Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie 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 hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Graham Dwyer loses appeal

1356

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,456 ✭✭✭Hangdogroad




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,594 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    I'll ask you again because you ignored the question the last time: how can a prisoner claim to be rehabilitated if they do not show remorse for the crime they committed?



  • Registered Users Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    Yeah, he was as creepy as they come.

    Not to mention very cruel and sadistic. That poor woman was already suffering with her own problems, only to be then preyed on by this sick monster. He turns my stomach tbh. I find it hard to look at his face... people like this should just be put down. Not wasting tax payer money and oxygen in a prison cell.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,427 ✭✭✭Man Vs ManUre


    Well he did either tie her up or handcuff her out there in the Dublin/Wicklow bush, she was alive at the time. And he went back the following morning I think. It’s not that bizarre to think it was just another type of punishment, he just got it wrong thinking she would survive the night. Only he knows and he’s not one for talking.



  • Registered Users Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    Yes, they're certainly more vulnerable to abuse.

    But to say something was "bound to happen to her" is still a very odd comment. She was unlucky to run into a monster, they are relatively rare in society.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,141 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    It's not up to a prisoner to claim they have been rehabilitated.

    The loss of liberty is part of the rehabilitation, as is the passage of time, length of time served and as specified in the act the prisoners conduct throughout that period.

    But since I have tried to explain it to you now several times with a link to the actual law, it's now your turn.

    Where does it state in the law that a convict has to show remorse in order to gain parole as you claimed?

    Again the parole board assess risk not guilt, that has been done.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,594 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    There is more to the parole process than just legislation. Quite honestly you are talking through your hoop.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,577 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Rest of his days?

    I don't see it. I see Malcolm McArthur around Dun Laoghaire the odd time since his release and that was one lad I honestly thought would not see the light of day beyond a high wall ever again. Yet there he is.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,141 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Given the turn in tone it's reasonable to suggest you cannot back up your claim.

    Again none of this is just my opinion.

    In fact families of victims have complained for years that preparators of serious crimes should acknowledge guilt and show remorse before they can be eligible for parole.

    Most recently

    Is she talking through her hoop?



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    There are no monsters, but I agree with you that she was unlucky



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,141 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Shaw will probably die in prison which is a rarity.

    He is unable to solve simple problems and has absolutely no apathy for others.

    Serial killer 101.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,790 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    I think in the context of parole, rehabilitated means that he won't do the crime again, i.e. murder.

    I'm not sure what that entails, if it's a pinky swear on his behalf or if prison psychiatrists/psychologists etc. all get to chime in on his 'rehabilitation'.

    I've said it before, I'm surprised he was convicted. A cause of death couldn't be established so I would have thought that left room for reasonable doubt. Don't get me wrong, I 100% think he 'dunnit' but I thought without the cause of death a conviction would be difficult.

    20 years is the average life sentence here in Ireland. Dwyer will probably do 25 in total. That's my prediction.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 61,172 ✭✭✭✭Agent Coulson


    The Supreme court will hear his appeal this morning.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    Rightly so.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,594 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    As if by magic the same poster pops in to support a man who has committed violence against women.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,141 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    So the Supreme Court have granted the appeal on the basis of public interest.

    Which means they are suitably concerned enough.

    It was the law itself deemed incompatible and not the application of it. Which is very interesting.

    If the COA are to believed, Dwyer hasn't a chance of getting his conviction vacated.

    But others may, any idea how many cases this could potentially apply to?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,899 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    As I understand it, it's not that there's a whole slew of prisoners waiting for the outcome of this case to see if it provides a basis for their own release. The facts of the Dwyer case surrounding the collection of the phone data and the use that was made of it are fairly unusual; there won't be many convictions depending on similar facts. If there are, they must all predate 2015, because Dwyer's appeal rests on a course of action which, he argues, was improper but whose impropriety was only established in a Supreme Court judgment handed down in 2015. So, unless those cases related to fairly serious crimes attracting long sentences, the people convicted would quite possibly already have been released from prison.

