Graham Dwyer court case *READ FIRST POST BEFORE POSTING*

RGDATA! wrote: »

he wasn't convicted of murder and didn't get a life sentence, so not comparable really as you say.

The average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is 18 years. There's not much reason to believe that Dwyer will serve less time than average for this kind of sentence - on the contrary.

correction: average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is actually 20 years now.

What are you basing this on? Life terms handed down, and including the amount of time served by the likes of McArthur? We can all google ya'know?

His sentence will be reviewed in 8 years time, that's a fact, he could be released at that stage.

Assuming that he is not deemed suitable for release, he'll get a review every 3 years, that's also a fact.

The average time (of late) has been skewed by those serving inordinately long life terms.

take everything wrote: »

I agree.
I'm a bit puzzled by people describing the coverage as too much tbh.
Some of it was unnecessary but i thought it was a good eye opener that guys like this piece of **** exist and how they prey on vulnerable people.

And to understand the case, a lot of the detail was necessary.
Are people saying it was too much because it was titillating.
You'd have to be fairly weird to find it titillating tbh.
Psychologically interesting and informative, but titillating?

I love a good murder mystery novel. I also love the likes of Criminal Minds, Bones and SVU type whodunnits. Never find them titillating - and if I did I'd be very worried indeed, but the forensics and investigation process interests me. This case relied heavily on those as there was no established cause of death, no confession, no witnesses to the crime.

I'm not saying that the coverage was too much - though some rags did go a bit far at times - just that it presents very awkward questions if you have a kid of an age where they understand the mechanics of sex but will ask you about the extreme forms of fetishes and the like that were described in the bulletins. I'd dread trying to explain in an age appropriate manner what bondage, bdsm, and bloodletting fetishes were to a kid that age. A simple "the following report contains content of an adult nature" before reading the bulletin would suffice.

Omackeral wrote: »

I'll take some of that bet. There's people locked up for over 20 years at present for more 'normal' murders ie they didn't attract half as much attention or were as sordid. I'd imagine it's Arbour Hill for Mr Dwyer as there was an overt sexual element to his crime. Anywhere else and he'd be destroyed in general population is imagine.

you really think he will be allowed out at the first opportunity?

It appears that Dwyer will appeal pretty soon to the Court of Criminal Appeal.

This article in the Journal is very informative, and sets out the possible grounds for appeal, and what the Court of Appeal can decide.

http://www.thejournal.ie/graham-dwyer-appeal-2053910-Apr2015/

murpho999 wrote: »

Don't agree that your perceived judge's bias is a factor for an appeal as he was convicted by a jury not the judge.
He can only appeal on limited grounds from what I have read and is unlikely to succeed.

The judge's action can play against him, particularly in any direction he gives to the jury. But as you quite rightly point out, since the judge doesn't decide the verdict, the basis of the appeal is on the strength of the evidence or the conduct/bias of the jury.

It's very rare for the latter to come up, but in a case like this filled with entirely circumstantial evidence, all it takes is a few reasonable doubts to order a complete retrial. For example, as the link in the journal quite rightly points out, the videos could very easily be seen to be prejudicial to the jury's attitude towards Dwyer. Just because someone is into bloodletting, doesn't prove they killed or intended to kill anyone. But that could easily create a negative bias in the jurys' minds towards Dwyer.

There's no way in hell an appeal could secure a release, but a retrial isn't out of the question.

He's a cornered animal at this stage, he has absolutely nothing to lose by appealing.

This was such a tragedy. I don't know anything about Elaine O'Hara, her family and friends; the Dwyer family, their family and friends; the people who testified in court, their family and friends. I don't know anything about those people who it might be easy to forget are humans. Yet even though I didn't really try I know just about everything about Elaine's death and those people that helped the carriage of justice's testimony. In many ways, media coverage of Graham Dwyer's actions and interests usurped those of Elaine. The people who testified to convict this killer had very private details exposed and their names and faces splashed across just about every media outlet you could find. The tabloids showed them no compassion or mercy. They showed little to Elaine's family. They just published content that disgusted people, made them outraged at what a monster this killer was - all before he was even convicted. Something his appeal will surely use. We got reports on when Graham O'Dwyer ate with his family. When he was on the late late. When he was talking about mirrors. What plans he had for what weekend. Charlier Brooker parodied that aspect of media reporting better than I ever could so I'm not going to try. I'm just going to paraphrase his rhetoric: Why the fck should we care? Why do we insist in the glorification of monsters rather the empathy towards victims? A human life was lost, yet if you went by the banter I heard and read, the judgements cast upon victims and witnesses alike you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

And there were so many victims in this. Real people, who had their dignity taken from them in so many ways. Hopefully now they can get some of that back - and their lives. One person won't get their life back and most people will only know the apparent ignominious aspects of that life: that's the greatest tragedy. There was a life there. Maybe next time more light could be shed on that?

RIP Elaine.
Thoughts are with the families and friends of all affected by this horrible ordeal.

GD was just an animal. Its as simple as that

Probably the highest profile case since veronica guerin

Mallagio wrote: »

The amount of coincidences in this particular case was unbelievable wasn't it?

Like what? Sorry I don't know much about the case

Mallagio wrote: »

The amount of coincidences in this particular case was unbelievable wasn't it?

deseil wrote: »

It really was mind boggling its like the universe conspired to get him caught, thankfully

a higher power?

i'm usually skeptical about such things but it makes you wonder

From a psychological viewpoint would it be fair to say that an individual who commits a crime like this one is unlikely to be satiated for life by a single occurrence?

It's pretty chilling to think that if all of the coincidences that caught Dwyer out hadn't occurred there's every chance he'd still be lurking around BDSM sites looking for the next troubled submissive he could lure in and manipulate into satisfying his twisted urges.

To be honest I don't even want to think about the possibility that if you go the other way with the time line there may be another victim, like much of the case that thought is so unsettling you wish it wasn't real but that wish goes unanswered. Given Elaine O'Hara's family had tried to make peace with her death assuming it was suicide (Newstalk earlier today) what's to say there isn't another family out there living under that assumption, unaware of the end their loved one truly came to. Would you even want them to know? would you want to know yourself or in the face of an end so bleak, is ignorance bliss?

RIP Elaine O'Hara, a fragile soul who did not deserve to be enveloped by the evil that brought about her end.