Graham Dwyer court case READ FIRST POST BEFORE POSTING

Roquentin · 25-04-2015 07:59PM

realdanbreen wrote: »

Why don't you,you don't appear to be exactly having a whale of a time on the outside!

you are talking to a computer screen

Dwarf.Shortage · 25-04-2015 08:02PM

Roquentin wrote: »

you are talking to a computer screen

As are you.

Roquentin · 25-04-2015 08:05PM

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

As are you.

as are you

Dwarf.Shortage · 25-04-2015 08:06PM

Roquentin wrote: »

as are you

He started it.

Danbo! · 25-04-2015 11:05PM

Sala wrote: »

I Thought I read an article before the trial saying he was suffering mentally after he killed her, but I can't seem to find it and it doesn't seem to fit in with everything saying he showed no remorse? Did anyone else read that? I presume that would have been an element of the trial so I must be mistaken or the article/blog was

Yes but nothing was said about it during the trial. It was before he was identified in the media, when lots of small details were coming out about him.

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/texts-on-married-businessmans-phone-linked-him-to-elaine-ohara-29670257.html

"The man who was arrested yesterday had been been getting frequent medical attention in the aftermath of the discovery of Elaine's body."

Dwarf.Shortage · 25-04-2015 11:08PM

Danbo! wrote: »

Yes but nothing was said about it during the trial. It was before he was identified in the media, when lots of small details were coming out about him. I also remember reading it was St John of Gods, but cannot find that particular article.

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/texts-on-married-businessmans-phone-linked-him-to-elaine-ohara-29670257.html

"The man who was arrested yesterday had been been getting frequent medical attention in the aftermath of the discovery of Elaine's body."

In the aftermath of her body being discovered, the thought of getting caught obviously shook him. There's no evidence he required any care in the 12 months after murdering her when he thought he was getting away with it.

Allyall · 25-04-2015 11:19PM

So how was he getting treatment for, a week?

Possibly a month at most.

strandroad · 25-04-2015 11:24PM

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

In the aftermath of her body being discovered, the thought of getting caught obviously shook him.

When you think about it, it could have been what convinced his wife about his guilt.

Turtwig · 25-04-2015 11:33PM

Danbo! wrote: »

Yes but nothing was said about it during the trial. It was before he was identified in the media, when lots of small details were coming out about him.

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/texts-on-married-businessmans-phone-linked-him-to-elaine-ohara-29670257.html

"The man who was arrested yesterday had been been getting frequent medical attention in the aftermath of the discovery of Elaine's body."

That's so weird that they didn't mention it.
Surely a plausible scenario could have been that he was distraught at the discovery of her death. He cared deeply about Elaine and he was in fact innocent of her murder. Unable to think straight in the immediate aftermath and when questioned by Gardai.

Why the fck wouldn't you mention that?

Dwarf.Shortage · 25-04-2015 11:35PM

Turtwig wrote: »

That's so weird that they didn't mention it.
Surely a plausible scenario could have been that he was distraught at the discovery of her death. He cared deeply about Elaine and he was in fact innocent of her murder. Unable to think straight in the immediate aftermath and when questioned by Gardai.

Why the fck wouldn't you mention that?

Because it's in no way plausible as evidenced by the recovered text messages.

Turtwig · 25-04-2015 11:39PM

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

Because it's in no way plausible as evidenced by the recovered text messages.

I disagree. You could argue that in fantasy role play settings, he was just in part of an act. Get a dozen BDSM'ers to testify that ethics don't always have make sense in the fantasy role-plays. He also thought Elaine was just "acting" her part.

For a trial so heavily based on circumstantial evidence, surely the strategy would be to try to sow the seeds of doubt wherever possible. It wouldn't have to be entirely plausible, it would have just to be enough to plant seeds of doubt.

Seems a bizarre omission by the defence to me.

Dwarf.Shortage · 25-04-2015 11:45PM

Turtwig wrote: »

Get a dozen BDSM'ers to testify that ethics don't always have make sense in the fantasy role-plays.

It's not a question of ethics. If Elaine O'Hara had signed a contract with him saying he had permission to kill her and he had done so he would still be guilty of murder. There is no ethics loophole nor a "her role in our BDSM relationship was to let me stab her to death" loophole.

Allyall · 25-04-2015 11:50PM

He was arrested a week after her body was discovered. I don't think she was identified until 5 or 6 days after, or at least, the Public didn't know.
So I doubt he could've said it was because he was upset. If anything, it may have made him look more guilty, as he was the only person that knew where she was.

Turtwig · 25-04-2015 11:53PM

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

It's not a question of ethics. If Elaine O'Hara had signed a contract with him saying he had permission to kill her and he had done so he would still be guilty of murder. There is no ethics loophole nor a "her role in our BDSM relationship was to let me stab her to death" loophole.

