bobsman wrote: » The Irish Times article seems to be the most revealing. Hawe was angsting over an encounter with a girl years ago. Also guilt over porn. It was nothing illegal. Anxiety over people not saluting him in the street. There appears to be no actual "fall from grace" However, his act was so barbaric, clinical, so difficult to comprehend.
seamus wrote: » You might want to catch up on the aul thread there. He was exhumed and reburied months ago. The parish priest pressured the family into burying them all together, and when it became clear that he had butchered them all senselessly, her family removed him from the grave and his family cremated him.
iamwhoiam wrote: » He was exhumed a few months after the funeral at the request of Clodaghs family as they did not want him in the family grave .
Stuckforcash wrote: » I remember a mother jumped off Wexford bridge with her two kids years ago also. Was seen a huge tragedy with tributes left right for the mother. Sympathy isn't exclusive to male murderers.
Candie wrote: » As much as I think the act was pure evil, and that there's something in a person to begin with that enables them to consider it as a course of action, if Prof Kennedy and the professionals who reviewed his records can tell us that he acted while suffering from severe mental illness, then I'll take their word for it. They're the experts, we aren't. Doesn't make the act less evil, or erase any other torment he put the family through, but if he was sick then he was sick and can't be considered in the same light as someone who did it for the thrills or to just protect a reputation. Those poor kids.
dok_golf wrote: » Just to add ( again) TWO professors of psychiatry , Prof, Harry Kennedy and Prof Patricia Casey, have both expressed the opinion that Hawe was psychotic at the time
volchitsa wrote: » What was Patricia Casey's opinion based on? Had she met him? Had she even read the notes in his medical file?
Stuckforcash wrote: » So you quote a section that has no relevance to what I said and then get snotty when I ask where's the part that's actually relevant?
dok_golf wrote: » I don't know, why don't you contact her and ask? All I'm stating is the fact that TWO professors of psychiatry BOTH said , he was psychotic at the time. When did you get your degree in psychiatry?
demfad wrote: » The report demonstrates that the principle motive for family annihilation is only mental illness for 5% of cases. If you believe that most of these men sufferred from mental illness (as you stated) then the onus is on you to demonstrate this not me. Please do so.
Stuckforcash wrote: » I said had a history of. And in this case that is fact. In two Wexford cases it is fact. It's worth exploring if there's a link instead of blaming masculinity (which is ludicrous.)
Valmont wrote: » Mental health campaigners want to have their cake and eat it too. They want us to excuse people from moral culpability if a psychiatrist or GP says they were mentally ill - implying this person had no control over their actions which were in fact determined by a brain disease. However they will be then quick to cry foul and moan about 'stigmatisation' if it's claimed that mentally ill people could actually be dangerous because of their mental illness. Either they are compelled to things they have no control over because of their disease or they don't - you can't have it both ways. The director of the Central Mental Hospital simply told people what they wanted to hear - that Alan Hawe did what he did because he was sick. This makes some people feel better and helps them sleep at night but it isn't really an explanation whatsoever. It's extremely easy to say someone was psychotic after they do something psychotic, especially when your medical speciality involves having to produce no physical evidence whatsoever (brain scans, blood samples, e tc). What people don't realise is that saying someone is 'depressive with psychotic symptoms' has no predictive validity whatsoever in terms of whether they are likely to do anything violent. With mental illness--sorry, mental health problems, or whatever the new term is--we are basically dealing with glorified star signs.
livedadream wrote: » to be fair i think it was pretty clearly outlined at the time that it wasnt mental health issues that he had,
Snickers Man wrote: » Actually, evidence given at the inquest clearly says that he DID have mental health issues. I really don't know why this is such a source of outrage for some people.
demfad wrote: » Testimony was that it was more likely than not on available documentation. This is not evidence as such in that 50:50 or better probabilities would not be admissable or credible in a court of law. The expert did not give this as a definitive motive. Many people experience mental illness but almost exclusively men with a patriarcal world view commit mass murder in this country, always family annihilation. No testimony from an expert in family annihilation or domestic violence was taken.
seamus wrote: » Professor Casey's commentary on the case can be considered little more than idle opinion, as she did not have access to the same data that Professor Kennedy did. Whatever she has said cannot be considered a professional diagnosis, and if she was to make such a diagnosis/proclamation without access to the notes, than she could be struck off the register. Imagine if a doctor made a diagnosis that someone had cancer based off what they heard in the news? Don't conflate Prof. Casey's agreement/acquiescence with Prof. Kennedy's evidence as a qualified opinion that he is correct. Only ONE Professor has said he was psychotic at the time.
SharleenF17 wrote: » This isn't uncommon in Rural Ireland. Where Alan Hawe lived would have had a similar kind of attitude - "say nothing, say nothing". Maybe Clodagh was "saying nothing" to make the outside world think hers was the perfect family. My point is that there are people out there who can be the life and soul of a party, maintaining a very normal (even enviable) lifestyle - while behind closed doors they are calculating, manipulative and controlling. I do believe Hawe was one of those people. But anyway - does it matter at this stage? They're all gone, an entire family wiped out. I don't think any "reason" would bring comfort to anyone at this point. Speculating on why his parents weren't there or what the "sexual issue" was (The Sun aren't known for their honesty, by the way so I wouldn't dwell on that one). I don't pray but I'll light a candle and think of Clodagh, Liam, Niall and Ryan when I'm sitting with my family on Christmas Day.
professore wrote: » http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/study-aims-to-shed-light-on-family-annihilators-239625.htmlHe said half of the 71 cases (59 committed by fathers and 12 by mothers) have happened since 2000, “suggests the phenomenon is increasing”. So over 20% of the cases were women - hardly "exclusively" men. Was "the patriarchy" responsible for the women too?
Professor David Wilson, who led the team, said he had “no reason to believe” the research would not apply to Ireland or elsewhere in Europe. The research defined family annihilation as where a parent — predominantly a father — kills his children, and frequently his partner or ex-partner, and typically attempts to kill himself, usually successfully. “Family annihilators are not known to the criminal justice system or mental health services or drug counsellors,” said. Prof Wilson. “They are seen as nice guys. Many men who typically take the lives of their partner have been unemployed, but family annihilators are employed, often very successful.” The research found August was the most common month for the crime and Sunday the most common day. The team identified four different types of annihilators. There are the “self-righteous”, who, according to Prof Wilson, are the most common type, who seek to blame the partner or ex-partner. They are often “very controlling, very narcissistic, and dramatic”. He said they often take their own lives because they don’t want the criminal justice system to judge them. “For some of these people, the family is the outward display of what they feel personally,” said Prof Wilson. “If they become a failure economically they can’t sustain the outward symbols of success. Rather than face the consequences, they regain control by wiping the family out.” He said half of the 71 cases (59 committed by fathers and 12 by mothers) have happened since 2000, “suggests the phenomenon is increasing”. The research said the crime reflected a difficulty with masculinity, but stopped short of calling it a crisis. “What links the four types is masculinity and the changing nature of man and changing nature of woman in society,” said Prof Wilson.He said researchers were not saying there was a crisis in masculinity, because they did not want people to start blaming women or children.“The responsibility lies with men,” said Prof Wilson.
Deise Vu wrote: » I have absolutely no doubt that Profs Casey and Kennedy are highly qualified, eminent people in their fields. I would also assume that the person whom Hawe was attending for his problems, who failed to spot that Hawe was capable of mass murder is also highly qualified and eminent. It is not a black and white discipline so it would be great if people just debate around the issues without demanding to know what psychiatric qualifications other posters have. In my opinion, Hawe was clearly able to function in society and achieve a position of some respect and authority which means he was capable of distinguishing between right and wrong. He also knew there was something not right and sought help. Yet he still went ahead and murdered an innocent woman and her innocent children, his own flesh and blood. Then he apologised for it and, thoughtfully, left a note for his mother-in-law to spare her the horror. In my lifetime I don't think I have ever heard of anything as evil and barbaric happening in this country. I applaud his in-laws decision to dig his body up and remove it from contaminating their loved ones graves. How anyone can sympathise with him is beyond me.
PeterParker957 wrote: » Apparently so. i was diagnosed with Generalised Anxiety Disorder in the past. It's not a big deal. I certainly wouldn't use it to excuse me committing a crime and neither would i expect anyone else to. But then I wouldn't massacre my entire family, you know - not being a scumbag unlike Hawe.
demfad wrote: » The article you linked answers your questions (best to actually read it next time) :.
professore wrote: » I did actually read it. And it has the same old bull**** that is trotted out every time that it's all men's fault - that men are responsible for all the ills of society and women are perfect. It's clearly not working as a diagnostic tool as the problem is getting worse instead of better. I know plenty of evil men and women ... blaming men is an easy option that is politically acceptable now. THAT'S the problem. Exactly the same as saying 50 years ago "They were possessed by the devil". No difference whatsoever.
demfad wrote: » The article you linked answers your questions (best to actually read it next time) : Interesting that this mass murder occurred in August also. Just before Hawe would have to return and face the music in the school.
jobbridge4life wrote: » What music specifically? Gardai investigations have revealled no criminality. No evidence of financial issues, no evidence of the alledged relationship with a young woman. The Gardai have investigated and found nothing.
