igCorcaigh wrote: » Why did she do that? Honest question. I've heard talk about this case in reference to 'darker times', was there something to do with the role of the RCC? I don't know much about the case at all. I do remember the coverage of the story back then, but I was a kid.
Aineoil wrote: » I was 18 when it all happened. I am from Kerry hence my interest. We didn't have twitter or facebook or any other social media back then but we had the local gossips who added the most spurious allegations to each tragic event.
igCorcaigh wrote: » What does it matter though? It was her baby, she could bury the child anywhere she wanted. I just wonder why she did what she did.
RustyNut wrote: » Possibly fear of being enslaved for the rest of her life in a magdalene laundry. It was the beginning of the end of that shameful time in our history but would still have been a real fear in those days.
skylight1987 wrote: » this lady illegally buried her baby on her land .she wouldn't even give him the decency of a proper burial. didn't even register a name .yes she was wronged by the gardai in relation to the other baby but what she did to her own flesh and blood was cruel .no one bothers to mention this now though .the only people I feel sorry for are both babies .
skylight1987 wrote: » I don't know why she did it but did it she did .cold fish that woman
igCorcaigh wrote: » Oh I'd say. Do you know why she did what she did?
igCorcaigh wrote: » Was there not a case of a woman who died giving birth, in a graveyard I think? I remember that. Different story I guess.
One eyed Jack wrote: » You might be thinking of the case of Ann Lovett -Tuesday, 31 January 1984 was a cold, wet, winter's day in Granard, County Longford. That afternoon, the fifteen-year-old school girl left her Cnoc Mhuire Secondary School and made her way to a Grotto dedicated to the Virgin Mary at the top of her small hometown in the Irish midlands. It was here beneath the statue of Our Lady, that she gave birth, alone, to her infant son.
igCorcaigh wrote: » It was her baby, she could bury the child anywhere she wanted.
Aineoil wrote: » The Kerry Babies and Ann Lovatt - Ireland of 1984, we have nothing to be proud of.
dense wrote: » Their "partners" don't have much to be proud of either.
RustyNut wrote: » Two things stand out for me about this. The first is the mealy mouth apology from the guards. It should have been delivered publicly by the commissioner (acting), not some local kerry lad. The second is the timing. The guards have been asked since the 90's to do dna analysis in this case but low and behold it all becomes public the week that the dirt is due to be aired at the Charlton Tribunal. Hardly a coincidence, good deflection. As Judge Peter Smithwic found, the most important thing to the guards is to protect the reputation of the guards above all else.
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
BENDYBINN wrote: » Both babies murdered by society’s foolish following of Catholic Church at the time. Let it go.....we are all guilty.
mariaalice wrote: » Most likely he is arrogant combined with an always right personality its become ingrained in him that he and his colleges were correct and he cant let it go.
RustyNut wrote: » I was discussing these cases earlier the car with two of the Nut teenagers and trying to explain what society was like back then. Contraception was not generally available, abortion illegal, homosexual practice was illegal, getting pregnant outside wedlock could see a girl shipped off to the nuns, never to be seen again. All thanks to the power and influence of the catholic church.
splinter65 wrote: » I was 19 in a rural town in Ireland in 1984. The first female chemist opened a pharmacy in the town and put a display of Durex condoms on the counter. She was also the first divorced person anyone had ever met. Within weeks all the other chemists were selling condoms, they just didn’t display them . I did my LC in 1982. Two girls got pregnant in 5th year. Both took a year out. Both returned with their babies, and went back to school, an all girls school. Unbelievably, they came back and the pregnancies were never mentioned. There was as much sex going on then as there is now. I had plenty of sex. One later gave her baby up for adoption under pressure from her mother who insisted that she’d never get a husband, a fate worse then death. Everyone went to mass, automatically , every Sunday. That summer was lovely and sunny, the music was great, good times.
jelutong wrote: » Was Sean Doherty Minister for Justice at the time? Another beauty.
Day Lewin wrote: » Yes...1984 wasn't the same as the nineteenth century or the 1920s. Really, it wasn't. There are lots and lots of places in the world, which have nothing to do with churches at all, where it still would be dubious to have kids to a married man from an ongoing local affair. And the baby was stillborn, so.... Meanwhile, some other place, a criminal rapist (guessing here) was horrified that his young daughter had a baby to reveal the horrible truth...quick, murder that child! *VIOLENCE* Granted you're supposed to declare births and dispose of bodies decently: but can't everyone see the difference between the two situations?