The former boards.ie member will be remaining in jail https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2023/0324/1366017-graham-dwyer/
Correct. I should have been more precise.
The thing is, you try to be a devil's advocate on all these topics on a constant basis....
If he gets off on this will he get compo?
It's completely black and white. It's only you yourself that is trying to obscure premeditated murder with waffle of consent. Which has no legal basis as you fully know well.
You can actually, but you can’t consent to someone causing ‘serious harm’ to you
“Black and White”?
Seriously- you’ve admitted that he killed her - just what part of murder do you not understand?
I agree that she was vulnerable. All I stated was that that she went along with it. What may or may not have been coercion is speculation and I I don’t think it is relevant now. There is no doubt that he killed her but I don’t think it’s as black and white as people make it out to be.
As I said earlier I am more interested in the court ruling now.
you can't consent to somebody else assaulting you either.
Not to mention that consenting to your own murder has sod all legal binding anyway.
So? She didn’t consent to being killed.
He killed her and then - at the very least - covered up her death. There are elements that indicate that he planned it.
That’s murder.
From everything you've heard, do you believe she gave informed consent to be harmed?
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.
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.
You can't consent to your own murder.
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.
I’m all for playing devils advocate, but you cannot seriously believe that she consented to being killed just to bring him some pleasure.
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.
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".
There was videos taken from his hard drive shown to the jury during the trial of him stabbing women during sex.
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.
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.
Yes of course, but at the end of the day we can only assume either way.
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.
This is always to be expected, and supports the suggestion that O’Hara, unlike others, had agreed to go further.
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).
Is Dwyer getting legal aid for these appeals. The bill must be huge by now and talk of heading to European courts.
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.
the poster has a history of supporting men who commit violence against women. make of that what you will.
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
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.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