    The Dwyer case raises important issues about the admissibility of evidence that has been obtained unlawfully, but where the unlawfulness was not known or recognised at the time. It's of general public importance not so much because there's a slew of convictions waiting to be overturned as because it has implications for the conduct of future investigations and the conduct of future trials. There are questions to which we need clear answers but, whatever the answers, I don't think they are seen as likely to lead to the release of many, or quite possibly any, current prisoners.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,141 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    As I understand it, it's not that there's a whole slew of prisoners waiting for the outcome of this case to see if it provides a basis for their own release.

    Indeed, but that would not mean that some would not apply to get their conviction vacated, especially in cases which were more reliant on mobile phone data.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,763 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    While the court of appeal found there was other evidence independent of the call data records that was "arguably more compelling", including text messages found on two phones recovered from Vartry Reservoir,

    I wonder might the Supreme Court decide that it’s not for the court of appeal to decide if such evidence is compelling or not- and that only a jury can decide that? A possible retrial?

    Personally I think that’s a very long shot, but in the interests of justice who knows what they may decide. It would be most unfortunate and very distressing for Elaine’s family if this was to happen.


    “There was other evidence to link Dwyer to two phones that formed part of the prosecution case, the CoA also found.”-

    -not least his own responses to questions in Garda interviews.


    “the data was obtained in compliance with the provisions of the 2011 Communications (Retention of Data) Act but where the Act itself was subsequently found to be inconsistent with EU law.”

    Is the key question here for the Supreme Court to answer , if you have a “faulty” law, then convictions under that law should be quashed?

    Or is it, if the law is found to be “faulty” (a well known legal term 😀) , is it the role of the Supreme Court then to determine if a miscarriage of justice occurred by assessing the other evidence or is their role simply to state that a retrial is necessary based on a “faulty” law being in place at the time of conviction with no assessment of the other evidence?





  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 398 ✭✭vswr



    was all a terrible accident... he completely changed his method of meeting her from the usual, trackable, method. To a scenario where he told her to leave her car, phone and valuables in one place, so he could me her inconspicuously in another location. Definitely just a terrible accident.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,933 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    If I recall, there was a bit of a breakthrough in the case, when AGS cross-referenced Galway toll payment records with movements tracked on his burner phone to link the burner phone to his car and therefore to him.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 398 ✭✭vswr


    also a lot of personal context conversations, he was an avid model airplane flyer and refer to this a lot in the messages, which AGS were able to cross reference to competitions he took part in... along with their hookups in Stepaside which they were able to place Dwyer in the locality at the time via other methods.

    Dwyer denied all of this until he was presented with this evidence, then he admitted to unfolding levels of the story, as much as he thought could get away with, as he thought AGS had nothing on him, but when they caught him out, his story would change....

    So, he went from, not knowing Elaine, to, admitting having a long time affair and cutting fetish with her.

    While I agree in the world of probabilities, there is infinite scenarios, but, in Ireland, in the time frame we focus on, you have someone who:

    -admits having a cutting fetish with someone

    -has been tied to phones through various pieces of contextual evidence

    -in these phones it discusses stabbing and murder

    -DNA evidence to support the affair was found prior to the murder (he denied even knowing Elaine until this evidence was presented)

    -had actively spoken about finding a secluded spot to do some humiliation cutting (even though they would do it usually in the apartment in Stepaside)

    -Dwyer would meet Elaine in a known manner to both of them, but, on the day in question before her murder, changed that routing in a manner so nothing could be tied to him

    I'm gonna bet my house Dwyer had the intention of murder



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,187 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Can you clarify if you actually want him to get off? Cause it really sounds like you do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,763 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Yeah- along with information he provided when purchasing the phone in the first place in the shop - he answered a lot of questions put to him by Gardai which appeared all very innocuous to him at the time - things like did he have an interest in flying model planes etc etc - all his answers corroborated with the ping masts of his phone for a variety of situations - now whether it’s this evidence that will be in doubt I guess it’s up to the Supreme Court to decide .

