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 all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
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

Mairia Cahill vindicated

24567

Comments

  • #52
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    What fact? A claim, unproven and not properly investigated is a fact?

    ..........




    You say 'brought to justice', for what? has anything been proven in a court of law? The claims should have gotten proper investigation. That's why the report is critical of the PSNI. She may or may not have been abused in the eyes of the law. There wasn't a proper investigation. Ms. Cahill did not get the representation she or anyone making such claims deserves. How many degrees did you say?


    I really don't care whether she may or may not have been abused in the eyes of the law.

    I have some really simple questions for you:

    (1) Do you believe that Mairia Cahill was abused?

    (2) Do you believe that Mairia Cahill was abused by a member of SF/IRA?

    (3) Do you believe that the IRA conducted a kangaroo court investigation into her abuse?

    (4) Do you believe that Sinn Fein should account fully for how they handled the accusations of child abuse against their member?


    Yes or no, so fairly simple to answer.


  • #53
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    They turned up last time and released a statement saying they wanted the chance to clear their names. No lie there.

    And the news this morning claimed the defendant was still protesting his innocence.

    Good job there isn't mandatory hanging here on the basis of allegations.


    Last time? When was that, five years ago? You said "it seems" as in present tense. Perhaps you can explain how you are so sure that the defendants want their day in court.

    Well, it is now clear from information only published today that one of the defendants was expelled from Sinn Fein. If you believe in his innocence, are you going to criticise Sinn Fein for their failure to observe due process and expel an innocent man?

    So which is it, Sinn Fein are guilty of infringing an innocent man's rights or the man is a child abuser? Please let us know which option you prefer.


  • #54
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    If you extrapolate the logic contained at post 47 in terms of what they allege the report says, SF have apologised for structural incompetence within the PSNI. Which is, admittedly, an odd thing for SF to apologise about.

    So we know abuse took place and nobody was brought to justice for the abuse. Gotcha.

    Also...something about the PSNI not doing good by Ms. Cahill.


  • #55
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    If not, why did Gerry and Mary Lou apologize to her?

    Read what ML said.

    She apologised because mandatory reporting was not in place. She is also on record as saying it is not SF's place to investigate abuse claims or allegations, and that the IRA should not have been doing it either.


  • #56
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    She apologised because mandatory reporting was not in place.

    Sinn Féin has robust procedures in place for mandatory reporting of abuse. I deeply regret that these procedures were not in place at the time of Máiría Cahill’s disclosure. For this I unreservedly apologise. I wish Máiría Cahill every best wish for the future.

    So ML is saying SF now has robust procedures in place for reporting.

    Given that SF knows something about a member which caused them to expel that member, have they now (under their robust procedures) given all details on that member to the police?


  • #57
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    So we know abuse took place and nobody was brought to justice for the abuse. Gotcha.

    Also...something about the PSNI not doing good by Ms. Cahill.
    Unless you disagree with what seems to be contained in the report based on the statements by PSNI Chief Constable George Hamilton and the leader of Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald, it seems like you're on the right track here.

    Unfortunately, you appear to be incapable of answering some basic questions which have been repeatedly addressed to you on this thread.


  • #58
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    blanch152 wrote: »
    [
    I suspect, that as with the Catholic Church, the truth will have to be dragged out of Sinn Fein, little by little.

    Sinn Fein cannot be permitted to run a 'shadow state'.


  • #59
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Last time? When was that, five years ago? You said "it seems" as in present tense. Perhaps you can explain how you are so sure that the defendants want their day in court.

    Well, it is now clear from information only published today that one of the defendants was expelled from Sinn Fein. If you believe in his innocence, are you going to criticise Sinn Fein for their failure to observe due process and expel an innocent man?

    So which is it, Sinn Fein are guilty of infringing an innocent man's rights or the man is a child abuser? Please let us know which option you prefer.

    Far as I know, it is standard proceedure to suspend anyone if allegations are made.

    This from 8 years ago.
    https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/politics/sinn-fein-not-our-job-to-probe-abuse-claims-109918.html
    The party confirmed one of its representatives is barred from having anything to do with its political activities because the PSNI is investigating allegations of abuse.

    It said its policy is to suspend all members suspected of abuse and pass on the details to the police. It cannot be expected to decide whether a person is guilty or not, it said.
    If it standard procedure of the arty I cannot see what rights were infringed. That is the rule of the organsiation, you accept them or don't join.


