The Kerry Babies Case

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120496250#Comment_120496250

Well you've made your mind up despite knowing absolutely sweet FA about what actually happened.

Those responsible for placing the blame on Hayes by getting her and her family to agree confessions were the same team that did similar with the Sallins train robbery investigations. Same as they did in Ratoath when investigating the murder of Una Lynskey (which directly led to the subsequent murder if one if the wrongly accused).

What you are doing is similar to the so called Murder Squad. You've made up your mind on who did it and now you want them punished.

Balagan1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120496504#Comment_120496504

The undertaker did his very best. The original 'I forgive' was in keeping with the ways of the time, greatly encouraged by the Catholic church, which, until very recently, led to children being buried in the same grave as their murdering and suiciding parent, and in one instance, put into the same coffin as their murderer.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120497247#Comment_120497247

If the death of the baby was due to a post-partum psychotic break, and a young teenage girl would have been dragged before a court of law in the ignorance of 80s Ireland on murder charges, with the full glare of the media in a national moral panic with a well documented Garda goon squad on the case?

In those circumstances, I think a lot of people reading this (including perhaps you) would have moved to protect the mother were they a sister/brother/mother/partner of the girl.

You can post Old Testament rhetoric of moral corruption etc etc if you want if it makes you feel superior, makes no difference to me. I think you're living in a moral absolutist wonderland that discounts the human nature that families will protect their young members in circumstances like that.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120495103#Comment_120495103

A file is being prepared for the DPP.

We don't know how long that takes or how long the DPP takes to make a decision.

So you'll just have to wait for the process to take it's course.

Are you ok with that, or do you want something now?

Andrea B.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120498544#Comment_120498544

Names/locations.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120501290#Comment_120501290

But why do you want to know?

What difference will it make to you?

Andrea B.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120501341#Comment_120501341

Dunno. But want to know. Could be due to some sort of collective guilt that those of us of a +50 age have regards the case. Just want to put a face to them.

April2023

Delete

Electric Sheep

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120494240#Comment_120494240

I don't think we'll ever hear anything official. I doubt we'll hear any more about it.

chooseusername

"A 17 year old concealing her pregnancy from everyone while staying at home is hard to believe".

I'm going to contradict this that I posted earlier in the thread. The pathologist on " For Ann Lovett..." said it was not all that unusual to hide a pregnancy from everyone - family, friends, room mates etc. she knew of at least 5. it's about 10 mins into this documentary;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39KU7Agwmis

myclist

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120545350#Comment_120545350

Is there a suggestion now that the mother was 17 at the time of the birth??

Yellow_Fern

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120457725#Comment_120457725

>It is true. I was only interested in countering your assertion that these places “did a lot of good”, a vague assertion that you choose to back up with a single anecdote, ignoring the mountains of evidence from the very same sources you’re using to make your argument which suggests otherwise -

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/ireland-s-proportion-of-unmarried-mothers-in-homes-was-probably-highest-in-world-1.4456279

 

A high rate of single mothers in such places is not proof in its self that they were harmful. So I don’t know why you share that link. Also, that study, interesting as it is, only refers to the late 1950s and suffers from a dearth of comparative data. We don’t know how common this was across Europe.

>Of course there was a lot more to it than just the social climate of the time in which pregnancy outside of wedlock caused considerable consternation not only among families due to concerns about their social status, but also among politicians who purported to be guided by religious morality in dealing with the issue of illegitimate children. “Pretend they don’t exist” appears to have been the order of the day, and in order to enforce that view in Irish society, what were once the poorhouses became institutions where what were considered social ills at the time could be hidden away from polite society where nobody cared what happened to them as long as they were out of sight and didn’t serve as a daily reminder of a cruel and sadistic society -

https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/mother-and-baby-home-st-patricks-2380868-Oct2015/

 

This statement denies the agency of the many young mothers who volunteered to come to this institutions, often in difficult circumstances. Society that was cruel in the sense that people struggled and the conditions were often dismal in some of these institutions and dismal for the kids boarded out. It was also cruel in the sense that rapists who got these women pregnant usually escaped scot free, but the sisters running these homes were making society more humane in most cases.

>I didn’t imply that being a single mother was impossible, that’s yet another strawman of your own invention to distract from the fact that unmarried mothers were viewed as moral failures, and they and their children were viewed as burdens on society, in the same way as they are today in some quarters, without the influence of the Church to fall back on as an excuse for how those people regard unmarried mothers and their children.

So society was bad for reasons that still exist? Hardly shows that they were unsually cruel times?

>As for your ridiculously specific claim that I’m unaware that in the 20th century most unmarried mothers kept their babies, while admitting that most babies born to unmarried mothers were adopted, except for 2-4 exceptional years in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, yet again you’re using all sorts of conditions which suit your argument, which have nothing to do with the figures for unmarried mothers who had no other choice but to enter the homes due to the lack of support from their families who were more concerned about their daughters specifically not bringing shame on the family and being a burden on the family. Does the 20th century not consist of the period between 1900 and 2000, or am I missing a few decades? Because even then in order to force the father to maintain their illegitimate offspring, a mother had to prove in open court that he was indeed the father, something which many women just weren’t prepared to do as it would again… you guessed it - bring shame upon the family -

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1930/act/17/enacted/en/print.html

 

My comment had a typo. Most kids born outside marriage were not adopted except in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s. I am surprised you did not know this.

 

As abhorrent and tragic as it is by today’s standards, it was pretty much the standard at the time during that period in Irish history when people were just as interested then in maintaining their social status as they are today. The mere passage of time hasn’t changed much, only that the services provided to the State by these institutions, are no longer required by the State is all.

monty_python

Any updates on this case?

Have the perants been charged?

Electric Sheep

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120679735#Comment_120679735

I very much doubt that will ever happen.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120715404#Comment_120715404

You're probably right and some may see this as a fitting conclusion to the original botched investigation, but only if they don't care about justice for an infant boy whose brief life ended in an horrific attack.

The parents of this baby watched in silence while a botched investigation almost stitched-up the Hayes family (saved by a fortuitous mismatch with the murdered baby's blood) and while the whole saga played out at the Tribunal of Inquiry. They didn't lift a finger to help the Gardai, the Hayes family, the Tribunal or any investigation during almost four decades.

Through the miracle of DNA technology and the persistence of the Gardai, the parents were finally identified but it seems they have continued to stonewall the investigating Gardai. They have a right to silence but their silence should not be a shield against justice for Baby John. (Their solicitor's complete indifference towards his client's murdered infant during his media appearance spoke volumes.) If they are unwilling to assist the Gardai in this investigation, there must be options to prosecute them e.g. for failing to register the birth. Even the most minor charge should be brought so that they are given an opportunity to clear their names in open court and to be judged according to the law. If the DPP fails to prosecute, it would be the final nail in that tiny white coffin.

There are some posters here trying to mitigate their behaviour by saying what a terrible taboo there was against unmarried mothers. But this murder was in 1984, not 1884 or even 1954. In no way could any lingering prejudice at that time justify the parents' continuing silence about this terrible murder.

Xander10

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120721820#Comment_120721820

Good post.

And you would have to hope that any conclusion in the year 2023, is not conveniently swept under the carpet.

juno10353

Is there a chance that an updated post mortem case could be taken if not a criminal case. And all details put forward.

Mrs OBumble

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120721849#Comment_120721849

Wrong country for that, though.

Water John

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120722677#Comment_120722677

I presume you mean, reopening the inquest?

anonymo203

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120721820#Comment_120721820

I think it was reported a few weeks back that a dead man connected to the couple was involved, so maybe the couple have told the investigators what happened but it’s now in the DPPs hands as to what will happen next and whether the truth comes out into the public domain. Anyway, the couples lives as they were prior to the arrests are now gone, so they would be better off telling the truth as to exactly what happened and at the very least acknowledging their murdered son.

juno10353

Yes I meant reopen the inquest now that new information has been received.

A baby was savagely killed. His body dumped in sea, his grave vandalised on multiple occasions. Innocent people blamed and lives ruined because of silence of those involved. Crime cover-up and silence of those involved or knowing the truth can not be allowed to continue. These people allowed the Hayes family to be tormented and linked to this horrific murder for all these years, without compassion for those affected.

The truth has to be told once and for all.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120721849#Comment_120721849

My guess is we will hear from the DPP in the next two months.

If they intend to bring charges, we should hear before the end of July.

If not, they will try to slip the news out as quietly as possible in August in the hope that everyone will have forgotten the issue by the time the Dáil resumes in September.

Galwayguy35

I'd sure like to see the dirtbag that smashed Johns headstone named and shamed, lowest of the low to do something like that.

TokenJogger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120751445#Comment_120751445

The question is why would someone do this ? and top of the list did they do it because of some involvement

Hotblack Desiato

Because of the totally crass "I forgive" statement the undertaker chose to add? What right did he have to say that on behalf of a murder victim?

Once that was removed the attacks stopped.

Obviously someone linked to that child in some way was not happy with the wall of silence and "all is forgiven" crap, and that was their way of expressing their anger at the determination to sweep all under the carpet.

Captain Fantastic 1984

I know its off topic but wasn't the same done in regards to Jo Jo Dollard? Didn't the family erect a headstone or monument somewhere and it was destroyed more than once? Imho when that happens its that someone with a guilty conscience doesn't want to see what they've done staring them in the face. The baby John story definitely has a local element to it. And more people know things than they're letting on. This could all be cleared up very quickly id say but people won't talk. That's jus the way it is in rural communities like that.

Andrea B.

Now that all parties identified, maybe his parents could settle undertaker costs with State, and erect a headstone to their own personal liking.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120751640#Comment_120751640

Baby John's grave had been desecrated a number of times before the headstone with "I forgive" replaced the little wooden cross. The "I forgive" on the stone had nothing to do with the attacks on the grave. It was vandalised for the last time in 2004 when the stone was smashed. The stone had been put there the previous February. If whoever did it was "not happy with the wall of silence" they were happy enough to keep it that way for the next 14 or so years.

Tom Cournane has unfinished work, his last act for Baby John is to put John's full name on that stone at the behest of his parents.

myclist

That is all bullshit. I suspect that you two know that. I don't know what your agenda is here but you'll have to sell that fairytale elsewhere.

micar

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120801848#Comment_120801848

Honestly......why would you even post this.