The man arrested was kept in a day longer for questioning.
This was purely because he took more breaks during questioning than the woman so his detention was extended. It doesn't mean anything in relation to his possible level of involvement or guilt.
We can take that at least one of the people arrested is the parent of Baby John. But maybe not two. The man arrested was kept in a day longer for questioning. The mother of baby John must have not shown that she was pregnant as family and neighbours would have questioned at the time where her baby went.
There is some rare cases where women dont show they're pregnant and don't even know they're pregnant till they're literally giving birth. Perhaps this happened here. One day she was a teenager girl and next thing she is giving birth and is an unmarried mother in a rural area where it would be frowned upon in 84. The sudden shock then causing or somone in the family to crack.
Ya true I was thinking she was early but see now she may be late
If she is 59, she is in her 50s, and would have been 20 years old, not 11. Given the time lime, she is more likely to be 59 than 50. This should not be as difficult as people are making it. Being mathmatically possible is not the same as being likely.
All I'm saying is I strongly doubt she was as young as 11 years old.
Possible? Yes.
Likely? No.
For the reasons already given.
Except the case is 39 years old and according to papers is in her 50's
Irish times have printed that woman was in her late 50s, which if she is 55yrs now, would make her at least 16yrs old at the time, probably older given they say late.
"A lawyer for the pair – a man in his 60s and a woman in her late 50s – said they strongly deny killing the baby on April 9th, 1984."
https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/2023/03/26/results-of-dna-tests-awaited-in-kerry-babies-case/
It's been reported in the papers that the probable mum's father was a garda.
I found one piece from the Sunday World with the headline of the woman being a daughter of a Garda, but then in the article refers to it as a familial link, which is a little bit more vague than a daughter.
Either way I'll not believe anything until their identies are made official, if they ever are.
Crazy case, I was listening to Niall Boylan last night, I'd never heard of this before.
So DNA has been taken, how long should it take for results to get back ?
It has been reported that the couple arrested have been a couple since the early 80s.
Mathematically she could have been as young as 11.
Mathematically he could have been as old as 30.
But there is nothing to suggest that the couple were together in 1984 either.
I don't believe she was as young as 11 either. I was just replying to someone who suggested it as a reason for silence.
The woman is in her 50s and man is in his sixties. Supposing they are the parents it means the man was at least 21 in 1984. It's unlikely a 21 year old was with an 11 year old ( possible but unlikely) and allowed to continue with the relationship.
While I know it is not a bastion of good facts it is reported her father may have been dead at that point in the Sunday World
But we don't know that it could have been taken straight of her and told anything. She may not have known anything about the case and anyone who says she must have are just talking conjecture at this time. Now in the years since she should have 100% come forward would not have helped Joanne Hayes in anyway in how she was treated by those Gardai. Yes would have but the case to bed it was not Joanne
Oh they will have to have there ducks in a row before they proceed with whatever case happens going forward. I wonder what she could be charged with though if she was not the one who killed Baby John, which is highly unlikely in my opinion
Agreed. Never disputed that.
So you would call someone who was 11 (which she may have been) a mature person.
In relation to your 2nd point I 100% agree with you and in that you and I can agree she has to answer for that
There you go casting your own ideal of what someone was doing in the 80's I gave my own story of growing up in the 80's I gave no thought to anything in the news in one ear out the other. Should I be castigated for that. I had no idea of the case until the mid late 90's when I got interested in stuff like that. You must have been a very learned person in your youth. Again she was said to maybe have been as young as 11 and I bet her parents would have made sure she would not have had any notions of going forward.
Could she have saved Joanne Hayes the hell she went through at the time I doubt it as those in the case were 100% sure they has there murderer and would not hear of anything else and I say those around here may have put the fear of god in her if she talked.
Now in the years that followed should she have come forward absolutely and does she have a case to answer for that most defiantly and if it is a criminal case how about we let justice take its course rather then a baying mob.
Also whats not excusable is the manner in which the baby was slaughtered.
Monsters.
I really doubt the mother of baby John was only 11 years old.
Baby John was born in April, which means an 11 year old would have been in primary school for most of her pregnancy. Its also very unlikely an 11 year old would be able to deliver safely without intervention or c-section. There was a 12 year old in the Coombe when I had my daughter. You'd notice. Whatever about a teenager hiding a pregnancy, it would have been virtually impossible to hide a pregnancy on an 11 year old, unless she was literally kept out of school and hidden.
I definitely think the mother was an adult or older teenager. Approx six months pregnant around the time Ann Lovett died, and probably terrified.
It doesn't excuse not coming forward later though, and allowing Joanne Hayes to be blamed.
At the root of all this now, despite failings by previous generations of Gardai, is the pursuit of justice for what was done to an innocent baby, a baby who had been cared for, for 3 days before someone decided he had to go. We can't have any society that tolerates murder like this, then or now.
It might be that only one of the couple is the parent. We won’t know til the results are back. Maybe the man was the father, but the woman is not the mother. Or vice versa. So it’s possible this woman and her family were in no way involved. There may be another woman somewhere who had a baby for this man who had been arrested. Nothing is confirmed. There could be more twists to the story yet. Let’s wait and see what comes out in the next few weeks.
The newspapers reported the family were staying with relatives / friends.
Where do you think people go when their house is sealed off as a crime scene?
You might want to do a bit of research before you come on here with your "idle speculation" tantrums.
It's being reported that baby John was from a garda family.
But that's not being reported.
It's just speculation around places like here.
There is zero 100% accurate reporting on who the couple are, because they have not been officially identified.
It's all just speculation and conjecture at this point.
On your earlier statement about the house being a crime scene and the couple living with relatives which I questioned.
The only mention of the house being a crime scene was one line in one paper credited to the solicitor and no mention at all about the living with relatives.
I'd say it was more a case of the Gardaí going for a familial match rather than relying on getting an actual match, as there was a good chance the parents may have either left the area or avoided giving a sample.
It's hard to know their reasoning.
It could easily be as simple as their mates were giving samples and they thought feck it what harm.
Families can be very good at keeping skeletons in the closet when they want to.
I don't think the person who gave the DNA that matched did so for any reason other than there was a trawl looking for people to give DNA, I think a younger person especially would be more inclined to go for that as they would probably understand how the whole building a profile and a family tree works. Watch a few Long Lost Family programmes or there is other ones more DNA related even and it's obvious how they can work backwards/forwards/sideways through generations matching DNA to find an answer. But then again that's just my theory, I wouldn't read into it that the sibling knew or had any clue.
I'd say the dinner table will be great craic if the parents didn't know it was their own kid that outed them.
It is possible that the sample was given because they knew it was they're parents who were baby Johns parents. This secret would have had to ate away at the parent/parents and perhaps did impact on family life.
I did think it unusual that a 20 or 30 something year old would volunteer a sample to solve a case that happened before they were born.
I did actually think when I read it was a younger sibling of Baby John that provided the DNA that rather than it being an unfortunate (or fortunate) act of fate, was more a case of having had enough of living the lie, and doing the right thing.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/08231869fd786c2459f2d35b207b4d26.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e68aa2b0e039b12ade8384a2f42841c6.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d38dadd4e9049f636f3a15f844846484.svg)