You spectacularly missed the point.

It was in relation to the text messages. Point out that fantasies aren't the same as reality. Graham, loved Elaine and thought she was just playing along too. It's just another plausible story - made even stronger if you got a public "celeb" expert on these things to make that point in front of the jury.

The point is that there was no direct evidence linking him to her death. Only indirect stuff and it looks like his defence team made a piss poor effort in actually attempting to provide other plausible explanations for those items.

Dwarf.Shortage · 25-04-2015 11:57PM

Turtwig wrote: »

Point out that fantasies aren't the same as reality.

Difficult in the presence of resounding evidence that he had prolifically acted on his fantasy, evidence he was kind enough to keep on the hard drive of his computer, one of the first places anyone would look if he was under investigation.

NachoBusiness · 26-04-2015 12:21AM

Turtwig wrote: »

The point is that there was no direct evidence linking him to her death. Only indirect stuff and it looks like his defence team made a piss poor effort in actually attempting to provide other plausible explanations for those items.

But they would know that any argument that they made would be so easily torn apart given that the sim cards and phones were found together. Had they been found in separate places and had Dwyer made calls from the master sim to the slave sim after that last time she was seen alive, even if to just give the impression that he believed her to be alive, then the argument you put forth could well be argued by the defense but the fact that he never used the sim again in any way and it was found along with the other one is really the smoking gun here, if there can be such a thing with circumstantial evidence, and I believe there can.

Dwarf.Shortage · 26-04-2015 12:28AM

NachoBusiness wrote: »

But they would know that any argument that they made would be so easily torn apart given that the sim cards and phones were found together. Had they been found in separate places and had Dwyer made calls from the master sim to the slave sim after that last time she was seen alive, even if to just give the impression that he believed her to be alive, then the argument you put forth could well be argued by the defense but the fact that he never used the sim again in any way and it was found along with the other one is really the smoking gun here, if there can be such a thing with circumstantial evidence, and I believe there can.

That's an excellent point, if he'd held onto the master phone and sent a few texts to the slave phone over the week or two after the murder, normal at first then asking if she was ok etc when she wasn't replying. All he has to say then is "yeah I met her down there to have sex but she was off the rails talking about committing suicide and I told her to calm down then she stormed off."

Proving that wasn't true with the circumstantial evidence they had would be tough, hindsight is 20/20 I suppose.

Allyall · 26-04-2015 02:21AM

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

That's an excellent point, if he'd held onto the master phone and sent a few texts to the slave phone over the week or two after the murder, normal at first then asking if she was ok etc when she wasn't replying. All he has to say then is "yeah I met her down there to have sex but she was off the rails talking about committing suicide and I told her to calm down then she stormed off."

Proving that wasn't true with the circumstantial evidence they had would be tough, hindsight is 20/20 I suppose.

He thought the phones were 'untraceable', as they weren't even in his name. So he may have been better off sticking to the "That's not my phone, I know nothing about it".
Except, he seems to have brought it everywhere with him. That was entirely circumstantial. The phone went where he went, ergo it was his phone.

As for "hindsight is 20/20". He thought he had everything covered, including not burying her (As the wildlife would do a better job of disposing, and it could be claimed accidental, natural or suicide.).

I'd say, and I hope he is kicking himself every day, that he didn't completely destroy those phones.
That will chip away over time.

sadie06 · 26-04-2015 11:20AM

Allyall wrote: »

.
Except, he seems to have brought it everywhere with him. That was entirely circumstantial. The phone went where he went, ergo it was his phone.

That, and the fact that given the content of the messages, if it wasn't his phone it would have to be a clone of his that owned it, i.e a model-plane-flying architect called Graham with two children, one of whom was born on the day his second child was.

With regards to his carelessness in disposing of incriminating evidence, I think his strict adherence to leading a double life and the demands on his time that this caused played a part in it.

Some of his most appalling texts (such as the ones where he repeatedly offers to end Elaine's misery) are appointment style "I can fit you in on Thursday afternoon" etc, and we know his regular window for indulging his hobby was his unquestioned time away from family.

My own feeling is that he didn't allow enough time to carry out anything further, so eager was he to get back to family and normal life. He arrogantly did as his texts suggested, 'fitted it in' to his regular schedule.

coL · 28-04-2015 09:50AM

Can someone explain to me why it was necessary for the prosecution to spend so much time and effort (weeks of testimony) going into such detail about the sexual aspects of this case? Genuine question.

I get that they may have needed to show what he was like and establish his character/depravity, but surely the level of evidence and the time spent presenting it was not required to show what type of person he was and what he was into? Why could they not just establish that they were into some kinky stuff and leave it at that, was the quantity of evidence they presented really required?

