Patrick Quirke -Guilty

realdanbreen · 03-05-2019 10:32AM

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.

If you are local it's strange that you would spell it 'Bancha' ? It's Bansha!

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:33AM

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.

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?

dochara · 03-05-2019 10:34AM

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

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 · 03-05-2019 10:35AM

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

Well that's what people from the area are saying. Like I said it's a rumour.

Nekarsulm · 03-05-2019 10:35AM

He probably planned to move/bury the body after the initial hue and cry died down. But while farmers are well accustomed to dealing with death and dead bodies, its different when its a human.
His own son was rotting in tbe grave, and he may have been affected by the sight/thoughts of moving tbe victims body after a few weeks had passed.

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:37AM

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!

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 found

flat cap....

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:38AM

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

Well that's what people from the area are saying. Like I said it's a rumour.

no it's not

Ush1 · 03-05-2019 10:39AM

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 found

flat cap....

The Haely Raes did it?

cocokabana · 03-05-2019 10:39AM

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?

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.

Bob Harris · 03-05-2019 10:39AM

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

Well that's what people from the area are saying. Like I said it's a rumour.

monkeybutter wrote: »

no it's not

You mean it's not a rumour...and it's true?

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:40AM

Bob Harris wrote: »

You mean it's not a rumour...and it's true?

no, it's fabricated

kerry cow · 03-05-2019 10:41AM

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 ?

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:41AM

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.

Did he, whats his name, when did he return home etc etc

Polish people go back to Poland sometimes, it's in their nature.

LETHAL LADY · 03-05-2019 10:42AM

monkeybutter wrote: »

no it's not

And how do you know? People I work with from the area have said it to me.

Bob Harris · 03-05-2019 10:43AM

monkeybutter wrote: »

no, it's fabricated

Well that's a bit of a let down.

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:43AM

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 ?

his van was there obviously

sure he would hardly be off djing of a thursday

what do you mean phone ping? Ring?

cocokabana · 03-05-2019 10:45AM

realdanbreen wrote: »

If you are local it's strange that you would spell it 'Bancha' ? It's Bansha!

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

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:45AM

Ush1 wrote: »

The Haely Raes did it?

the Kerry Cow may be a Healy Rae... Danny by the looks of it

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:47AM

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

it means you lied, what your are basically saying is you are sea bass farmer from Greece.

realdanbreen · 03-05-2019 10:50AM

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

Name a pub in Bansha.

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:50AM

this case does put doubts that if you do go missing, the Gardaí wont be expending too much effort to find you

tenor.gif?itemid=10474292

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 10:52AM

realdanbreen wrote: »

Name a pub in Bansha.

there are none, trick question

the safe bet is always Ryans though, am i right?

Aska · 03-05-2019 10:57AM

cocokabana wrote:

Nothing in it and Patrick Quirke acted alone.

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.

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 11:02AM

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.

what would he do anyway, he'd have to admit it to snare he also and there's no particular reason to believe his word

and what possible motive would she have

and now that hes convicted, he can't say diddly as it wouldn't be believed

Calypso Realm · 03-05-2019 11:02AM

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. .

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?

At any rate he is going to appeal it, so we will see what happens

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 11:04AM

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?

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

Vicarious Function · 03-05-2019 11:05AM

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 interviews that Quirke gave voluntarily to Police. These interviews 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!

ohnonotgmail · 03-05-2019 11:08AM

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!

Not all of the information you mention was put the to the jury. The sex tapes and the underwear stealing in particular were excluded from evidence by the judge.

Calypso Realm · 03-05-2019 11:09AM

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

Agree. That's what I thought at first all things considered but then changed my mind when the other details emerged.

monkeybutter · 03-05-2019 11:15AM

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!

Circumstantial evidence is evidence

Non jury trials from now on

Patrick Quirke -Guilty

Comments