Gangland Shootings [Mod Note in Post #1]

TallGlass · 20-02-2019 02:53PM

Talking about it on Joe Duffy now.

Calltocall · 20-02-2019 02:53PM

The problem is that when there is a void of official reports on why/what happened here people are left to speculate, did gangs have something on the guard who died etc etc, it could have been innocent and just human error which may have led to a guilty concience of being responsible for collapse of the trial we just don’t know because nobody either the state or papers will reveal the truth which makes people think cover up. By all accounts the guard was a decent highly respected Detective.

big syke · 20-02-2019 02:53PM

reg114 wrote: »

The nolle prosequi ruling today will have huge implications. First of all for the gardai because it basically suggests that if the leading garda in a serious crime investigation dies then there's a good possibility the case against the accused will be dismissed. The mafia have a long history of eliminating members of law enforcement and the judiciary in order to achieve the same result, so how long before Irish gangsters take that approach given the perceived benefits to them.

The other issue is for the state and judiciary. How and why a case can fall due to the death of one garda is beyond comprehension. Witness and photographic evidence should have been sufficient to obtain ruling without evidence of one leading garda.

Then you have the ramifications on the streets. This verdict will just antagonise those in gangland circles. You can expect retaliation sadly.

It is not necessarily the death of one Garda that collapsed the case.

As mentioned before emails exchanges between 4 Gardai had caused the trial to be delayed and would have played a part in the collapse.

Edgware · 20-02-2019 02:56PM

This is still a live investigation. There are still a number of participants who could face a trial for some part of the attack. Thats of course if they havent met "justice" already.

Edgware · 20-02-2019 03:00PM

spider baby 172 wrote: »

Good points. So if it was the case that these emails proved that guards discussed the identity of the man dressed in drag, would that be enough to collapse the case??

The identification evidence was allowed in as "evidence" and would have been considered with all evidence when the Judges would be considering a verdict. Personally I dont believe it was singularly enough to prove beyond doubt.

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:00PM

spider baby 172 wrote: »

Good points. So if it was the case that these emails proved that guards discussed the identity of the man dressed in drag, would that be enough to collapse the case??

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Almost certainly I imagine.

But I'm not going to pretend I know what was in those emails.

Certain amount of reading inbetween the lines and reasonable conclusions can be made though.

I've assumed for a while that it was an Ian Bailey esque thing - "We don't know who it is, but we all hate Patrick Hutch and he's likely to have wanted to do it, so let's all agree privately to say we recognise him in this photo even though we haven't actually got a clue".

I can't think of anything else which would have caused a case of this magnitude to fall apart.

r93kaey5p2izun · 20-02-2019 03:02PM

Why is the opinion of Gardai on the id of a man in the photo of such importance? Surely photographic evidence should stand by itself - let the jury or judge as applicable look at the photo and look at the defendant in front of them and make a decision. I don't see why the opinion of any Garda adds to the confirmation of identity in such a scenario. I understand there's more to the collapse of the trial than just this element but I've never understood why it was ever relevant at all.

Edgware · 20-02-2019 03:03PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I've assumed for a while that it was an Ian Bailey esque thing - "We don't know who it is, but we all hate Patrick Hutch and he's likely to have wanted to do it, so let's all agree privately to say we recognise him in this photo even though we haven't actually got a clue".

I can't think of anything else which would have caused a case of this magnitude to fall apart.

You have a very limited thinking ability. Postman Pat is coming on shortly. See can you work out what happened Jess

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:04PM

Suckit wrote: »

Mrs Byrne said:

"No one wants to listen to me. Nobody."

and

"His life is not in danger from us."

I'm guessing only one of those statements is true.

I've heard from multiple people, some of whom seem to have insider knowledge of this whole feud, that it's widely presumed that Sadie Byrne and / or "Jaws" were the ones who requested / ordered a retaliatory campaign. No idea whether that's accurate. People on this very thread have suggested that Daniel Kinahan is not the ringleader of the campaign to wipe out the Hutches, and that it's primarily coming from the grieving Byrnes instead.

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:06PM

Edgware wrote: »

You have a very limited thinking ability. Postman Pat is coming on shortly. See can you work out what happened Jess

Based on the fact that the identification of the guy in the photo was the specific thing causing the prosecution's case to be questioned immediately before Supt Fox's death and that the case was suspended immediately afterwards, doesn't Occam's Razor suggest that the two are directly linked - questions being raised over the photo identification, and Supt Fox's suicide?

Sure, there could be other explanations, but it's by far the most obvious one.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 20-02-2019 03:08PM

Edgware wrote: »

You have a very limited thinking ability. Postman Pat is coming on shortly. See can you work out what happened Jess

You keep not saying what you believe.

PingTing comes for Fire · 20-02-2019 03:08PM

Major Great Cellist wrote: »

Why is the opinion of Gardai on the id of a man in the photo of such importance?

The id sets in train a sequence of events. Gives reasonable cause to suspect gives a legal power necessary to arrest him. Being detained allows him to be questioned. Allows him to be charged and brought to court.

rondog · 20-02-2019 03:10PM

Bomber Kavanagh is married to Byrnes sister.

the Byrnes have waged this war and Liam byrne/Bomber kavanagh have been bank rolling it.

D kinahan initially wanted this to go ahead as it was him who was the main target but the war has been very bad for business but there is serious anger from teh Byrne side over david byrnes murder.This trial collapse will only make things much worse.

The Enbalmer · 20-02-2019 03:10PM

PingTing comes for Fire wrote: »

The id sets in train a sequence of events. Gives reasonable cause to suspect gives a legal power necessary to arrest him. Being detained allows him to be questioned. Allows him to be charged and brought to court.

I think his name was put up before the CCTV footage came out..from whence did the information originate is another question.

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:12PM

Major Great Cellist wrote: »

Why is the opinion of Gardai on the id of a man in the photo of such importance? Surely photographic evidence should stand by itself - let the jury or judge as applicable look at the photo and look at the defendant in front of them and make a decision. I don't see why the opinion of any Garda adds to the confirmation of identity in such a scenario. I understand there's more to the collapse of the trial than just this element but I've never understood why it was ever relevant at all.

I think it's more to do with whether or not there's enough evidence to even bring a case. The Gardai would have had to get warrants and court orders to search Hutch's gaff, seize evidence, look at phone records, etc. They would have had to send a file to the DPP in order to charge him and prosecute him.

If the entire basis of that was a lie about a photograph - if they lied about recognising him in order to falsely claim probable cause to get a warrant, search his house, look at his phone records, and detain him under suspicion of committing the crime, then it means that all of those actions were illegal, as the evidence used to justify them and get the required court orders was fabricated.

It's a bit like how even if the Gardaí find a gun in your house, if they searched the house illegally without a valid warrant (or with a mis-dated one as has happened in the past in high profile cases) the evidence cannot be mentioned in court and thus there's no actual case against you.

This might all seem very pedantic and absurd, until you consider that the reason we have such rules is to ensure that evidence cannot be planted during an unplanned and unwarranted search.

So essentially, if his identification in that photograph was part of a conspiracy to frame him without actual evidence, then he should never have been prosecuted to begin with, and that's why the prosecution would decide not to pursue the case. I'm guessing that the email correspondence between the Gardai whose devices were examined after Fox's death confirmed that the Gardai involved had decided to lie in a co-ordinated manner about recognising Hutch, so they could get an illegitimate and fabriacted pretext to go and examine his private life.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 20-02-2019 03:16PM

How can you prove a lie about recognising someone or not? There’s the photo. Is it hutch. Looks like him.

The other guy is clearly visible by the way.

spider baby 172 · 20-02-2019 03:17PM

Joe said on lifeline at least twice that Sadie and Liam and all the byrnes are completely innocent in this. Which I just cannot believe. Paul Williams saying Fox is an innocent victim in this aswell.

spider baby 172 · 20-02-2019 03:18PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

How can you prove a lie about recognising someone or not? There’s the photo. Is it hutch. Looks like him.

The other guy is clearly visible by the way.

The other guy is irrelevant

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:20PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

How can you prove a lie about recognising someone or not? There’s the photo. Is it hutch. Looks like him.

The other guy is clearly visible by the way.

You can prove the intention to lie if it's openly discussed in private emails or text messages between those involved. Don't forget that the long delay in this trial was due to GSOC having to deconstruct various encrypted phones and other electronic devices belonging to Fox. So if there were texts within those devices saying anything along the lines of "we need a warrant on this guy Hutch, can someone back me up if I tell a judge we recognise him in the photo so they'll give us permission to look around his gaff and monitor his phone?"

RoryMac · 20-02-2019 03:21PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I think it's more to do with whether or not there's enough evidence to even bring a case. The Gardai would have had to get warrants and court orders to search Hutch's gaff, seize evidence, look at phone records, etc. They would have had to send a file to the DPP in order to charge him and prosecute him.

If the entire basis of that was a lie about a photograph - if they lied about recognising him in order to falsely claim probable cause to get a warrant, search his house, look at his phone records, and detain him under suspicion of committing the crime, then it means that all of those actions were illegal, as the evidence used to justify them and get the required court orders was fabricated.

It's a bit like how even if the Gardaí find a gun in your house, if they searched the house illegally without a valid warrant (or with a mis-dated one as has happened in the past in high profile cases) the evidence cannot be mentioned in court and thus there's no actual case against you.

This might all seem very pedantic and absurd, until you consider that the reason we have such rules is to ensure that evidence cannot be planted during an unplanned and unwarranted search.

So essentially, if his identification in that photograph was part of a conspiracy to frame him without actual evidence, then he should never have been prosecuted to begin with, and that's why the prosecution would decide not to pursue the case. I'm guessing that the email correspondence between the Gardai whose devices were examined after Fox's death confirmed that the Gardai involved had decided to lie in a co-ordinated manner about recognising Hutch, so they could get an illegitimate and fabriacted pretext to go and examine his private life.

