cocokabana wrote: » I'm from a farming background not a million miles from Bancha & heard locally that there was a Polish farm labourer who went back to Poland after this and took his own life sadly. Whether there's any truth I don't know but I'm sure Guards would have investigated this line of inquiry.
Laois_Man wrote: » 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
monkeybutter wrote: » far fetched, roping in outside help ends in tears, especially if you don't move in the right circles, and even getting someone reliable if you do is near impossible If he had outside help, you think they would have left the body on the farm to be found? The beating he gave him indicates a rage attack, he absolutely beat the head off him, cracked ribs etc Then he had to deal with it, and he bottled it most do
dochara wrote: » A majority verdict with no real evidence is unfair. The jury system is badly flawed - we have a very high opinion of ourselves as purveyors of the truth!
LETHAL LADY wrote: » Well that's what people from the area are saying. Like I said it's a rumour.
monkeybutter wrote: » dead body on land you control which you mysteriously find sour relationship with the girlfriend on the victim notebook writing saying what you did imminent loss of control of the land where the body was foundflat cap....
monkeybutter wrote: » no they won't pointless, how to corroborate this rubbish why the fook would he trust someone like that with this? come on here Johnny, I know you are a dab hand with milking, but have you ever tried a bitta murder?
monkeybutter wrote: » no it's not
Bob Harris wrote: » You mean it's not a rumour...and it's true?
cocokabana wrote: » Who knows. Only Patrick Quirke knows exactly what happened. If he had a Polish labourer working with him and he went back to Poland after this happened, at what point he returned I don't know, but that is what was said to me by a farmer from that area. Maybe concidence he returned. Nothing in it and Patrick Quirke acted alone.
monkeybutter wrote: » no, it's fabricated
kerry cow wrote: » quirke didn't know ryan was going to be at marys house on the Thursday night , lowry kept ringing him to come over with which was a little flustered that she kept texting him or ringing . maybe he went missing earlier than 630am ?? why did his phone ping at 1030 am ?
realdanbreen wrote: » If you are local it's strange that you would spell it 'Bancha' ? It's Bansha!
Ush1 wrote: » The Haely Raes did it?
cocokabana wrote: » I didn't say I was local, I said I'm not a million miles away from there. From a farming background. I have spoken to farmers from Bansha. anyway what does it matter I spelled it wrong
realdanbreen wrote: » Name a pub in Bansha.
cocokabana wrote: Nothing in it and Patrick Quirke acted alone.
Aska wrote: » Personally can't see PQ taking one for the team here, someone mentioned Mary may have been involved, he doesn't seem like a guy who would take full blame and let someone else walk.
Neyite wrote: » I don't think he did bottle it. I think his intention was to discover the body of HER missing boyfriend buried on HER land and hopefully the gardai would consider her the prime suspect given she was the last person to have seen him. .
Calypso Realm wrote: » This is the exact conclusion I finally came to as well, when I learned he tried to pin it on ML-something I wasn't aware of- as I'd often wondered why on earth he didn't just move the remains elsewhere before he had to leave. He'd gotten away with it for a few years so why run the risk of being found out now?
Vicarious Function wrote: » The Prosecution Team certainly pulled off a major feat getting that murder conviction. That is considering it was all based on circumstantial evidence and, as they said, there would be "no smoking gun". There would be no blood and no crime scene. Basically what they did, IMO, is build up a picture of the character which answers the question: "Would he be capable of doing this?" and, if so, "Is he possiby the only only one who would have done it?". Hence they build up this character, who seemingly would stop at nothing to get what he wants. There's the behaviour where he acts like he owns M. Lowry's home (Lowry Junior's evidence). He reports Mary to Child Protective Services, when he realises she has someone else. Mary feels she has to report him to Police for Harrassment, leading to very telling inerviews that Quirke gave voluntarily to Police. These inerviews painted quite a picture of his character, even though he was not charged with anything at the time. There are the findings on his computer, phone recordings and handwritten notes, which show his kinkiness regarding sex and methodical planning. Also there's the evidence of his sneaking around Mary's house, looking through windows and pinching underwear from the clothes-line. His hoodwinking of Mary, which enabled him to make huge profits off her money, his stay-overs in 5-star hotels in order to hold onto and control his lover. His leasing of her land for a 7-year period. His neglect, unfaithfulness to and betrayal of his wife, while doing all of that. Did all of this build up to a picture of someone who would stop at nothing to get what he wants and was well capable of this murder, leaving no reasonable doubt that it could have been anybody else who did it. If I had been on that jury, I would have been in "no doubt as to who did it and there would have no question that it could have been someone else who did it, considering the buildup of that character. Well done, Prosecution Team!
monkeybutter wrote: » cause he bottled it, simple as that try it yourself, kill someone, leave their body in a pool for 2 years and then try to move it let us know how you get on Most people don't have the guts for any of it, once the madness subsides, thankfully
