Well no, if they had come forward at the time it would have been fairly obvious she had recently given birth.
The "heavy squad" would never have gone near Joanne.
This whole sorry mess would have been cleared up relatively quickly 40 years ago and consigned to local history never really spoken about.
However they didn't come forward.
For 40 years people have speculated.
Their own children will now be looking at them in a different light.
Their silence will probably create a much bigger ripple now than it would have 40 years ago if they were honest at the start.
Well not really.
It's being reported that baby John was from a garda family.
Perhaps they influenced the heavy squad to look in a certain direction.
Yeah, that whole can of worms needs to be kicked wide open regardless of who gets hurt.
The sad dealings with Joanne Hayes are fully owned by the 'heavy squad', no one else. The parents of Baby John have their own cross to carry.
Moral Expectations.
Moral Epiphany.
Moral Compass.
Any room for empathy for Joann Hayes in your morals Fr.
The Sunday Times are reporting that Gardai are looking into the possibility of a third party being involved...
I know this was an horrific experience for the mother - it has to have been. In the last 39 years though she should have come forward - she wasnt that vulnerable kid for the last 39 years. If she didnt murder the baby than she too was a victim. However she didnt come forward and had no intention of coming forward it seems - if true its dna that revealed her secret not herself.
She had a moral obligation towards Joanne Hayes. Its probable all this mother done was have a baby out of wedlock - no crime in that - however she stood back for 39 years and allowed another womans life to be ruined.
There is that boards moral compass pointing other people that they don't know anything about in the right direction again.
Exactly, and if she nursed her own child for 3 days you would expect her to have some empathy with with Joann Hayes who was also grieving the loss of her newborn baby.
People seem to have really high moral expectations of others.
If this was a traumatic event for an 11 year old it's not going to be easy to forget for them or for them to suddenly have a moral epiphany and start telling everything to the Gardai.
I mean just look a the vitriol here towards two people none of us know.
Can you only imagine the level of abuse the real mother and her family are in for if they are found?
5 days old when found, 2 days in the sea.
But she wasn't 11 for the last 39 years
Yeah I do agree she or they have no doubt suffered through the years - but that still doesn't make the silence right.
The bit I have the difficulty with is her watching Joanne Hayes's life being ruined and staying silent. Ireland is a different place than it was in 1984 - I think if the mother had come forward herself she would have been dealt with in a more compassionate manner in the last 20/30 years than the 80s.
Another poster alluded to the fact that the woman arrested, if she was the mother could have been aas young as 11 when John was born.
Just think for a minute how young that is to be going through this.
Do you really think that she and her family would fell comfortable putting up their hands and admitting it was them after what they saw happened to Joanne Hayes?
Obviously she could also have been closer to 20 when all this happened but regardless I still don't think a 20 year old would be that forthcoming after what happened.
Precocious puberty can occur, it doesn't a mature body to conceive, carry and deliver a full-term baby.
If the woman arrested is proven to be Baby John's mother she could have been anywhere between 11 and 20, there's a chance she was a child.
Virtually every home got a weekly local newspaper and a Sunday paper and even in very rural areas anyone going into town would pick up a daily or evening paper. Unless there was a literacy problem and/or extreme poverty, then adults and young teens were indeed reading newspapers, especially if there was a local dimension to the stories.
5 days i read.
one would wonder did the neighbours know too ? or was she kept hidden whilst she appeared pregnant
If the mother was old enough to conceive, carry and deliver a full term baby, I would hardly call her a kid.
This was big local and national news for years after 1984, so she would have heard it as a mature woman.
Probably the mother....then they were found out and whoever found them went into a fit of rage. Pure speculation obviously!
I did not realised Baby John lived for 3 days before being killed.
So he must have been fed, but by who?
If anyone in who family was involved with the babies death I doubt they would have wanted to discuss it and what kid even in the 80's was reading a newspaper
Kids can avoid news easily now - all they have to do is to switch to something else. My kids wont even watch ads - anything that bores them they have no interest in. In the 80's we had to watch it as there was nothing else to switch to. It was on in the background even if you were playing so you were taking some in even if not actively listening.. She would have had to have been locked away to avoid the news or reading a newspaper!
I was a kid in the 80s and if watched the news if I was up never would have taken any interest was playing with something. Maybe I am weird.
To say kids can now avoid news now is stupid it's everywhere and anywhere. If anything watch easier in the time of 2 channels and no 24 hour news. To say she had to know is idiotic. Could she have known if she was that young maybe but I would put it in single digits.
I was bought up in a house where the news was watched on TV and newspapers were purchased. At the time most houses were the same - you couldnt avoid news like kids can now. Most people only had 2 channels to watch on TV so you had to watch the news. This case was a huge story at the time and was bought up again and again in the media over the years. While she may have been shielded at the time there is no way she would have avoided the story as the years went by. If this person is the mother she even lived in the county it occurred in. Yes she may have been threatened into silence but that threat would have diminished over the years. She allowed Joanne Hayes's life to be ruined by staying silent - thats a crime in itself in my opinion.
No, in the Bible no.. Think that only got added later - 591AD according to this (link), by accident. But it stuck.
That also mentions in 1969 the then Pope clarified it was a mixup.
It's being reported that it's a full sibling match, so both parents are, it seems, together.
But could she have come forward then. If she was as young as I have heard she may not have known the news then and by the time she was old enough and brave enough the whole affair with Joanne Hayes was over and for some reason of fear she did not come forward. I know I had no idea of what was is the news for a long time in my late teens as it was not something children or teens cares about and even if at that young age she did suspect the vitriol at the time and fear of would whoever killed her baby may kill her also kept her silent.
Not saying she is not completely innocent but a lot of people jumping through hopes just to get the punishment they want to see to feel happy imo
That's Jesus all over with his forgiveness and kindness. He didn't have the makings of good Catholic!
The DPP will be slow to move on this unless they have a compelling case. The time factor alone. May not be what a lot of people want to hear, but fairly likely.
Just because she had the baby does not mean she killed it or she knows who did. Withholding information and whatever else yet but not a 100% fact it was her who killed him. Who knows the person or persons maybe dead
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e68aa2b0e039b12ade8384a2f42841c6.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/edcbd210970750108c5b4b1ad0bf1083.svg)
