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

Satriale wrote: »

Bear in mind that the newspaper that seems to be trying to discredit Gemma O Doherty unfairly dismissed her for attempting to ask the Garda Commissioner about getting his penalty point squashed (the same paper whos Editor-in-chief is also a former editor of the "Garda Review").

I'm going to give Gemma the benefit of the doubt here. She done more for this case in a few weeks than's been done by the state for a few decades.

There can be no doubt that Independent News & Media have a huge grudge against Gemma. She won her unfair dismissal case against them and took a large sum of money in compensation to boot. They are an establishment mouthpiece so it comes as no surprise that they choose to report only one side of the story.

I would give her the benefit of the doubt too but at the same time I hope that she releases the unedited interview so this can get cleared up. For what it is worth I dont think any amount of editing can distort the words that left the mouths of the ex-Gardai. The two Gardai are backpedalling now which reflects poorly on them but it also makes me question what or who got to them. It is all very sinister IMO.

On the insinuation that the IRA were phone tapping Garda stations I could well believe that, even the Garda management in the Phoenix Park were illegally recording conversations in Garda stations between solicitors and clients as we now know from the Ian Bailey case and the Attorney Generals urgent meeting with Enda Kenny over the same issue. But if Gemma has a recording of this politician ringing the station to influence investigating Gardai then she needs to release it to help further the case.

I would prefer her not to get into a spat with the two ex-Gardai and the politician angle because that end of this case isnt as important as getting justice for the murder of a child. However if she is in possession of a recording then the release of it would blow things wide open, it would be (hopefully) a means to an end.

Macca07 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/765849764369952768

I've seen no proof of this. Has anyone else?

In case anyone is interested, the film is getting a public viewing in Greencastle and Gemma will be there to answer questions.

I'm confused. What Murray says appears to directly contradict the following:

Aidan Murray said he and another garda interviewed the chief suspect in Ballyshannon Garda station.
He told the documentary: “At one stage when I was interviewing him, I said to him, ‘just tell us where the child is’. I got a little nudge from the inspector at the time to ease off a little bit and I did.
“I went out to get him a glass of water at the instruction of the inspector."
Mr Murray said: “The result of that phone call is that certain people weren’t allowed to be interviewed and it was all hands off. The sting went out of the whole investigation after that.”
Mr Collins, who was in Ballyshannon Garda station, when the phone call came through confirmed: “The gist of it [the phone call] was that none of a particular family should be made suspect for Mary’s interference.”

I'm struggling to see how what he said could have been edited to give a false impression.

The fact that he appears to be contradicting himself is very worrying.

Muahahaha wrote: »

It is worrying because it appears he has been gotten to. I assume that means former colleagues of his who wish the cover up to continue contacted him. Lets not forget that there was not one but two suspected paedophile rings in Donegal at the time of Mary Boyles disappearance. The two ex-Gardai who spoke about the politicians phone call may be blowing the lid off an even bigger scandal than just Marys dissappearance, whether they know it or not.

The claim is there that Mary Boyle was sexually abused and was intending to tell someone about it. We know that paedophiles tend to have multiple victims plus there is stacks of evidence that there was two rings operational in the area. Mary Boyle could well have been seen as a threat to these rings if she remained alive.

There are also parallels with this case and the Cynthia Owen case, otherwise known as the Dalkey House of Horrors. In that case (which smacks of cover up too) Cynthia Owen claims she was raped multiple times by multiple men, ie a paedophile ring operating in Dalkey. She fell pregnant and her baby was murdered with knitting needles with the body left in an alleyway. Three alleged members of the ring were serving Gardai and one of them has come out lately to deny the allegations. Things are still in process but there appears to be a large cover up going on in Dalkey too.
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/01/12/a-dalkey-archive/

FWIW, and it's just my own opinion - I think that when Gemma O'Doherty embarked on her inquiry into Mary Boyle's disappearance, those two Gardai, having been involved in the original botched investigation, cooperated with her in an effort to exonerate themselves and did the Pontius Pilate act. Now, that GO'D is coming in for some criticism, they are trying to weasel out of the statements they made in the film, displaying a shameful sense of 'mé féinism'.
Guess we are seeing, once again, two examples of self-serving Gardai, who run with the hare and chase with the hound.

As I say, just my tuppenceworth!

gaius c wrote: »

Very plausible explanation. Think I read somewhere that the solicitor acting for Murray is the son of the superintendent involved with the case originally.

This is true.

gaius c wrote: »

Very plausible explanation. Think I read somewhere that the solicitor acting for Murray is the son of the superintendent involved with the case originally.

Jeez, everything in Ireland is so 'incestuous'!! :mad:

mikeymouse wrote: »

Was the story about Mary following her uncle ever corroborated by anyone, even her young cousins?
Maybe she never left the house after helping with the washing-up.

Actually I noticed in the interview with Mary's mum and Miriam O'Callaghan which Larry the Lamb had up on twitter, Ann B says that she was doing the dishes after the the dinner that afternoon. Ann D says Mary told her she was going to stay inside and help with the dishes rather than go outside and play with the other children. Ann B never mentions Mary staying in to do the dishes nor does she say she say her in the house or leaving the house.

Missymoohaa wrote: »

That's what has been going through my mind all along since I've seen the documentary. I've watched it 3 times and it struck me, did little Mary ever leave the house at all. Whose word do we have that she did?

A six yr old child full of energy and mischief volunteers to stay in and wash dishes rather than play with her siblings and cousins. OK maybe she did, but I'd like to hear some statements from both Marys parents and grandparents regarding the time line from when they finished dinner to when Ann Doyle went to call her daughter. There's a gap there and only with an inquest will those questions be addressed.

I'm still wondering??? why the sniffer dog went to the same spot over and over?? Something very fishy. Was there a car parked at that spot on the day which was used to remove the child/body from the scene?

I also wish that people would concentrate only on what is known for a fact and cut out the agenda of bashing parents, journalists, garda, politicians etc until we know more about what actually happened. A lot of what has appeared in this thread is just innuendo, bashing and guesswork but little in the way of actual fact. I know we have to do some of that but I believe it should be based on as much fact as possible otherwise the thread goes off on a tangent.