  • #60
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Sinn Féin has robust procedures in place for mandatory reporting of abuse. I deeply regret that these procedures were not in place at the time of Máiría Cahill’s disclosure. For this I unreservedly apologise. I wish Máiría Cahill every best wish for the future.

    So ML is saying SF now has robust procedures in place for reporting.

    Given that SF knows something about a member which caused them to expel that member, have they now (under their robust procedures) given all details on that member to the police?

    No idea.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Read what ML said.

    She apologised because mandatory reporting was not in place. She is also on record as saying it is not SF's place to investigate abuse claims or allegations, and that the IRA should not have been doing it either.
    “I welcome the publication of the Ombudsman’s report and the fact that the PSNI have accepted and will implement the recommendations of that report.

    “Abuse has scarred too many lives across Ireland. We all have a responsibility to keep children safe.

    “I have no doubt that the three women at the heart of this report have been through an ordeal.

    “I want to commend their bravery, in particular the bravery of Mairia Cahill for waiving her anonymity.

    “Sinn Féin has robust procedures in place for mandatory reporting of abuse.

    “I deeply regret that these procedures were not in place at the time of Mairia Cahill’s disclosure. For this I unreservedly apologise.

    “I wish Mairia Cahill every best wish for the future.”

    Unless you are reading something differently, MLMcD seems to be saying (a) there was abuse against three victims (b) they have been through an ordeal in relation to that abuse (c) SF believes that its procedures require mandatory reporting of abuse and those procedures were not in place at the time of MC's disclosure.

    I think this is fairly clear that regardless of the perpetrator of said abuse, SF accepts the report that abuse occurred and the victims were failed.


  • #62
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    I think this is fairly clear that regardless of the perpetrator of said abuse, SF accepts the report that abuse occurred and the victims were failed.

    The final step is that they accept that abuse should be dealt with by state bodies. Until we see that final step (cooperation with the state) we should be sceptical.


  • #63
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Unless you are reading something differently, MLMcD seems to be saying (a) there was abuse against three victims (b) they have been through an ordeal in relation to that abuse (c) SF believes that its procedures require mandatory reporting of abuse and those procedures were not in place at the time of MC's disclosure.

    I think this is fairly clear that regardless of the perpetrator of said abuse, SF accepts the report that abuse occurred and the victims were failed.

    I have said befo4re many times that I have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill. However, hers is one side of the story.
    A man and 4 other defendants await their chance at justice/clearing their names with respect to the Mairia Cahill case.

    Personally I want to see that happen.

    I am glad Liam Adams is in jail.

    If Paudie McGahan's alleged abuser is found guilty in a court of law, he too should go to jail.


  • #64
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I have said befo4re many times that I have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill. However, hers is one side of the story.
    A man and 4 other defendants await their chance at justice/clearing their names with respect to the Mairia Cahill case.
    I'm glad you have come to that realisation, but it seemed that you (like another poster on here) rejected what seems to be a finding of abuse in the report on the basis that nobody was convicted of abuse.

    As I said, just because a person is not convicted of rape does not mean that the victim was not raped. It may mean that the incorrect person was tried, that the prosecution failed to meet the standard of proof, that the jury failed to reach the correct verdict or that the state and its servants were grossly incompetent in collecting and storing evidence resulting in an inability to conduct a proper trial.

    I agree with you, and have at all times made it clear that the alleged perpetrator of that crime is irrelevant in terms of the findings which appear to be contained in the report. One can accept that a victim was abused whilst awaiting the courts to determine whether any or all of the alleged perpetrators were guilty of the abuse.


  • #65
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Far as I know, it is standard proceedure to suspend anyone if allegations are made.

    This from 8 years ago.
    https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/politics/sinn-fein-not-our-job-to-probe-abuse-claims-109918.html

    It said its policy is to suspend all members suspected of abuse and pass on the details to the police. It cannot be expected to decide whether a person is guilty or not, it said.
    If it standard procedure of the arty I cannot see what rights were infringed. That is the rule of the organsiation, you accept them or don't join.


    I think that is a different case because it involves a public representative.

    Then again, I could be wrong. There are so many cases of child abuse involving Sinn Fein and the IRA that it is hard to keep track. A bit like remembering which diocese had covered up what.


  • #66
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I have said befo4re many times that I have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill.


    Saying that you have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill is not the same as saying that you actively believe her.

    There is a certain element of Schrodinger's Sinn Fein about you, trying to believe two different and opposing things at the same time. If you believe Mairia Cahill, then you believe she was abused by members of the IRA and Sinn Fein, put in front of a kangaroo trial organised by Gerry Adams, and made to face her absuer.

    I have listened to her story, I have listened to Gerry and other SF apologists on the subject, and there is no question in my mind - I believe her completely.

    She is a credible speaker, and on the balance of probabilities - sufficient in a civil court case - I have no doubt that everything that she says happened to her is true.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Unless you disagree with what seems to be contained in the report based on the statements by PSNI Chief Constable George Hamilton and the leader of Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald, it seems like you're on the right track here.

    You are wrong.
    What peaked my interest was a report criticising the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints being used to get a dig at SF. It's using Ms. Cahill and her claims for point scoring.
    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Unfortunately, you appear to be incapable of answering some basic questions which have been repeatedly addressed to you on this thread.

    This is an exaggeration. You asked me about my legal qualifications. I've not made any claims. I do not intend on giving over personal information online to anonymous sources.


  • #68
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    You are wrong.
    What peaked my interest was a report criticising the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints being used to get a dig at SF. It's using Ms. Cahill and her claims for point scoring.
    I'm still not convinced you have seen the report.

    This is an exaggeration. You asked me about my legal qualifications.
    Yeah, I seem to recall that was right after you made a silly statement regarding mine...
    I've not made any claims. I do not intend on giving over personal information online to anonymous sources.
    So none then. Cool.


  • #69
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    I'm still not convinced you have seen the report.



    Yeah, I seem to recall that was right after you made a silly statement regarding mine...

    So none then. Cool.

    Incorrect again. I asked had you no grasp of the law, based on your comments.
    I've 5 law degrees...or do I? Pointless grandstanding. My ego needs no such boost.


  • #70
    Pkiernan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,310 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    Havockk wrote: »
    PONI report very damning to PSNI. Yet I've now read about 3 articles and this post who want to focus on SF. Blatant politicking. The real story of course being just how badly the PSNI let a victim down.

    Let's not forget Sinn Fein doing a Catholic Church style cover up of child rapists...


  • #71
    blackwhite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,961 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Incorrect again. I asked had you no grasp of the law, based on your comments.
    I've 5 law degrees...or do I? Pointless grandstanding. My ego needs no such boost.

    Yet it always seems to need the boost of making petty, snide personal digs anytime a question is asked that you want to avoid :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    You are wrong.
    What peaked my interest was a report criticising the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints being used to get a dig at SF. It's using Ms. Cahill and her claims for point scoring.


    .

    The report did more than criticise the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints. It also set out some truths about what happened her, truths that people like you and Francie and Gerry Adams and the rest of the "republican" community have repeatedly denied.

    At the end of the day, Mairia Cahill has been treated very badly by a lot of people.

    She has been treated very badly by the PSNI who failed to investigate her complaints properly. She was treated worse by Sinn Fein who protected her abuser and repeatedly denied any knowledge of her abuse. She was treated worse again by the IRA who subjected her to a kangaroo court and put her in front of her abuser. Finally, she was treated worst of all by the man who abused her, a man who got the full protection of the "republican" community.

    And he wasn't the only one who got the protection of the "republican" community. Liam Adams was another one, helpfully given a job working with children in another jurisdiction to the one in which he committed the abuse, so was Paudie McGahon's abuser, moved on to other safe houses.


  • #73
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Saying that you have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill is not the same as saying that you actively believe her.

    There is a certain element of Schrodinger's Sinn Fein about you, trying to believe two different and opposing things at the same time. If you believe Mairia Cahill, then you believe she was abused by members of the IRA and Sinn Fein, put in front of a kangaroo trial organised by Gerry Adams, and made to face her absuer.

    I have listened to her story, I have listened to Gerry and other SF apologists on the subject, and there is no question in my mind - I believe her completely.

    She is a credible speaker, and on the balance of probabilities - sufficient in a civil court case - I have no doubt that everything that she says happened to her is true.

    I believe Mairia Cahill's story. But that is as far as it goes. If her alleged abuser can prove that she is wrong, then I can no longer believe her.

    There is a side to the story missing here. Unlike others, I am not ready to hang somebody without hearing their side.
    As far as I am aware, Gerry and what you call other SF apologists were not there when the offences are alleged to have taken place.
    Although to listen to some, you would think they were present and actively participating at all these alleged events.


  • #74
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Incorrect again. I asked had you no grasp of the law, based on your comments.
    I've 5 law degrees...or do I? Pointless grandstanding. My ego needs no such boost.
    Actually in this specific instance it is useful information.


  • #75
    Sycamore Tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 796 ✭✭✭Sycamore Tree


    I don't post in Politics much but this story shows exactly why SF wont ever get a sizeable mandate. I like Mary Lou but in my mind SF are still a very dodgy outfit. The lies out of Adams and the way they treated Maria Cahill are just disturbing. Instead of admitting the truth about the child abuse, they tried to destroy her and threw a smokescreen around her. Its like what the Gardai did to McCabe. I am glad Adams is gone but they really need to come clean on all their skeletons.


  • #76
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    The report did more than criticise the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints. It also set out some truths about what happened her, truths that people like you and Francie and Gerry Adams and the rest of the "republican" community have repeatedly denied.

    At the end of the day, Mairia Cahill has been treated very badly by a lot of people.

    She has been treated very badly by the PSNI who failed to investigate her complaints properly. She was treated worse by Sinn Fein who protected her abuser and repeatedly denied any knowledge of her abuse. She was treated worse again by the IRA who subjected her to a kangaroo court and put her in front of her abuser. Finally, she was treated worst of all by the man who abused her, a man who got the full protection of the "republican" community.
    In fairness, a man, and 4 other defendants turned up at the court to defend themselves. He didn't get the chance, the reasons are contained in today's report.
    I know the civil liberties of republicans are not important to some, but they are to me anyway. Everyone has the right to vindicate themselves, regardless of creed or colour or political persuasion.

    And he wasn't the only one who got the protection of the "republican" community. Liam Adams was another one, helpfully given a job working with children in another jurisdiction to the one in which he committed the abuse, so was Paudie McGahon's abuser, moved on to other safe houses.

    Liam Adams is in jail where he should be. His brother has apologised and admitted he did some wrong things in handling that. His party membership accepted that and allowed him continue in his role.

    McGahan's alleged abuser whereabouts was known and was within reach of the Gardai anytime they wanted to prosecute, to date they still haven't mounted a prosecution here. What possible reasons could there be for that?


  • #77
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    I don't post in Politics much but this story shows exactly why SF wont ever get a sizeable mandate. I like Mary Lou but in my mind SF are still a very dodgy outfit. The lies out of Adams and the way they treated Maria Cahill are just disturbing. Instead of admitting the truth about the child abuse, they tried to destroy her and threw a smokescreen around her. Its like what the Gardai did to McCabe. I am glad Adams is gone but they really need to come clean on all their skeletons.

    You can check the relevant thread, but at the start of this, it was SF's fault that the case collapsed in some people's eyes here. They were blocking it apparently.
    As so often is the case, time has brought the truth to the surface, it was a failure of the RUC/PSNI that led to the case collapsing.


  • #78
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You can check the relevant thread, but at the start of this, it was SF's fault that the case collapsed in some people's eyes here. They were blocking it apparently.
    As so often is the case, time has brought the truth to the surface, it was a failure of the RUC/PSNI that led to the case collapsing.


    You are only just short of saying that a member of the RUC committed the abuse.


  • #79
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    blackwhite wrote: »
    Yet it always seems to need the boost of making petty, snide personal digs anytime a question is asked that you want to avoid :rolleyes:

    Snide you say? Medice, cura te ipsum, (Physician, heal thyself).
    marieholmfan wrote: »
    Actually in this specific instance it is useful information.

    Actually it might be if I were pontificating on here claiming to have numerous law degrees and using that claim to support flawed conclusions.

    The PSNI did Ms. Cahill a disservice. Why this thread is more about SF, is low grade political point scoring IMO.


  • #80
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    You are only just short of saying that a member of the RUC committed the abuse.

    Nice try. But that is a complete fabrication. Like many others, the RUC/PSNI had their eyes on somebody else, not the alleged victim at all. The victim never matters to those who want that somebody else.


  • #81
    splinter65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    If you extrapolate the logic contained at post 47 in terms of what they allege the report says, SF have apologised for structural incompetence within the PSNI. Which is, admittedly, an odd thing for SF to apologise about.

    Odd indeed....


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,646 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    They turned up last time and released a statement saying they wanted the chance to clear their names. No lie there.

    And the news this morning claimed the defendant was still protesting his innocence.

    Good job there isn't mandatory hanging here on the basis of allegations.

    Or bullets to the head and a shallow grave like your beloved SF/IRA would dish out.


  • #83
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    This is mad stuff altogether. People in this thread are defending SF’s role in this terrible series of events by placing the blame on the PSNI.


  • #84
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    You mean.like SF/IRA due process?

    Interesting you should mention it because Cahill said to Suzanne Breen in a Sunday Tribune article dated January 2010:
    I never wanted M killed. I wanted him tied to railings in Ballymurphy with a placard around his neck saying he was a rapist.

    Now if this had actually been done, I wonder what would have happened after that? Seems to me she had no problem accepting 'IRA due process' up to a certain point, so her pronouncements on IRA violence are a tad hypocritical to me.


  • #85
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    garhjw wrote: »
    This is mad stuff altogether. People in this thread are defending SF’s role in this terrible series of events by placing the blame on the PSNI.

    eh, I think the PSNI have blamed themselves actually.


  • #86
    Sycamore Tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 796 ✭✭✭Sycamore Tree


    I believe Maria Cahill is telling the whole truth. 100%. Brave woman. She says she is still getting trolled by SF fanatics.

    Q. Do we know the identity of the IRA man who abused her?


  • #87
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Interesting you should mention it because Cahill said to Suzanne Breen in a Sunday Tribune article dated January 2010:



    Now if this had actually been done, I wonder what would have happened after that? Seems to me she had no problem accepting 'IRA due process' up to a certain point, so her pronouncements on IRA violence are a tad hypocritical to me.

    Shocking news: Young woman raped and traumatised, still suffering wants vengenance on her abuser.

    Disgusting victim blaming by another SF apologist.

    FACT: A member of Sinn Fein abused Mairia Cahill
    FACT: The IRA subjected her to a kangaroo court process
    FACT: Sinn Fein protected him, like many other child abusers and rapists
    FACT: The IRA moved child abusers to other jurisdictions as Gerry Adams admitted in a blog post
    FACT: Sinn Fein later expelled the member involved in child abuse
    FACT: Sinn Fein have never passed on the information they have about child abuse to the relevant authorities.


  • #88
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    I believe Maria Cahill is telling the whole truth. 100%. Brave woman. She says she is still getting trolled by SF fanatics.


    We can see that on here, there are quite a few of them engaged in victim-blaming.


  • #89
    piplip87
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,148 ✭✭✭piplip87


    #ibelieveher


  • #90
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    piplip87 wrote: »
    #ibelieveher


    +1


    #ibelieveher


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Shocking news: Young woman raped and traumatised, still suffering wants vengenance on her abuser.

    Disgusting victim blaming by another SF apologist.

    FACT: A member of Sinn Fein abused Mairia Cahill
    FACT: The IRA subjected her to a kangaroo court process
    FACT: Sinn Fein protected him, like many other child abusers and rapists
    FACT: The IRA moved child abusers to other jurisdictions as Gerry Adams admitted in a blog post
    FACT: Sinn Fein later expelled the member involved in child abuse
    FACT: Sinn Fein have never passed on the information they have about child abuse to the relevant authorities.

    Why are you trying to cover up the fact that MC asked that the IRA get involved and attacking a poster for stating the truth?


  • #92
    Sycamore Tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 796 ✭✭✭Sycamore Tree


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Deleted User wrote: »
    Interesting you should mention it because Cahill said to Suzanne Breen in a Sunday Tribune article dated January 2010:



    Now if this had actually been done, I wonder what would have happened after that? Seems to me she had no problem accepting 'IRA due process' up to a certain point, so her pronouncements on IRA violence are a tad hypocritical to me.

    Shocking news: Young woman raped and traumatised, still suffering wants vengenance on her abuser.

    Disgusting victim blaming by another SF apologist.

