scandal and following therapy was able to recall events almost 60 years later which had never been spoken of before (including some very serious incidents) and that had been hidden all those years. It brought devastating consequences for all concerned.

People should reserve judgement until the truth comes out.

Have we learnt nothing from the past?

Bebopclown

Looks like Eamon Cooke was into young girls. If this is true, I wonder why he went after a boy. Also, it looks like his arson attack happened in 1986, I wonder if it was on this witness.

Samaris

Bebopclown wrote: »

Looks like Eamon Cooke was into young girls. If this is true, I wonder why he went after a boy. Also, it looks like his arson attack happened in 1986, I wonder if it was on this witness.

I was reading around a bit and on a thread about this man, someone said that she was his daughter. Another person, with a male handle, said that he was the person that Cooke had had a petrol bomb chucked at (or words to that effect). I know, it's the internet, but for what it's worth.

Fleawuss

Samaris wrote: »

Actually, it's a thread about whether the case is finally confirmed as a murder, precipitated by information about someone coming forward in May.

So you can go either way on that, although I'm rather with the line of thought that thinks it's weird to call down the fires of hell on an unknown witness while generally ignoring the paedophilic presumed murderer.

Actually it's not: the title raises the question and the op is about the person who held a secret for 30 years to add to the torment of the Cairns family. But don't let that get in the way of what you think it should be about and that anything else is "weird". Given that there is no hell and unless I missed it not even the religious crazies were calling for hellfire I'll just put that comment of yours in the "weird" pile too. Perhaps if you took the time to think about things you might realise that there's **** all can be done to a dead paedophile. But obviously you believe that all the attention should be on that. Was weird the word you tried to apply to others views? Take the log out of your own eye etc. you know what I mean.

Samaris

Fleawuss wrote: »

Actually it's not: the title raises the question and the op is about the person who held a secret for 30 years to add to the torment of the Cairns family. But don't let that get in the way of what you think it should be about and that anything else is "weird". Given that there is no hell and unless I missed it not even the religious crazies were calling for hellfire I'll just put that comment of yours in the "weird" pile too. Perhaps if you took the time to think about things you might realise that there's **** all can be done to a dead paedophile. But obviously you believe that all the attention should be on that. Was weird the word you tried to apply to others views? Take the log out of your own eye etc. you know what I mean.

"Phillip Cairns' Murder finally confirmed" is the name of the thread, yes? Although going back, I do see that the only note in the OPs post is "Stupid bitch" so you may have a point.

But okay, this thread can go back to ranting about how awful this woman is for coming forward. Seems a bit pointless to me, but if it makes you feel happier in yourself, go ahead. All the attention can now be on castigating the one person who can help for reasons that are at the moment, at best, dimly understood. (And yes, I did apply the word "weird" to the concept of shooting the messenger rather than applying any of it to the, y'know, paedophilic murderer.)

As a side-note, I did assume that all but the most humour-deficient could read between the lines in terms of the words "fires of hell".

Marlie

Samaris wrote: »

I was reading around a bit and on a thread about this man, someone said that she was his daughter. Another person, with a male handle, said that he was the person that Cooke had had a petrol bomb chucked at (or words to that effect). I know, it's the internet, but for what it's worth.

Sorry, I can't post a link yet, Irish Times title "Who was Eamon Cooke"?

If this Irish Times piece is correct and his children were aged between 4 and 18 in 2007 then his first child was born 3 years after Philip's disappearance.

Fleawuss

Samaris wrote: »

"Phillip Cairns' Murder finally confirmed" is the name of the thread, yes? Although going back, I do see that the only note in the OPs post is "Stupid bitch" so you may have a point.

But okay, this thread can go back to ranting about how awful this woman is for coming forward. Seems a bit pointless to me, but if it makes you feel happier in yourself, go ahead. All the attention can now be on castigating the one person who can help for reasons that are at the moment, at best, dimly understood. (And yes, I did apply the word "weird" to the concept of shooting the messenger rather than applying any of it to the, y'know, paedophilic murderer.)

As a side-note, I did assume that all but the most humour-deficient could read between the lines in terms of the words "fires of hell".

So you can now admit that the op was about the silent witness. Progress. There's no "may" about me having a point, it's crystal clear. There's no point to you asking me the title of the thread as I already and very obviously referenced it in my reply to you. You have to be corrected again about what the thread is about: it's not about her coming forward, it's about her not coming forward. Geddit? And I see that you happily resort to personal abuse when called out on "hell". Ah well.

Bebopclown

Samaris wrote: »

"Phillip Cairns' Murder finally confirmed" is the name of the thread, yes? Although going back, I do see that the only note in the OPs post is "Stupid bitch" so you may have a point.

Actully it's "Phillip Cairns' Murder finally confirmed?"
You forgot the question mark.

Pretzill

Marlie wrote: »

Sorry, I can't post a link yet, Irish Times title "Who was Eamon Cooke"?

If this Irish Times piece is correct and his children were aged between 4 and 18 in 2007 then his first child was born 3 years after Philip's disappearance.

I think someone else posted an article about him a few pages back - he had 9 children by his second wife and so the other two could have been older.


What a creepy, evil f*cker he was. I read an article on Politico from Magill around the time of the pirate stations and this **** was far from pilloried in it. Eventhough this article was written in 79 and there were allegations of abuse - the author of the article made it sound like it was all made up against Cooke. I don't have the link but it's a reminder of the dark days when no one believed children.

It's a chilling case. That poor kid.

anewme

This is it..
http://politico.ie/archive/pirates-rule-airways-how-long

Going Forward

eviltwin wrote: »

How convenient he's just died. Not sure what to think of this one. If she's genuine she should face prosecution.

What message would that send out to others who may have information regarding other cases?

There's a balance which the cops have to keep between seeking vital information and treating informants who give valuable information.

And making appeals for information usually includes an assurance anyone who contacts them will be treated in a certain way.

If she had no involvement, I doubt they'd prosecute for her delay in coming forward.

It would deter others from doing so.

Pretzill

anewme wrote: »

This is it..
http://politico.ie/archive/pirates-rule-airways-how-long

Thing is if those allegations were proven back then and this latest story proves true - that evil bastard may not have had a chance to kill.

Fleawuss

Going Forward wrote: »

What message would that send out to others who may have information regarding other cases?

There's a balance which the cops have to keep between seeking vital information and treating informants who give valuable information.

And making appeals for information usually includes an assurance anyone who contacts them will be treated in a certain way.

If she had no involvement, I doubt they'd prosecute for her delay in coming forward.

It would deter others from doing so.

If there is no punishment for withholding information then there is every reason to believe that information will be withheld far more often. It has been an established tenet of common law that withholding information is an offence. I doubt any action will be taken either. This is Ireland. We don't like action. Much better to phone Joe. Next caller.

Samaris

Fleawuss wrote: »

So you can now admit that the op was about the silent witness. Progress. There's no "may" about me having a point, it's crystal clear. There's no point to you asking me the title of the thread as I already and very obviously referenced it in my reply to you. You have to be corrected again about what the thread is about: it's not about her coming forward, it's about her not coming forward. Geddit? And I see that you happily resort to personal abuse when called out on "hell". Ah well.

You started on the sarcasm.

And really, picking on the hell comment was being deliberately obtuse. Please note, I am not calling -you- deliberately obtuse, I am saying that that specific comment was. Fine, I apologise for the phrase "humour-deficient", but it was an unnecessary remark of yours in the first place. I think we can both agree, to be utterly specific and moderately pedantic, that many posters in this thread have called for retribution upon the person coming forward, right? Rather than listing all the things that people feel should happen to her, I used the fairly obvious catch-all "fires of hell", and I really don't feel that this was ascribing specific religious beliefs on anyone, which I think was something you brought up as part of your general disapprobation with that comment.

And yes, I missed the questionmark (other poster), accidental oversight.

And actually, it's not about either, or rather, it can be about both. The OP's scintillating commentary (sorry, the sarcasm is creeping in again) was "Stupid Bitch", which, while certainly a valid opinion, is not exactly an in-depth analysis.


Okay, I can compromise. The original post was about this person coming forward now (or not coming forward until now if you wish), as well as (from the title of the thread, plus questionmark) whether the murder is actually confirmed from this new information. I do think that those calling for retribution in the shape of dubiously defined justice on this woman based on what information is known so far is a leap into the premature, but the internet is very good at forming a lynch mob.*

*Please note, I do not mean a literal lynch mob. It is very hard to force a noose through a computer screen without irreparable damage to both.

Going Forward

Fleawuss wrote: »

If there is no punishment for withholding information then there is every reason to believe that information will be withheld far more often. It has been an established tenet of common law that withholding information is an offence. I doubt any action will be taken either. This is Ireland. We don't like action. Much better to phone Joe. Next caller.

But if the lady knew there was punishment for supplying information, then what??

The case festers?