Listening to the details of the case each day on the radio it seemed to me that a lot of what was presented was not directly relevant to the actual material facts of the case. I couldn't believe it when the defence finished so quickly by comparison.

stickybookmark · 28-04-2015 10:09AM

sully2010 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what Graham Dwyers defense was? That it was an accidental stabbing or she stabbed herself? Haven't heard much about what his defense was.

His defence took up one afternoon. It was the 2 sheep farmers saying they had no record/recollection of any dead sheep around the flying club during the time in question and a frankly quite heartbreaking account given by a lady that saw EOH in the graveyard shortly before she went to meet GD and EOH was doubled over sobbing near a grave

I assume the latter was to indicate suicide. Just highlighted to me how evil it was for GD to take advantage of someone so vulnerable. And must have been awful for her family to know that in her final moments she was so upset.

Dolbert · 28-04-2015 10:11AM

coL wrote: »

Can someone explain to me why it was necessary for the prosecution to spend so much time and effort (weeks of testimony) going into such detail about the sexual aspects of this case? Genuine question.

I get that they may have needed to show what he was like and establish his character/depravity, but surely the level of evidence and the time spent presenting it was not required to show what type of person he was and what he was into? Why could they not just establish that they were into some kinky stuff and leave it at that, was the quantity of evidence they presented really required?

Listening to the details of the case each day on the radio it seemed to me that a lot of what was presented was not directly relevant to the actual material facts of the case. I couldn't believe it when the defence finished so quickly by comparison.

It was the State's case that Dwyer stabbed O'Hara to death for his own sexual gratification. The onus was on the prosecution to prove that he killed her in that way, for those reasons. It was extremely relevant to the prosecution.

Ash.J.Williams · 28-04-2015 10:21AM

coL wrote: »

Can someone explain to me why it was necessary for the prosecution to spend so much time and effort (weeks of testimony) going into such detail about the sexual aspects of this case? Genuine question.

I get that they may have needed to show what he was like and establish his character/depravity, but surely the level of evidence and the time spent presenting it was not required to show what type of person he was and what he was into? Why could they not just establish that they were into some kinky stuff and leave it at that, was the quantity of evidence they presented really required?

Listening to the details of the case each day on the radio it seemed to me that a lot of what was presented was not directly relevant to the actual material facts of the case. I couldn't believe it when the defence finished so quickly by comparison.

Well matlock, i guess where you have a case based 100% on circumstantial evidence, very single thread of that evidence needs to be before the jury or a future serial walks free

haveringchick · 28-04-2015 11:46AM

coL wrote: »

Can someone explain to me why it was necessary for the prosecution to spend so much time and effort (weeks of testimony) going into such detail about the sexual aspects of this case? Genuine question.

I get that they may have needed to show what he was like and establish his character/depravity, but surely the level of evidence and the time spent presenting it was not required to show what type of person he was and what he was into? Why could they not just establish that they were into some kinky stuff and leave it at that, was the quantity of evidence they presented really required?

Listening to the details of the case each day on the radio it seemed to me that a lot of what was presented was not directly relevant to the actual material facts of the case. I couldn't believe it when the defence finished so quickly by comparison.

The prosecution had no forensics, no cause of death. They had to prove that GODwyer was a sadistic monster addicted to BDSM . They had to exhaust every last piece of circumstantial evidence available to them.
If the content offended your sensibilities you should have moved the dial to LyricFM

Larbre34 · 28-04-2015 11:52AM

Its a big misconception about trials. The defence is conducted throughout the trial, defence evidence may just be one or two witnesses that the prosecutor has no particular interest in, hence it can be very short.

discodiva92 · 28-04-2015 03:00PM

When can he appeal?

Ash.J.Williams · 28-04-2015 03:36PM

discodiva92 wrote: »

When can he appeal?

he probably is now

BattleCorp · 28-04-2015 03:57PM

I'm saying it now. I think he will be freed upon appeal.

I hope I'm wrong because I think he did it but there is no smoking gun in this case.

To be honest, there's no real evidence that anybody killed her.

There is evidence that he wanted to stab her and maybe kill her, but that doesn't prove 100% that he actually did kill her.

Hopefully I am wrong and he rots in jail.

JillyQ · 28-04-2015 04:03PM

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm saying it now. I think he will be freed upon appeal.

I hope I'm wrong because I think he did it but there is no smoking gun in this case.

To be honest, there's no real evidence that anybody killed her.

There is evidence that he wanted to stab her and maybe kill her, but that doesn't prove 100% that he actually did kill her.

Hopefully I am wrong and he rots in jail.[/quote

I hope you are wrong but unfortunately i dont think you are.]

snoopy12 · 28-04-2015 04:34PM

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

he probably is now

is it something like a window of 21 days after sentencing in which he can appeal?

Graham Dwyer court case *READ FIRST POST BEFORE POSTING*

Comments

Graham Dwyer court case READ FIRST POST BEFORE POSTING