Patrick Quirke -Guilty

knucklehead6

Seems to me the ex had something to do with this too

BarryD2

Very odd, he'll surely appeal. Whatever about the ins and outs of the case, there was no clear evidence that he murdered anybody. All they really demonstrated was possible motive.

kneemos

BarryD2 wrote: »

Very odd, he'll surely appeal. Whatever about the ins and outs of the case, there was no clear evidence that he murdered anybody. All they really demonstrated was possible motive.

Not a shread of evidence.

FrancieBrady

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Seems to me the ex had something to do with this too

Good job he/she is your 'ex' then!

PinotNero

Kind of surprised.I believe he probably did it but the evidence was weak.

I imagine he'll appeal the sentence.

Bob Harris

A lot of indications he was up to no good but no actual evidence.
Hardly proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The bauld Mary Lowry was as dodgy as he was.

BPKS

Very surprised.

Listening to the daily trial updates, I was wondering how the prosecution brought a case at all.

Faugheen

Although the evidence was circumstantial, it certainly wasn’t ‘weak’.

The moment I heard he had been searching for how long it takes bodies to decompose on the internet in the days after Bobby Ryan went missing, I knew he was guilty as sin.

King of Kings

Based on what was in the media its a shocking verdict. Very little evidence to send somebody down for a life sentence.

In fact more suspicion on the lowry woman imo than quirke.

On an aside..there seems to be some fierce amount of middle aged riding going on. I'll never believe my single mates telling me its hard to date in your 40s.

Odelay

The staging of finding the body was a bit of a give away.

Laois_Man

I wasn't surprised it was taking the jury ages but knew they'd come back fairly quickly after this mornings directive from the judge

Evidence was a bit circumstantial for my liking.

Based on media anyway

is_that_so

King of Kings wrote: »

Based on what was in the media its a shocking verdict. Very little evidence to send somebody down for a life sentence.

In fact more suspicion on the lowry woman imo than quirke.

On an aside..there seems to be some fierce amount of middle aged riding going on. I'll never believe my single mates telling me its hard to date in your 40s.

I remember reading a few years back that STIs were increasing rapidly in the over 50s!

King of Kings

Faugheen wrote: »

Although the evidence was circumstantial, it certainly wasn’t ‘weak’.

The moment I heard he had been searching for how long it takes bodies to decompose on the internet in the days after Bobby Ryan went missing, I knew he was guilty as sin.

I know what you mean..but ive looked up mad **** on the net too...and that particular stuff too....its not enough to send somebody down for a life sentence imo...

The burden of proof should be very high cos the consequences are very high and I dont this it was even close to that in this case.

Laois_Man

Faugheen wrote: »

Although the evidence was circumstantial, it certainly wasn’t ‘weak’.

The moment I heard he had been searching for how long it takes bodies to decompose on the internet in the days after Bobby Ryan went missing, I knew he was guilty as sin.

Did they say those searches were in the days after and did they present evidence as to who performed the searches?

realdanbreen

Scary that you could get a life sentence based on that evidence.

Faugheen

Laois_Man wrote: »

Did they say those searches were in the days after and did they present evidence as to who performed the searches?

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

Birneybau

Surely Mary Lowry could have been found as guilty of him

hairyprincess

Faugheen wrote: »

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

Who hadn’t actually died yet.

Odelay

Faugheen wrote: »

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

Only he managed to search if before his son died...

Odelay

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

BarryD2

Odelay wrote: »

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

Said with scary conviction! Just hope that if any misfortune befalls you and you end up on trial, that the jurors will be open minded

Faugheen

Odelay wrote: »

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

Same. Think people need to learn the difference between circumstantial evidence and no evidence.

ongarite

Lots of evidence against him was ruled inadmissible by his defence team.
Details on RTE:
https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0501/1046863-what-the-quirke-trial-jury-didnt-hear/

Faugheen

BarryD2 wrote: »

Said with scary conviction! Just hope that if any misfortune befalls you and you end up on trial, that the jurors will be open minded

The jury took 20 hours to deliberate the verdict. Sounds to me like they were very open minded.

I presented a huge piece of evidence in this thread which pointed towards his guilt and you’ve completely ignored it.

Vegeta

BPKS wrote: »

Very surprised.

Listening to the daily trial updates, I was wondering how the prosecution brought a case at all.

Exactly my response to this.

Mantis Toboggan

Justice

Beechwoodspark

Yer wan seems to have been ridin like a rampant rabbit

And he’d get up on a cracked plate

Mantis Toboggan

Its important to note that the guards did a shambles of a job in this case, real amateur stuff.

Faugheen

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Yer wan seems to have been ridin like a rampant rabbit

And he’d get up on a cracked plate

In fairness, Mary Lowry looks a lot like his wife.

kneemos

Faugheen wrote: »

Same. Think people need to learn the difference between circumstantial evidence and no evidence.

Sure it looks suspicious,but it could just as easily have been someone else that dumped the body in the tank.

Folk are concerned that a conviction can follow from such weak evidence.

Laois_Man

Faugheen wrote: »

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

Wrong. The search took place more than once.

The only one that took place after Bobby Ryan disappeared was a year and a half after

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/human-body-decomposition-search-carried-out-on-a-computer-seized-in-quirke-house-court-told-1.3833977

hairyprincess wrote: »

Who hadn’t actually died yet.

The other, the one before his son died, also took place two years before Bobby Ryan died. That alone makes the searches meaningless

Cryptopagan

realdanbreen wrote: »

Scary that you could get a life sentence based on that evidence.