    FACT: A member of Sinn Fein abused Mairia Cahill
    FACT: The IRA subjected her to a kangaroo court process
    FACT: Sinn Fein protected him, like many other child abusers and rapists
    FACT: The IRA moved child abusers to other jurisdictions as Gerry Adams admitted in a blog post
    FACT: Sinn Fein later expelled the member involved in child abuse
    FACT: Sinn Fein have never passed on the information they have about child abuse to the relevant authorities.

    Do the authorities know who abused Maria Cahill? Was he jailed?


  • #93
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    Do the authorities know who abused Maria Cahill? Was he jailed?

    They know who she alleged to have raped her. No, his trial collapsed. Report today shows why.


  • #94
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Shocking news: Young woman raped and traumatised, still suffering wants vengenance on her abuser.

    Disgusting victim blaming by another SF apologist.

    FACT: A member of Sinn Fein abused Mairia Cahill
    FACT: The IRA subjected her to a kangaroo court process
    FACT: Sinn Fein protected him, like many other child abusers and rapists
    FACT: The IRA moved child abusers to other jurisdictions as Gerry Adams admitted in a blog post
    FACT: Sinn Fein later expelled the member involved in child abuse
    FACT: Sinn Fein have never passed on the information they have about child abuse to the relevant authorities.

    Typical predictable rubbish from you blanch. The fact of the matter is she engaged first with a process you utterly hate to get justice. Nothing you can say can alter this fact.


  • #95
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    Do the authorities know who abused Maria Cahill? Was he jailed?


    Unfortunately, the PSNI made some dreadful disgraceful errors and the case collapsed. This gives an out to the SF defenders on here who repeatedly proclaim the innocence of her abuser.


  • #96
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Unfortunately, the PSNI made some dreadful disgraceful errors and the case collapsed. This gives an out to the SF defenders on here who repeatedly proclaim the innocence of her abuser.

    Sensationalising again? Who claimed he was innocent?


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Sycamore Tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 796 ✭✭✭Sycamore Tree


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    Do the authorities know who abused Maria Cahill? Was he jailed?


    Unfortunately, the PSNI made some dreadful disgraceful errors and the case collapsed. This gives an out to the SF defenders on here who repeatedly proclaim the innocence of her abuser.

    Ok gotcha. One last question. Was the accused well known?


  • #98
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    Ok gotcha. One last question. Was the accused well known?


    Until today, I didn't realise the accused was a Sinn Fein member and that they had known about the abuse for several years while he remained a member.


  • #99
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,987 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    Ok gotcha. One last question. Was the accused well known?

    Why don't you just read the RTE report? All the answers you are looking for are there, including the accussed's name.
    https://www.rte.ie/news/ulster/2018/0912/993382-mairia-cahill/


  • #100
    McMurphy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    I believe Maria Cahill is telling the whole truth. 100%. Brave woman. She says she is still getting trolled by SF fanatics.

    Quick question, how are you so sure she's "100% telling the truth" about something you obviously haven't been following very closely (if at all)?

    The reason I ask this is because you ask this.
    Q. Do we know the identity of the IRA man who abused her?

    I suggest doing a tad more research than just wading in.

    Moving on.

    It would appear that the RUC and PSNI denied Cahill any justice she may have been due. This is pretty scathing.
    The Ombudsman found no evidence that anyone had been protected from prosecution or that the PSNI investigation became subject to adverse political interference.

    Three of the officers recommended for action have been disciplined. The fourth has retired.

    PSNI Chief Constable George Hamilton said the three women were failed by the police.

    "I apologise unequivocally for the hurt and distress caused to them and for the failures in the police investigation," he said.






  • #101
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,327 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    Quick question, how are you so sure she's "100% telling the truth" about something you obviously haven't been following very closely (if at all)?

    The reason I ask this is because you ask this.


    I suggest doing a tad more research than just wading in.

    Moving on.

    It would appear that the RUC and PSNI denied Cahill any justice she may have been due. This is pretty scathing.


    Pretty scathing, I agree with you.

    On a scale of 1-10 of police failures it is close to a 10, one of the worst failings of any police force.

    What is so terrible for Mairia Cahill is that on a scale of 1-10 of what was done to her, it is a 1, with her abuser at 10 and the SF/IRA machine around 8.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement