If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

A convicted sex offender, jailed for the rape and killing on Tinder

  • 15-09-2021 10:30pm
    Registered Users Posts: 84,986 ✭✭✭✭

    Convicted killer Ian Horgan has authorised Gardaí to access records of his application to join the dating app Tinder, after claiming in court that the use of the name ‘Cian’ in his profile was a typing error.

    The convicted sex offender, jailed for the rape and killing of beautician Rachel Kiely in 2002, signed the authorisation at Macroom District Court, and it will now be forwarded to the CEO of Tinder.

    It came after Mr Horgan, 37, outlined through his solicitor that his defence to the charge that he joined the dating app under an alias that had not been notified to Gardaí was that essentially the use of the name 'Cian' had been a simple error.

    Gardaí allege that between May 24 and 31 last he failed to notify them of a name that he was using that had not been previously notified to use the app, which is an offence under Section 10, sub-section 2, of the Sex Offenders Act 2001.

    Our justice system is a fceking joke

    Horgan, 37, was convicted in 2002 of the rape and manslaughter of beautician Rachel Kiely in Ballincollig in 2000. The 22-year-old had been walking her dog in a park when she was attacked. Horgan was 16 at the time and was 18 when he was sentenced.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,361 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice

    Not really a current affairs issue more After hours, it is to the Gardai credit that they are on top of this issue. Also very scary if individuals like that are on Tinder

  • Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus

    What's the joke, exactly? Convicted sex offenders is subject to lifetime requirement to keep authorities informed of all the names they use; offender uses name that has not been notified to authorities, he says by mistake; offender is almost immediately detected, arrested and charged.

    I'm not sure what part of this you find amusing, to be honest.

  • Registered Users Posts: 16,545 ✭✭✭✭osarusan

    Pretty silly to try and pretend you think the word 'joke' is being used as a synonym for 'amusing' here, when it couldn't be more obvious to anybody reading that it's used as a synonym for 'failure' or 'unbelievably bad'.

  • Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus

    Well, what's the failure? Man breaks law, gets detected and prosecuted. That's not a failure; it's what's supposed to happen.

  • Registered Users Posts: 16,545 ✭✭✭✭osarusan

    I don't think there was any failure either, but you can't fail to have understood what the OP meant by the word 'joke' in this context, even if you disagree on whether its use is correct in this case.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus

    I understand from the OP's use of the word "joke" that he is very unhappy with the situation, but I genuinely have no idea as to why. Does he think that the restriction should not have been imposed on the offender in the first place? Does he think that the offender's breach should have gone undetected, or should have been ignored by the authorities? I can hardly imagine that he does. But, if he doesn't think either of these things, then what is his problem? I'm mystified. He can't have meant that the system had failed, because it plainly hasn't. He can't have meant that the system is unbelievably bad, because he describes nothing bad.

    You say that I "can't fail to have understood what the OP meant by 'joke' in this context, but you are mistaken. I genuinely, in good faith, do not understand what he meant.

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus

    @Peregrinus wrote:

    I understand from the OP's use of the word "joke" that he is very unhappy with the situation, but I genuinely have no idea as to why.

    I believe what the OP is try to say is that it's a joke that man who violently raped and killed a woman 21 years ago is walking free today.

    Which is a whole other kettle of fish.

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,078 ✭✭✭✭jmayo

    Well lets see he raped and murdered a woman and within about 18 years is out and about on a dating app trying to find women to meet.

    He was given life sentence for her murder according to newspapers.

    Oh yeah life is what 16/18 years with less for time off for good behaviour since he probably didn't rape or kill any women when in jail.

    Wasn't he great.

    And because the rape sentence would have been concurrent, wippeee do for good old concurrent sentencing, he is out in 18 years or so.

    BTW for some fooking reason two of the jurors could not find him guilty. 😯

    Nah our justice system is not a joke.

    Actually not sure if this is true, but there is Sunday World article that said he had gotten only manslaughter for killing Rachel Kiely (maybe he accidentally choked her after accidentally raping her) and that he had gotten more time for robbing someone at knife point.

    Oh and that he had girlfriend who happened to be sister of a convicted rapist.

    Maybe someone can confirm correct story ?

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus

    @jmayo wrote:

    Well lets see he raped and murdered a woman and within about 18 years is out and about on a dating app trying to find women to meet.

    He was given life sentence for her murder according to newspapers.

    From a quick look, he was originally convicted of murder in 2002, but after sufficient doubt was raised about some of the evidence, this conviction was quashed and a retrial was ordered. At the retrial he was found not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter.

    He was sentenced to 8 years (which is a pretty long one for manslaughter). The last two years of this were suspended, and because he'd been in jail for 4.5 years at that point, he served 18 months after the second trial before being released.