Yeah exactly how Darren Tracey got off

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:21PM

spider baby 172 wrote: »

Paul Williams saying Fox is an innocent victim in this aswell.

Well there's your answer, he's clearly not if Williams is saying he is

spider baby 172 · 20-02-2019 03:22PM

rondog wrote: »

Bomber Kavanagh is married to Byrnes sister.

the Byrnes have waged this war and Liam byrne/Bomber kavanagh have been bank rolling it.

D kinahan initially wanted this to go ahead as it was him who was the main target but the war has been very bad for business but there is serious anger from teh Byrne side over david byrnes murder.This trial collapse will only make things much worse.

I have to believe they are all in on it. Sadie and Jaws are as bloodthirsty as the rest. I dont think much happens without D. Kinahan's blessing either to be fair

spider baby 172 · 20-02-2019 03:23PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Well there's your answer, he's clearly not if Williams is saying he is

Yeah I'd be taking anything Williams says with a trailer load of salt aswell. He has his own agenda

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:24PM

RoryMac wrote: »

Yeah exactly how Darren Tracey got off

Took me a second

I was thinking more about former judge Brian Curtin actually, his trial over alleged possession of child porn was screwed up because they searched his house after the warrant had expired. Either an intentional screwup to get him off, or a case of catastrophic incompetence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Curtin#Trial_and_acquittal

El_Bee · 20-02-2019 03:28PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Come on. He took notes. He must have been to briefings. They had cctv and other evidence. Him being alive is irrelevant.

Ireland is heading towards a lawless society.

Heading toward?

Franz Von Peppercorn · 20-02-2019 03:29PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Took me a second I was thinking more about former judge Brian Curtin actually, his trial over alleged possession of child porn was screwed up because they searched his house after the warrant had expired. Either an intentional screwup to get him off, or a case of catastrophic incompetence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Curtin#Trial_and_acquittal

That’s also pretty dubious.

LuckyLloyd · 20-02-2019 03:33PM

STB. wrote: »

This photo seems mad to me. I have silly questions on it (that people who follow this stuff even vaguely would obviously know):

- who is the other guy? Is he alive / charged?
- who took this photo of lads running with guns towards them?
- why are their people in the background who do not seem to be running away or focussing on the gunmen?

It almost doesn't look like a real photo if I'm honest.

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2019 03:35PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

That’s also pretty dubious.

Of course it is, as is the collapse of the Anglo investigation, as was the whole thing with Sgt Maurice McCabe's file with TUSLA "accidentally" being mixed up with a far more serious allegation and then leaked to senior Gardaí.

Does anyone genuinely still believe that these things routinely happen by accident? There's a high level unspoken agreement in this state that wherever possible, people in high places don't face consequences for their actions. Hell, the very fact that the terms of reference of the enquiry into the Children's Hospital overspend were explicitly instructed not to find any specific individuals responsible should say it all.

I don't believe for a second that any of those cases is a genuine "mistake" - and the fact that this trial has collapsed on foot of a GSOC investigation very strongly suggests intentional wrongdoing in this one as well.

My real curiosity is, how did the defence find out? They raised serious questions over the validity of the investigation, pertaining to the photograph, several weeks before Fox took his life - did someone tip them off, or did a Garda crack under cross examination in the witness box, and admit to having been nudged or told who was in the photo before claiming to have recognised him independently?

There are so many questions relating to this case and it'll be an absolute scandal if the public is kept in the dark. We deserve to know, especially in the context of the widespread breakdown in trust between the public and the Gardai in recent years.

yourdeadwright · 20-02-2019 03:40PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

This photo seems mad to me. I have silly questions on it (that people who follow this stuff even vaguely would obviously know):

- who is the other guy? Is he alive / charged?
- who took this photo of lads running with guns towards them?
- why are their people in the background who do not seem to be running away or focussing on the gunmen?

It almost doesn't look like a real photo if I'm honest.

Flat cap fled north and then died of cancer,
A journalist in his car took the photo's
There looking the other way because in the panic the majority of people only seen the guys dressed in the riot like gear with the machine guns and where focused on them

Criminal informer · 20-02-2019 03:43PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

This photo seems mad to me. I have silly questions on it (that people who follow this stuff even vaguely would obviously know):

- who is the other guy? Is he alive / charged?
- who took this photo of lads running with guns towards them?
- why are their people in the background who do not seem to be running away or focussing on the gunmen?

It almost doesn't look like a real photo if I'm honest.

1, "flatcap" Kevin Murray died from a neurological illness before he could be tried of the charges against him.

2, Members of INM "Sunday World" took the photos as they were there because it was well publised that "top level gangsters" would be in attendance.

3, I don't know why, maybe just normal people who didn't want to "see anything" so guards couldn't drag them in as witnesses.

Gangland Shootings [Mod Note in Post #1]

Comments