grayzer75 wrote: » Report all you want I couldn't give a toss. Stephen Travers stated in public that Harris tried at all costs to stop papers being released to the official investigation to protect agents - that's collusion....
smurgen wrote: » If the truth is vile to you then you're the problem not social media . You do realise that the newspapers that started this thread have adjusted their headlines right?
FrancieBrady wrote: » How are they doing that? If the Gardai, PSNI and IMC know who was there, why would they need witnesses from SF to say they were there? Make some sense Shef.
Shefwedfan wrote: » They need witnesses. As we have seen in this case seemingly people cannot go to the Garda without approval from SF which in this case doesn't seem to have happened. You can't just arrest someone because you know they done it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Not knowing who Stephen Travers is in relation to the subject you are pretending to be knowledgeable about says it all really. You need to research before commenting.
smurgen wrote: » Why did Marie Bailey speak to Josephine Madigan about her insurance claim?
FrancieBrady wrote: » There was nobody there but the killers Shef. How do you get witnesses out of that situation?
IAMAMORON wrote: » Lol. Sticking up for your bhoys again Francie? Condemning murder one minute then having their backs the next? Sounds like a political party I know somewhere.
Shefwedfan wrote: » Wow just Wow. It's called a alibi. It is fairly clear SF know who done it, the Garda and PSNI know who done it. ANy other political party would do anything to bring these killers to the courts. SF instead throw about lies about the victim, then lie about the lies, then lie about the lies and then try to say the original lie never happened.
IAMAMORON wrote: » I love it when Shinnerbots manage to compare and contrast murder, kidnapping , extortion and the disappeared with a woman falling off a swing in a nightclub. Wow.
smurgen wrote: » Which SF person done that in this instance? What I'm drawing attention to is the need to talk regarding an item. Why did Maria Bailey feel like she needed to talk to Madigan about an insurance claim? Was it because she knew more about the law maybe. Could advise her more?
jm08 wrote: » The apology Mrs Quinn is looking for is a statement from Murphy is that her son was not involved in criminality. Do you know if that is true or not? If it is true that he was not involved in criminality, surely its the PSNI she needs to make a statement bearing in mind that is where Bertie got his information from when he made that statement in the Dail (which he sort half hearted withdrew later).
blanch152 wrote: » https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2008-02-07/5/ Rory O'Hanlon: "A few weeks after the murder, I called to the Quinn household in Cullyhanna in the company of councillor Geraldine Donnelly. Despite the enormity of the tragedy, I was impressed by the dignity of the family. Briege Quinn told me she desired two things, that Paul's name be cleared of allegations of criminality and that the perpetrators be brought to justice. Paul Quinn's name has been cleared by the Government here and the Taoiseach spoke to Briege. I was present at the meeting. The Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party also accepts that Paul Quinn was an innocent victim." Enda Kenny: "The late Paul Quinn was entitled to have his good name and integrity protected by the peace process. I regret the quick response from the Government suggesting that criminal elements may have been involved. As I told Stephen and Briege Quinn, I and the party that I lead never regarded the late Paul Quinn as a criminal. It is important that all parties make that statement so as to bring some consolation to his family. I accept that the Government has confirmed that position in a meeting with his parents." Liz McManus: "I have little doubt members of the Provisional IRA carried out the attack on Paul Quinn and were responsible for his murder. I do not know if the murder was sanctioned at a higher level but regardless of this, the provisional movement has an obligation to face up to its responsibilities." "I cannot let this occasion pass without making some reference to the injudicious comments made by the Taoiseach in the aftermath of the killing in which he clearly implied that Paul Quinn had been involved in criminal activity. I do not know if the Taoiseach had been poorly briefed or if his desire not to do anything to destabilise the delicate political position in Northern Ireland clouded his judgment. However, the result of his comments was to play into the hands of his killers, provide ammunition for those who wanted to denigrate Paul Quinn and add enormously to the trauma of the Quinn family. In fairness to the Taoiseach, six weeks later he eventually withdrew those comments and publicly stated that Paul Quinn was not involved in criminal activity, but these groundless comments should never have been made in the first place." She had a lot more to say, well worth a read. Minister of State, Sean Power: "I and the Government have no problem stating categorically that the murder of Paul Quinn was not related in any way to any involvement of by him in criminal activities." But read the weaselly, sly, words of that creep Caoimhin O'Caoilean, still implying a slur on Paul Quinn's character: "The question has been raised as to whether the victim of this murder, Paul Quinn, may or may not have at any time been involved in criminal activity. As I have said before, that has no bearing whatsoever on the heinousness of the crime of murder committed against him." I am fed up to the teeth with the sleeveen approach of Sinn Fein supporters on here, continually to peddle lies about Paul Quinn. It is disgusting, it is sewer-like and repugnant.
Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: » ... It's a sick party with moronic and morally bankrupt supporters.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Are you going to post here and bare face lie about what the reports from the PSNI The Gardai and the IMC given to government said? At least O'Caolain used the caveat 'may or may not'...Ahern didn't when he quoted those reports in the house. Just bizarre.
blanch152 wrote: » And how would Stephen Travers know this? If you had said that Stephen Travers had accused Harris of being involved in stopping papers being released, then you might have been accurate. However, even if the accusation is true, it does not amount to collusion in killing.
blanch152 wrote: » Only in Sinn Fein wonderland would a woman seeking advice from her personal solicitor about an insurance claim be considered equivalent to a Sinn Fein member/associate seeking permission from the party leader to give evidence in a murder trial.
jm08 wrote: » All a load of political point scoring off each other. Mrs Quinn wants a statement to clear her son's name of being involved in criminal activity. The only people who can clear that allegation (made by Bertie Ahern on information given to him by the Gardai (originating from the PSNI) needs to be made by the PSNI. Sinn Fein saying that he wasn't involved in criminal activity is pointless (because as you like to claim they are liars). Why won't the PSNI clear Paul Quinn's name for Mrs Quinn?
FrancieBrady wrote: » The elephant in the room.
Shefwedfan wrote: » Did the PSNI ever go to the press/tv and say Paul Quinn was a criminal?
Bowie wrote: » And if the solicitor was Madigan? Your telling of the events differs from the reality. Also this was on giving evidence to assist Garda. Not screw the hotel, insurers and public for some grubby personal gain. Of course if this were FG the finer details would remain hidden from the public
