Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…5455575960…94

Comments

  • #1682
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,087 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You come accross as being very defensive of the Gardaí/Legal System?

    Was that a statement or a question? It seems to be neither or maybe both :)

    Pointing out the situation is not being defensive, it is being informative.

    Of course some people do not want to read information that goes against their personal beliefs and/or prejudices.


  • #1683
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Esel wrote: »
    By whom? Dirty linen would be washed in public...

    Sued on behalf of whoever she names!

    That's why Gemma O Doherty didn't name names isn't it??

    What else is stopping them, a fear of "offending" whoever they believe is responsible for "killing Mary" or a fear of somehow jinxing a judicial process that they've already said they've no respect for?

    But are waiting patiently for it to reform itself?

    After a 40 year wait??

    Let's get real here.


  • #1684
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    Was that a statement or a question? It seems to be neither or maybe both :)

    Pointing out the situation is not being defensive, it is being informative.

    Of course some people do not want to read information that goes against their personal beliefs and/or prejudices.

    It was a question - hence the question mark.

    Since I have no "personal beliefs and/or prejudices" in this case, your statement does not apply to me.

    My sole interest is in finding out the truth, and seeing justice done.
    Better late, than never - and it's looking as if "never" is the likely outcome unless our justice system improves - a lot....


  • #1685
    jonski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,425 ✭✭✭jonski


    Johnboy1951 wrote:
    The highlighted part is the important bit. -


    Really ? Out of that post I would have thought the next part was the important part as I have never seen anyone actually say that on here .


  • #1686
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,087 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    jonski wrote: »
    Really ? Out of that post I would have thought the next part was the important part as I have never seen anyone actually say that on here .
    I have never before seen that written on this forum either.
    It makes me wonder why it has been done now.

    No, I stand by what I posted because when commenting on anything, ignorance of the facts of the case means the comment is only guesswork. I suppose 'CT' is the correct place in that case!


  • Advertisement
  • #1687
    Smondie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭Smondie


    If the Gardai haven't solved it in 40years, it's time it was taken out of thier hands.


  • #1688
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    I have never before seen that written on this forum either.
    It makes me wonder why it has been done now.

    No, I stand by what I posted because when commenting on anything, ignorance of the facts of the case means the comment is only guesswork. I suppose 'CT' is the correct place in that case!

    Are you suggesting that the gardai may be in possession of some evidence connecting McMahon to the Mary Boyle case?


  • #1689
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Smondie wrote: »
    If the Gardai haven't solved it in 40years, it's time it was taken out of thier hands.

    But given to whom?

    The NYPD said they'd solved the case in 5 minutes but I didn't see any convictions.

    This case is an example of how not to investigate a missing persons case though, that I accept.


  • #1690
    Smondie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭Smondie


    Going Forward wrote: »
    Smondie wrote: »
    If the Gardai haven't solved it in 40years, it's time it was taken out of thier hands.

    But given to whom?

    The NYPD said they'd solved the case in 5 minutes but I didn't see any convictions.

    This case is an example of how not to investigate a missing persons case though, that I accept.
    Psni maybe

    What was the outcome of the nypd investigation? Where all identified suspects questioned by them?


  • #1691
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,087 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    Johnboy1951 wrote:
    I have never before seen that written on this forum either.
    It makes me wonder why it has been done now.

    No, I stand by what I posted because when commenting on anything, ignorance of the facts of the case means the comment is only guesswork. I suppose 'CT' is the correct place in that case!
    Going Forward wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that the gardai may be in possession of some evidence connecting McMahon to the Mary Boyle case?
    My post which you quoted was not related to McMahon.
    But to answer your question, contrary to opinions posted here, I believe the Gardai had sufficient cause to question McMahon under caution. They were obviously satisfied with the results of their questioning and did not charge him.


  • Advertisement
  • #1692
    PaddyWilliams
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭PaddyWilliams


    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    My post which you quoted was not related to McMahon.
    But to answer your question, contrary to opinions posted here, I believe the Gardai had sufficient cause to question McMahon under caution. They were obviously satisfied with the results of their questioning and did not charge him.

    Can I ask what cause they had to question him? Genuinely interested to know.


  • #1693
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Smondie wrote: »
    Psni maybe

    What was the outcome of the nypd investigation? Where all identified suspects questioned by them?

    Nothing was the outcome.
    They never named anyone.

    I doubt they questioned anyone.

    I'd say they just read the account given to gardai of what happened.

    She was there one minute.

    Then she disappeared.


  • #1694
    Smondie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭Smondie


    Going Forward wrote: »
    Smondie wrote: »
    Psni maybe

    What was the outcome of the nypd investigation? Where all identified suspects questioned by them?

    Nothing was the outcome.
    They never named anyone.

    I doubt they questioned anyone.

    I'd say they just read the account given to gardai of what happened.

    She was there one minute.

    Then she disappeared.