Yeah, all they had on him was the motive and the opportunity...and the actual body of the murder victim hidden in a concealed water tank on his farm that only he and a few others knew about.

realdanbreen

Faugheen wrote: »

Odelay wrote: »

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

Same. Think people need to learn the difference between circumstantial evidence and no evidence.

When the guy is in the dock at the beginning of the trial the jury do not know if he is guilty or not guilty. Based on the evidence that the prosecution presented there is no way that they now know that he is guilty.

Cryptopagan

kneemos wrote: »

Sure it looks suspicious,but it could just as easily have been someone else that dumped the body in the tank.

Then they snuck into his house and looked up how long it takes a body to decompose in water on his laptop.

Laois_Man

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Then they snuck into his house and looked up how long it takes a body to decompose in water on his laptop.

Are you imagining things?

The searches did not mention water

Cryptopagan

Laois_Man wrote: »

Are you imagining things?

The searches did not mention water

“Gardaí also found evidence that a home computer had been used to search for the rate of decomposition of human remains in water.”

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2019/0501/1046814-patrick-quirke-trial/

meeeeh

I'm not surprised that it went to majority verdict.

freshpopcorn

BarryD2 wrote: »

Said with scary conviction! Just hope that if any misfortune befalls you and you end up on trial, that the jurors will be open minded

I used always have great confidence in jurys up until the Belfast trial last year.
It's was scary to think that some of the one's on Twotter could end up on a jury!

Mantis Toboggan

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Its important to note that the guards did a shambles of a job in this case, real amateur stuff.

What would you have done differently?
Gardai arrested the suspect & clearly put enough evidence together for the DPP to decide that suspect should be charged.
Looks like they did exactly what they are supposed to do.

freshpopcorn

bubblypop wrote: »

What would you have done differently?
Gardai arrested the suspect & clearly put enough evidence together for the DPP to decide that suspect should be charged.
Looks like they did exactly what they are supposed to do.

That his body wasn't found sooner was one of the main things I've heard mentioned!

Based on what the media told us, I would have had a hard time finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

What was the judges directive this morning?

Oh, and I was full sure he’d shout from the docks “she was in on it too”

realdanbreen

I do think that an innocent defendant should always take the stand regardless of what their defence team advises them.

Faugheen

Laois_Man wrote: »

Wrong. The search took place more than once.

The only one that took place after Bobby Ryan disappeared was a year and a half after

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/human-body-decomposition-search-carried-out-on-a-computer-seized-in-quirke-house-court-told-1.3833977



The other, the one before his son died, also took place two years before Bobby Ryan died. That alone makes the searches meaningless

Granted I got my dates wrong, but reading that article you linked doesn’t make me any less convinced.

Laois_Man

Cryptopagan wrote: »

“Gardalso found evidence that a home computer had been used to search for the rate of decomposition of human remains in water.”

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2019/0501/1046814-patrick-quirke-trial/

The link I have already given gives the exact searches that were used and the exact articles that were read, which were not about decomposition in water

And it gives the dates of the second searches - a year and a half after the murder with the first searches at least two years before the murder.

Gaillimh1976

Unless you were in the courtroom & heard all of the evidence, you can't really comment on whether this verdict is correct.

Media may not have reported everything / may have been instructed not to report everything / put their own spin on things to sell papers

If they spent 20 hours deliberating the jurors have clearly given this sufficient thought & not rushed into a verdict

Utter Consternation

bubblypop wrote: »

What would you have done differently?
Gardai arrested the suspect & clearly put enough evidence together for the DPP to decide that suspect should be charged.
Looks like they did exactly what they are supposed to do.

From the Gardai evidence in the trial it sounded like the crime scene investigation was like something out of the Naked Gun. Frank Drebbin wouldn't be bloody in it with their carry on.

The State Pathologist didn't even bother his hole going down to it.

Faugheen

Gaillimh1976 wrote: »

Unless you were in the courtroom & heard all of the evidence, you can't really comment on whether this verdict is correct.

Media may not have reported everything / may have been instructed not to report everything / put their own spin on things to sell papers

If they spent 20 hours deliberating the jurors have clearly given this sufficient thought & not rushed into a verdict

You really need to read up on how the media can report court cases if you think this is a possibility.

Laois_Man

Faugheen wrote: »

Granted I got my dates wrong, but reading that article you linked doesn’t make me any less convinced.

Try this one then

Ryan was murdered in 2014

Searches about body decomposition took place before his son died

But his son died in August 2012

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/boy-killed-in-trailer-accident-on-family-dairy-farm-26885315.html

Did he plan pre-August 2012 to murder someone and not get around to it until a couple of years later?

Gaillimh1976

Faugheen wrote: »

You really need to read up on how the media can report court cases if you think this is a possibility.

Spin may be the wrong word


More emphasis on certain parts than others is really what I mean


Rest of the point still stands

Faugheen

Laois_Man wrote: »

Try this one then

Ryan was murdered in 2014

Searches about body decomposition took place before his son died

But his son died in August 2012

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/boy-killed-in-trailer-accident-on-family-dairy-farm-26885315.html

Did he plan pre-August 2012 to murder someone and not get around to it until a couple of years later?

Bobby Ryan went missing in 2011...

KaneToad

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Its important to note that the guards did a shambles of a job in this case, real amateur stuff.

I didn't seem that way to me. The defence certainly tried to portray that way but I don't think any of their points were of much consequence. My reading of the media reports was that the guards did pretty much what you would expect of them. One might argue that they did exceptionally well, given that the evidence they gathered has secured a murder conviction.