Would she have come forward, to inevitable prosecution?

anewme

Fleawuss wrote: »

If there is no punishment for withholding information then there is every reason to believe that information will be withheld far more often. It has been an established tenet of common law that withholding information is an offence. I doubt any action will be taken either. This is Ireland. We don't like action. Much better to phone Joe. Next caller.

How do you know the information was deliberately withheld? Your comments seem to assume that this person acted with malicious intent?

If the witness was a child at the time, could she not have been suffering from a PTSD and blocked out the memories memories (very common in cases like this) - especially if she herself is a victim of this monster.

Why have the police Gardai mentioned her incredible courage?

Your too quick to assume the worst and act as Judge and Jury without knowing the facts.

But as you say, this is Ireland.

Fleawuss

Pretzill wrote: »

Thing is if those allegations were proven back then and this latest story proves true - that evil bastard may not have had a chance to kill.

You see, there it is. One person failed to do the right thing and who knows how many more lives could have been protected from abuse or worse if one person told the truth. There it is.

Fleawuss

Going Forward wrote: »

But if the lady knew there was punishment for supplying information, then what??

The case festers?

Would she have come forward, to inevitable prosecution?

Christ. The punishment is for not supplying information.

Samaris

Yep, it's the automatic assumption of malicious intent that's bugging me about this. Not to mention the attempt to move the blame from the man that did it to a witness. The full and absolute blame lies with the man who raped children, who molested children and who may well have murdered a young boy.

Just because he's dead and nothing more can be done to him does not change that. It never changes that. Sometimes there isn't a living person to blame, and no justice that can be meted out and that is tragic but that is how it goes. To seek another person to punish in his stead is blind and foolish.

Maybe this woman has something to be ashamed of. Maybe there was absolutely no reason she didn't come forward until 2011 and then 2016 (and possibly sometime in the 90s). Maybe she did just wake up one morning and think "hm, eggs, milk, report seeing the murder of a kid thirty years ago", but frankly, I think it highly unlikely.

anewme

Fleawuss wrote: »

You see, there it is. One person failed to do the right thing and who knows how many more lives could have been protected from abuse or worse if one person told the truth. There it is.

What about all the Saville victims who did not speak out while he was alive. They might have saved others from abuse too. But they felt no one would believe them. Should they be prosecuted too?

Going Forward

Fleawuss wrote: »

Christ. The punishment is for not supplying information.

In effect it is, because the possibility doesnt wont arise if she doesn't make contact, as she did following an appeal.

anewme

Fleawuss wrote: »

Christ. The punishment is for not supplying information.

maybe she Blocked out the incident as too traumatic to process.

Allyall

anewme wrote: »

What about all the Saville victims who did not speak out while he was alive. They might have saved others from abuse too. But they felt no one would believe them. Should they be prosecuted too?

Plenty of people did come forward and have spoken out in both these cases, and weren't listened to. Nothing was done.
Cookes Radio studio was trashed by his own staff in 1978 because of allegations.
Maybe she needed Cooke to admit it, otherwise she had zero proof and it was just another story and by going to the Gardaí again while he was on his death bed, she was hoping he would be more honest.

Fleawuss

anewme wrote: »

How do you know the information was deliberately withheld? Your comments seem to assume that this person acted with malicious intent?

If the witness was a child at the time, could she not have been suffering from a PTSD and blocked out the memories memories (very common in cases like this) - especially if she herself is a victim of this monster.

Why have the police Gardai mentioned her incredible courage?

Your too quick to assume the worst and act as Judge and Jury without knowing the facts.

But as you say, this is Ireland.

What I believe is that there is no excuse for 30 years of silence. You have all sorts of hypothetical excuses to hand: let her face a criminal investigation into 30 years of silence. Put all these excuses to the test. And you're assuming that Im assuming malice: I'm saying there is no excuse for her inaction. I have no interest in her motivation: the outcome of her inaction was 30 years of torment for the family. Excuses seem to be all that matters to some here. But then as you say, this is Ireland

Going Forward

Fleawuss wrote: »

You see, there it is. One person failed to do the right thing and who knows how many more lives could have been protected from abuse or worse if one person told the truth. There it is.

Perhaps the Garda appeals should make it clear that prosecutions for withholding information are imminent and drop the assurances about information received being treated in confidence.

Fleawuss

anewme wrote: »

What about all the Saville victims who did not speak out while he was alive. They might have saved others from abuse too. But they felt no one would believe them. Should they be prosecuted too?

In my opinion yes. As should the police who didn't investigate. As should the bishops and priests who covered up abuse.