    While it would be tragic if he were freed, justice is justice - I would just hope that whatever evidence is left as admissible in a retrial is enough to convict him again



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 398 ✭✭vswr


    If Graham Dwyer gets out, someone who AGS had even more evidence on, then Joe O'Reilly will be out by default.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭TokTik


    Can you be tried for the same crime twice in Ireland? I know some places have double jeopardy laws.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,141 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    I'm gonna bet my house Dwyer had the intention of murder

    Not to relitigate the case but no cause of death was established.

    I imagine if Dwyer were to get his retrial his legal team would be hard pressing for a complete change in tactics.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    I don’t see why I would have to justify my interest in this case to you.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,187 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    You're in a discussion and seem to be hoping he gets off. It's reasonable for posters to be curious on what you believe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,933 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    O'Reilly's case pre-dates the EU legislation around retention of mobile phone data.

    The core of the data protection issue relates to meta data they got from the phone company(s) about phone usage - where the phone was, and how it was used (voice call, text message, data). This is the data that comes under the EU legislation which Ireland effectively ignored. We had no controls around how long the data was kept and how it could be accessed by AGS or others.

    Data about the content of the text messages would have come from the phones gathered as evidence in the normal ways, and isn't in dispute afaik.

    The point about cross referencing the Galway toll bridge usage with mobile phone tracking was a key breakthrough in linking him with the burner phone iirc. This could be undermined if they make their case about our cavalier attitude to data protection laws.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,763 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    I honestly don’t know but if memory serves weren’t double jeopardy laws updated anyway some years ago to allow for a retrial where there was substantial evidence ? I could be wrong though

    If the conviction is over turned he’s obviously deemed “innocent” in the eyes of the law but what then I don’t know - does new evidence have to be found like DNA or something in order for a new trial to go ahead?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 398 ✭✭vswr


    correct... But, as it is a circumstantial evidence conviction, we can safely say this outdoor picnic was going to be a one way affair for everyone but Dwyer.

    I know we're going to have the overly pedantic law interpreters here, but, lets call a spade a spade here.


    Ah interesting, I thought it did go back that far, because AGS had actually used it in other cases, but never brought it to court, to 1) not show they had the capability and 2) because the laws around lawful intercept were very much in their infancy.

    The legislation wasn't ignored, but, it wasn't as watertight as it is now.... AGS were definitely in the grey area with it, as with a lot of this case, there was a lot of evidence that didn't make it to court due to the grey area element of a lot of it (utilising tactics which were used to track paramilitaries etc....).

    I don;t see how it can be appealed successfully, but, if it does, a lot of cases (particularly gang related) will come into dispute.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,128 ✭✭✭✭suvigirl


    Did they not deal with the issue of unlawfully obtained evidence in JC?

    something about it not being conscious and deliberate? I may be getting mixed up



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,594 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    the poster has a history of supporting men who commit violence against women. make of that what you will.



  • Registered Users Posts: 361 ✭✭Cheddar Bob


    Dwyer is arguably more dangerous if he was released now than he was then.


    What prevented him doing a Larry Murpjhy every few months was what he had to lose- his wife, kids, well paying status job, home in one of Ireland's most exclusive locales.


    He would today be released to a world of no family, living with his parents or else being ran from town to town by vigilantes, life on the dole (unless the Saudis are mad enough to give him work on a project perhaps but I seriously doubt they're that hard up).


    With nothing to lose he's a bigger risk than he ever was.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,093 ✭✭✭Pauliedragon


    Is Dwyer getting legal aid for these appeals. The bill must be huge by now and talk of heading to European courts.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 398 ✭✭vswr


    there were suggestions from his fetlife profile that he attempted to escalate other meetings in a manner of how he did with Elaine, scaring some off, but, others were never accounted for (not suggesting they're dead, they just never found out who there were and the extent of the relationship).



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    This is always to be expected, and supports the suggestion that O’Hara, unlike others, had agreed to go further.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,897 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Doesn't mean she agreed to be put in danger of death: she may have been a bit more naive, or a bit more vulnerable to forceful persuasion than those other women, or the previous refusals from other women may mean that Dwyer could just have got better at learning what to say to make his demands sound reasonable.

    Reem Alsalem UNSR Violence against Women & Girls:"Very concerned about statements by the IOC at Paris2024 (M)ultiple international treaties and national constitutions specifically refer to women & their fundamental rights, so the world (understands) what women -and men- are. (H)ow can one assess fairness and justice if we do not know who we are being fair and just to?"



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    Yes of course, but at the end of the day we can only assume either way.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,897 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    We don't normally assume that anyone has consented to being killed by someone else without VERY strong evidence. The killer assuring us that they did isn't usually considered relevant.

    We also don't normally assume that someone who is killed accidentally by someone else consented to being put at risk of death. That's why the charge of homicide exists.

    Reem Alsalem UNSR Violence against Women & Girls:"Very concerned about statements by the IOC at Paris2024 (M)ultiple international treaties and national constitutions specifically refer to women & their fundamental rights, so the world (understands) what women -and men- are. (H)ow can one assess fairness and justice if we do not know who we are being fair and just to?"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,899 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Yes, they did, but Dwyer's trial predated the JC judgment. An issue raised in the appeal was whether Dwyer's conviction was unsafe because his trial wasn't conducted in the way that the Supreme Court held, in JC, trials like that ought to be conducted.

    But that goes to my point. No trials have been conducted in that way since 2015. So even if (which I don't expect) the Supreme Court finds Dwyer's conviction to be unsafe on this ground, the only people who could say that this has implications for their own convictions and they ought to be released would be people tried before 2015, but still in prison (which is not a huge group of people) — and, even then, only those of them whose convictions rested in part on evidence that raised JC-type issues, which would be a small fraction of that group.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 743 ✭✭✭marilynrr


    There was videos taken from his hard drive shown to the jury during the trial of him stabbing women during sex.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 743 ✭✭✭marilynrr


    If Graham Dwyer had a woman tied up suffering then he wasn't leaving her overnight where he couldn't watch. He would have stayed and relished every moment. He clearly killed her and watched her die. It was clear from the text messages how much his excitement was building that he was finally going to get to kill a woman.

    If there was even a tiny chance he didn't intend to kill her. I don't believe that for a second but let's say there was a 1 in a billion chance, I guarantee his only thought when he would have came back to find her dead wouldn't have been "oh **** she died" it would have been "I can't believe she died and I didn't get to watch".



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    I only said she agreed to “go further”, which she did as is evident from the text messages. None of us know what exactly she thought was going to happen. But it was a consensual fetish play involving cutting and stabbing after all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,858 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    I’m all for playing devils advocate, but you cannot seriously believe that she consented to being killed just to bring him some pleasure.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    I didn’t say that. She agreed to get stabbed though. There is a chance that this was an elaborate blood kink play that got out of hand and he tried to cover it up.

    Anyway, the interesting part is the Supreme Court ruling now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,594 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 398 ✭✭vswr


    You haven't read the evidence have you? There was numerous cases of O'Hara stating she thought he went too far on previous occurrences and was afraid he would seriously hurt her.

    Not kink shaming at all, and not saying at some point there was consensual actions (even if this is open to interpretation due to O'Hara's known mental state).

    But, if someone expresses fear for their safety in sexual play, and the perpetrator continues to ignore this in a coercive manner, which then results in that persons death, that is murder.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    Her fetish was not cutting, but chains. Which he indulged just as far as it allowed him to claim cutting in return. Elaine complained to her friend at the clinic she was attending that a male friend was insisting on cuts that she did not enjoy, and that he went too far. She also complained the same to Graham in some of the phone messages and fetlife messages that were quoted in evidence. She "broke it off" with him for this reason. But he seduced her back into the relationship with soft words and promises, and she was flattered.

    Yes, she was easy to exploit and coerce. The poor girl was pressured relentlessly, and she was in a vulnerable mental state. He treated her with the most heartless disregard for her dignity or safety, he used her like an object. It was WICKED.

    And there's no doubt at all that he did it. He deserves to be jailed for the rest of his life and never, ever be let near respectable people again.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement