nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Patrick Quirke -Guilty

knucklehead6

Seems to me the ex had something to do with this too

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

meeeeh

I'm not surprised that it went to majority verdict.

Cryptopagan

Laois_Man wrote: »

Are you imagining things?

The searches did not mention water

“Gardaí also found evidence that a home computer had been used to search for the rate of decomposition of human remains in water.”

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2019/0501/1046814-patrick-quirke-trial/

Laois_Man

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Then they snuck into his house and looked up how long it takes a body to decompose in water on his laptop.

Are you imagining things?

The searches did not mention water

Cryptopagan

kneemos wrote: »

Sure it looks suspicious,but it could just as easily have been someone else that dumped the body in the tank.

Then they snuck into his house and looked up how long it takes a body to decompose in water on his laptop.

realdanbreen

Faugheen wrote: »

Odelay wrote: »

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

Same. Think people need to learn the difference between circumstantial evidence and no evidence.

When the guy is in the dock at the beginning of the trial the jury do not know if he is guilty or not guilty. Based on the evidence that the prosecution presented there is no way that they now know that he is guilty.

Cryptopagan

realdanbreen wrote: »

Scary that you could get a life sentence based on that evidence.

Yeah, all they had on him was the motive and the opportunity...and the actual body of the murder victim hidden in a concealed water tank on his farm that only he and a few others knew about.

Laois_Man

Faugheen wrote: »

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

Wrong. The search took place more than once.

The only one that took place after Bobby Ryan disappeared was a year and a half after

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/human-body-decomposition-search-carried-out-on-a-computer-seized-in-quirke-house-court-told-1.3833977

hairyprincess wrote: »

Who hadn’t actually died yet.

The other, the one before his son died, also took place two years before Bobby Ryan died. That alone makes the searches meaningless

kneemos

Faugheen wrote: »

Same. Think people need to learn the difference between circumstantial evidence and no evidence.

Sure it looks suspicious,but it could just as easily have been someone else that dumped the body in the tank.

Folk are concerned that a conviction can follow from such weak evidence.

Faugheen

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Yer wan seems to have been ridin like a rampant rabbit

And he’d get up on a cracked plate

In fairness, Mary Lowry looks a lot like his wife.

Mantis Toboggan

Its important to note that the guards did a shambles of a job in this case, real amateur stuff.

Beechwoodspark

Yer wan seems to have been ridin like a rampant rabbit

And he’d get up on a cracked plate

Mantis Toboggan

Justice

Vegeta

BPKS wrote: »

Very surprised.

Listening to the daily trial updates, I was wondering how the prosecution brought a case at all.

Exactly my response to this.

Faugheen

BarryD2 wrote: »

Said with scary conviction! Just hope that if any misfortune befalls you and you end up on trial, that the jurors will be open minded

The jury took 20 hours to deliberate the verdict. Sounds to me like they were very open minded.

I presented a huge piece of evidence in this thread which pointed towards his guilt and you’ve completely ignored it.

ongarite

Lots of evidence against him was ruled inadmissible by his defence team.
Details on RTE:
https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0501/1046863-what-the-quirke-trial-jury-didnt-hear/

Faugheen

Odelay wrote: »

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

Same. Think people need to learn the difference between circumstantial evidence and no evidence.

BarryD2

Odelay wrote: »

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

Said with scary conviction! Just hope that if any misfortune befalls you and you end up on trial, that the jurors will be open minded

Odelay

I think it would have been terrible if he wasn’t found guilty. Glad he isn't getting away with it.

Odelay

Faugheen wrote: »

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

Only he managed to search if before his son died...

hairyprincess

Faugheen wrote: »

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

Who hadn’t actually died yet.

Birneybau

Surely Mary Lowry could have been found as guilty of him

Faugheen

Laois_Man wrote: »

Did they say those searches were in the days after and did they present evidence as to who performed the searches?

Yes they did, and Patrick Quirke admitted to the Gardai to searching that on the internet but claimed it was in relation to his dead son.

realdanbreen

Scary that you could get a life sentence based on that evidence.

Laois_Man

Faugheen wrote: »

Although the evidence was circumstantial, it certainly wasn’t ‘weak’.

The moment I heard he had been searching for how long it takes bodies to decompose on the internet in the days after Bobby Ryan went missing, I knew he was guilty as sin.

Did they say those searches were in the days after and did they present evidence as to who performed the searches?

King of Kings

Faugheen wrote: »

Although the evidence was circumstantial, it certainly wasn’t ‘weak’.

The moment I heard he had been searching for how long it takes bodies to decompose on the internet in the days after Bobby Ryan went missing, I knew he was guilty as sin.

I know what you mean..but ive looked up mad **** on the net too...and that particular stuff too....its not enough to send somebody down for a life sentence imo...

The burden of proof should be very high cos the consequences are very high and I dont this it was even close to that in this case.

is_that_so

King of Kings wrote: »

Based on what was in the media its a shocking verdict. Very little evidence to send somebody down for a life sentence.

In fact more suspicion on the lowry woman imo than quirke.

On an aside..there seems to be some fierce amount of middle aged riding going on. I'll never believe my single mates telling me its hard to date in your 40s.

I remember reading a few years back that STIs were increasing rapidly in the over 50s!

Laois_Man

I wasn't surprised it was taking the jury ages but knew they'd come back fairly quickly after this mornings directive from the judge

Evidence was a bit circumstantial for my liking.

Based on media anyway

Odelay

The staging of finding the body was a bit of a give away.

King of Kings

Based on what was in the media its a shocking verdict. Very little evidence to send somebody down for a life sentence.

In fact more suspicion on the lowry woman imo than quirke.

On an aside..there seems to be some fierce amount of middle aged riding going on. I'll never believe my single mates telling me its hard to date in your 40s.

Faugheen

Although the evidence was circumstantial, it certainly wasn’t ‘weak’.

The moment I heard he had been searching for how long it takes bodies to decompose on the internet in the days after Bobby Ryan went missing, I knew he was guilty as sin.