    It was hardly worth thier while if the didn't interview


  • #1695
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    My post which you quoted was not related to McMahon.
    But to answer your question, contrary to opinions posted here, I believe the Gardai had sufficient cause to question McMahon under caution. They were obviously satisfied with the results of their questioning and did not charge him.

    Do you think believe there is sufficient grounds for them to arrest anyone else?

    Were they at fault for too readily accepting original explanations?


  • #1696
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Smondie wrote: »
    It was hardly worth thier while if the didn't interview

    I think they discounted the theory that she disappeared into thin air or that she was taken by aliens or that she walked to Belleek and then was abducted never to be heard of again.

    Or that the rural farmhouse had somehow been identified and placed under surveillance by Robert Black or McMahon, who chose to pounce as she turned back and headed towards the house.

    They discounted the statements that there were no strange cars or people in the area that day too.

    The odd thing is, if they've solved the case the only thing left is that they must believe she fell into a hole.

    Or that something more sinister happened.

    I don't know what they said actually but it was claimed that they'd solved it, and quickly.


    The US cops believe they know who killed Boyle according to a report in the Irish Sun newspaper.


  • #1697
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Going Forward wrote: »
    I think they discounted the theory that she disappeared into thin air or that she was taken by aliens or that she walked to Belleek and then was abducted never to be heard of again.

    Or that the rural farmhouse had somehow been identified and placed under surveillance by Robert Black or McMahon, who chose to pounce as she turned back and headed towards the house.

    They discounted the statements that there were no strange cars or people in the area that day too.

    The odd thing is, if they've solved the case the only thing left is that they must believe she fell into a hole.

    Or that something more sinister happened.

    I don't know what they said actually but it was claimed that they'd solved it, and quickly.


    The US cops believe they know who killed Boyle according to a report in the Irish Sun newspaper.

    That article is dated 28 March 2013.

    That's a strange definition of "Close to solving the case".:D

    Seriously though, I wonder if they shared their findings with the Gardaí?


  • #1698
    mikeymouse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 568 ✭✭✭mikeymouse


    Going Forward wrote: »
    But given to whom?

    The NYPD said they'd solved the case in 5 minutes but I didn't see any convictions.

    This case is an example of how not to investigate a missing persons case though, that I accept.

    They were born in England,
    maybe the National Crime Agency arm of UK police


  • #1699
    groovyg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,049 ✭✭✭groovyg


    oranbhoy67 wrote: »
    full 1985 documentary now on vimeo

    https://vimeo.com/177916120

    just watched that documentary, still the same level of corruption going on 20 yrs later.


  • #1700
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    [Deleted User] wrote: »

    Seriously though, I wonder if they shared their findings with the Gardaí?

    Not sure.

    Not sure that the force welcomes outsiders with opinions.

    Or insiders for that matter.

    They don't take kindly to anyone looking over their work.

    There have been reports of internal disputes affecting the potential of the cold case unit.

    They're not getting the co operation from those whose work they are reviewing.

    It's a sham, but being a modern police organisation they have to be able to say the have a Cold Case Unit.

    The fact that's on it knees doesn't seem to bother anyone.

    http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-cold-case-murder-unit-may-be-disbanded-over-disputes-29819243.html


    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/staffing-at-garda-cold-case-unit-halved-in-past-2-years-376093.html

    There's no mention of the Mary Boyle case anywhere being handled by this unit.

    It's not in that list in the Examiner and it's not listed on the Cold Case section of the garda website.

    Yet they claim it's one of the cases this "team" is reviewing.

    And has been since 2011 apparently.

    And they only said that after the recent front page headlines said there's a new probe into the case.

    I'd say it is alright, eh?

    Sure it is.


  • #1701
    Smondie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭Smondie


    The Gardai never entered the house the night she went missing. That seems very strange if true.


  • Advertisement
  • #1702
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    mikeymouse wrote: »
    They were born in England,
    maybe the National Crime Agency arm of UK police

    Mmmm. Hadn't thought of that tbh.

    Ian Bailey and Sophie Toscan du Plantier case.


    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ian-bailey-to-ask-dpp-to-charge-him-over-murder-1.2748474


  • #1703
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Smondie wrote: »
    The Gardai never entered the house the night she went missing. That seems very strange if true.

    Didn't know that, who said it?

    Gemma OD said that the boots of cars weren't searched either.


    And from her Twitter:

    CpWNG3cWEAANuYv.jpg:small

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CpWNG3cWEAANuYv.jpg:small


  • #1704
    Smondie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭Smondie


    Going Forward wrote: »
    Didn't know that, who said it?

    Gemma OD said that the boots of cars weren't searched either.


    And from her Twitter:

    CpWNG3cWEAANuYv.jpg:small

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CpWNG3cWEAANuYv.jpg:small

    Gemma on Twitter

    https://mobile.twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/762381207116087296

    Why was Sgt Collins refused entry to the Gallagher cottage after anglers told gardai of #MaryBoyle disappearance?


  • #1705
    Going Forward
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,224 ✭✭✭Going Forward


    Smondie wrote: »
    Gemma on Twitter

    https://mobile.twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/762381207116087296

    Why was Sgt Collins refused entry to the Gallagher cottage after anglers told gardai of #MaryBoyle disappearance?

    Being (initially?) refused entry does not mean they didn't get in though.
    She has a way with words;)

    But apart from that, what the hell was the reason for this "refusal" which I don't doubt occurred?????


  • #1706
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Going Forward wrote: »
    Not sure.

    Not sure that the force welcomes outsiders with opinions.

    Or insiders for that matter.

    They don't take kindly to anyone looking over their work.

    There have been reports of internal disputes affecting the potential of the cold case unit.

    They're not getting the co operation from those whose work they are reviewing.

    It's a sham, but being a modern police organisation they have to be able to say the have a Cold Case Unit.

    The fact that's on it knees doesn't seem to bother anyone.

    http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-cold-case-murder-unit-may-be-disbanded-over-disputes-29819243.html


    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/staffing-at-garda-cold-case-unit-halved-in-past-2-years-376093.html

    There's no mention of the Mary Boyle case anywhere being handled by this unit.

    It's not in that list in the Examiner and it's not listed on the Cold Case section of the garda website.

    Yet they claim it's one of the cases this "team" is reviewing.

    And has been since 2011 apparently.

    And they only said that after the recent front page headlines said there's a new probe into the case.

    I'd say it is alright, eh?

    Sure it is.

    And yet, the retired detective stated they could only review 1 or 2 cases at a time with only 8 members... and there are a lot more than two cases being reviewid. Hmmm!

    Isn't it strange that, at a time when there are serious investigations to be carried out, be it into murder, or white collar crime, both the cold case unit, and the office of Corporate enforcement both have their numbers reduced?

    Before anyone gets in with the "balance the budget" argument, as far as I am concerned, it's a matter of priorities. Yes, there had to be reductions in spending. Whether those reductions had to target the units investigating serious crime is entirely another question.
    Another half a dozen detectives, an accountant or two, and whatever other staff the office of corporate Enforcement needed would hardly have bankrupted the Country. Indeed, it's arguable that the latter could probably have recouped money for the state.

    It's a strange kind of logic, to say the least.... and it makes me wonder what the decision makers priorities are?


  • #1707
    mikeymouse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 568 ✭✭✭mikeymouse


    Going Forward wrote: »
    Not sure.

    Not sure that the force welcomes outsiders with opinions.

    Or insiders for that matter.

    They don't take kindly to anyone looking over their work.

    There have been reports of internal disputes affecting the potential of the cold case unit.

    They're not getting the co operation from those whose work they are reviewing.

    It's a sham, but being a modern police organisation they have to be able to say the have a Cold Case Unit.

    The fact that's on it knees doesn't seem to bother anyone.

    http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-cold-case-murder-unit-may-be-disbanded-over-disputes-29819243.html


    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/staffing-at-garda-cold-case-unit-halved-in-past-2-years-376093.html

    There's no mention of the Mary Boyle case anywhere being handled by this unit.

    It's not in that list in the Examiner and it's not listed on the Cold Case section of the garda website.

    Yet they claim it's one of the cases this "team" is reviewing.

    And has been since 2011 apparently.

    And they only said that after the recent front page headlines said there's a new probe into the case.

    I'd say it is alright, eh?

    Sure it is.

    Unlikely to have a cold case review as case is 'ongoing'
    as said twice here by justice minister.

    http://www.newstalk.com/Justice-Minister-says-Garda-investigation-into-disappearance-of-Mary-Boyle-is-ongoing

    listen to audio at bottom.


  • #1708
    oranbhoy67
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,804 ✭✭✭oranbhoy67


    Going Forward wrote: »
    Being (initially?) refused entry does not mean they didn't get in though.
    She has a way with words;)

    But apart from that, what the hell was the reason for this "refusal" which I don't doubt occurred?????

    agreed on all you said in first paragraph

    on Second Point they were asked to stay out because "Marys grandparents were too upset " and they complied

    awful policing by any standards


  • #1709
    mikeymouse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 568 ✭✭✭mikeymouse


    Is that Gemma laughing and whistling at about 1;50

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUPMMl4k3UI


  • #1710
    oranbhoy67
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,804 ✭✭✭oranbhoy67


    mikeymouse wrote: »
    Is that Gemma laughing and whistling at about 1;50

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUPMMl4k3UI

    thatll be Patricia McCafferty one time party member of Fianna Fail and Bundoran traffic warden who McEniff took to court twice for defamation but backed out at last minute, she has a long-running feud with the McEniffs , Gemma Introduced her on twitter today


  • Advertisement
  • #1711
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    mikeymouse wrote: »
    Unlikely to have a cold case review as case is 'ongoing'
    as said twice here by justice minister.

    http://www.newstalk.com/Justice-Minister-says-Garda-investigation-into-disappearance-of-Mary-Boyle-is-ongoing

    listen to audio at bottom.

    ?? I heard her say the case is "ongoing".
    Why would that prevent a cold case review, though?


Advertisement