  • Registered Users Posts: 84,986 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,078 ✭✭✭✭jmayo

    Was it not DNA evidence ?

    How could someone who strangled someone to death be found to be just guilty of manslaughter?

    I mean the whole thing with manslaughter is that is somewhat accidental or unplanned I thought.

    How do you accidentally strangle someone?

    It takes concerted effort to be applied for a period of time.

    Somewhere along the line he could have stopped so to me that is murder.

    Hang on was he also found guilty of rape so why did he only serve less than 8 years when you had a rape and a killing?

    This is why lots of people see our justice system as a joke.

    Oh and just to clarify for some people around here I don't mean a funny fooking one.

    So after his light sentence for manslaughter and maybe rape, he is freed and hey presto he serves time for agravated robbery with a weapon.

    And then he breaks the law again by surfing dating apps under assumed name ?

    Why do I think humanity would be much better off with the Russian solution of a bullet to back of head.

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus

    I haven't looked at the full details, but yeah the retrial was ordered mainly because doubt was cast over DNA evidence.

    A retrial is complete reevaluation of all evidence not juts parts of it.

    So I guess the second time around the jury were not convinced of the murder charge. If there's a strangulation aspect, the argument is usually that they were attempting to restrain the other person and didn't mean to kill them. See: George Floyd.

    Sentences are typically applied concurrently except in rare circumstances, so the prison time for rape would like have been served at the same time as the manslaughter.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭Jequ0n

    Personally I find it completely irrelevant whether he was convicted or murder or manslaughter. There will have been reasons for the final decision.

    What is laughable, however, is the claim that he was being deceptive when there was a one letter difference in his profile name. If this alone throws a spanner in the verification process the gardai need to seriously reevaluate their ways of working.

  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]

    what do you mean by this?

    he used a false name on tinder, gardai found out and prosecute him. Where's the problem?

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭Jequ0n

    He had to provide his bank details and pay for the service. Even if he used an unregistered phone umber and burner email address the bank details are a pretty solid link to him. But the profile name is the issue here? Really?

  • Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus

    Presumably the concern is that somebody matching with "Cian" on Tindr might not realise that they are matching with Ian, the notorious rapist and manslaughterer.

  • Registered Users Posts: 339 ✭✭IAmTheReign

    I don't understand the outrage either. Man breaks the law and gets charged for it. Here I was thinking that's how the legal process is supposed to work.

  • Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams

    This thread has a weird title

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭Jequ0n

    And just the name “Ian” would make them realise that?

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭irelandrover

    I'd be shocked if most people didn't google someone they met online before meeting them in person, so yes it would.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭Jequ0n

    Most don’t exchange full names before a first date. It’s Tinder after all.

  • Registered Users Posts: 689 ✭✭✭Oscar Madison

    I completely agree with the above!

    Execution in my opinion was the answer but that's now gone unfortunately!

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,435 ✭✭✭Scoundrel

    This animal was sentenced to 6 years for the manslaughter then following an appeal it was increased to 12 he also committed a horrendous knifepoint armed robbery while on bail for which he only got 4 years. He's also going out with the sister of cratloe rapist Thomas O Neill he is a human skidmark.

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus

    You don't think dating sites ask the Gardai to vet every new signup, do you? Tinder have no idea and don't care if his name is Ian or Cian.

    This most likely came about because someone recognised him on Tinder and reported it to the Gardai.

    There's a strong argument that dating sites should indeed take stronger measures to verify people in order to protect their users. Revolut for example requires you to take a selfie and then send a copy of your passport or driving licence before they'll activate your account.

    No reason a dating site couldn't do the same thing. Tindr and the likes might be for casual hookups, but there's no honest reason for someone to have a fake or anonymous account on these platforms. If they want, someone can have a nickname instead of a real name before they're matched, but the account should still be validated.

    How that would tie into the sex offenders' register, I don't know. There is nothing stopping a sex offender from signing up a real account on Tindr, and no obligation on them to inform the site or potential partners, of their past.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭Jequ0n

    Of course I don’t expect any company to do background checks. The issue is that there seems to a validation check in progress which is flawed.

    He had user information that could be traced back to him (as there is no mentioning of him using someone else’s bank account details). If the gardai rely on profile names on dating sites it means that the whole process is corrupted.

  • Registered Users Posts: 84,986 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1

  • Registered Users Posts: 40,126 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail

    why do you think the gardai found out he was on tinder under a different name? It was probably reported to them.

  • Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams

    eats shoots and leaves sort of title

  • Registered Users Posts: 84,986 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,520 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave