QuoteYeah,i saw that too,how they can get away with it,is what amazes meOriginally Posted by Soko
The Sun is a joke.
I think they also ran a story saying that WOD was having gay sex in a shed in Portlaoise prison with some 26 year old convicted sex offender. I mean ffs, they should be put out of business for that filth.
Yeah,i saw that too,how they can get away with it,is what amazes me
Stories like that helps to sell newspapers.
Never play leapfrog with a unicorn!!
The Sun can run whatever stories they like about Wayne O'Donoghue thanks to th laws of libel. Libel laws state that you cannot discredit or publish stories that may harm the repuation of an induvudual, or individuals. In O'Donoghues case, being convicted of manslaughter protects the sun from libel charges because the lad's reputation is already seen as irreparably damaged according to a court of law.
It's why they write rubbish about Myra Hindley, Ian Huntley, Fred West, and other notorious killers.
The Tribune had some stuff about how the test used in this instance has been called hyper-sensitive (i.e. prone to false positives) and as quite unreliable by an expert in an Australian case. I didn't read the details yet though.
You can't spell failure without FAI
It'll be interesting to see whether the case is taken. Big difference between killing a child through what the judge described as "horseplay" and being accused of being a paedophile.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
the way i see it, mrs hoolihan abused the spirit of the victim impact statement to put evidence, that rightly or wrongly, was not deemed relevant and/or appropriate in front of the jury. she got short shrift from the courts over this, so resorted to a ham fisted effort to leak details of the case to the press.
i understand she is grieving, but its unnacceptable behaviour, and thats coming from someone who has little faith in the criminal justice system. it might be slightly different if he walked on the chages., but the reality is he was jailed for the longest time realistically possible.
Its also a long time since the incident occured so she can't claim heat of the moment. Tabloids will always sensationalise so don't expect much facts there.
all they have to say is a source said and in this country you dont have to reveal your sources , its to protect jornalists but is just abused by the rags .
there sorce could be a crazy drunk bum on the street if he says WOD is having gay sex in a shack in jail then they can print it as ....a source says ...............
since when do jails have gay shacks ????
I Said on here at the time of the verdict that something didn't seem right about the relationship between robert and wayne and was shot down by the majority of posters I think I've been vindicated you know what they say no smoke without fire
I would like to nominate Majella Holohan for Irish Woman of the Year 2006 and it is not even February. Reason being is that she stood up in court and went against protocol to deliver her victim impact statement directly from her heart; not a cosmetically dressed up statement drawn up by a solicitor and I admire for what she has done. Not many people would have the courage to question the Irish Criminal Justice System within a court chamber and I toff my hat to her. The hurt she is going through would remind me of the hurt of the families of the 96 Martyrs of Hillsborough in 1989, and to this day, the Liverpool families have not got the justice they have deserved. The Robert Holohan case would be perfect material for Jimmy McGovern, a Liverpool writer famous for the Cracker and Hillsborough docu-drama films.
Never play leapfrog with a unicorn!!
She could have choosen to take a legal challenge against the Public prosecutors? or even a civil case against the convicted?
I've no reason to defend anyone but does seem cowardly to mention issues that were excluded as facts for a reason...?
How have you been vindicated? He wasn't convicted of anything bar manslaughter and none of this evidence was even brought into the case by the prosecution.
Vindicated by a court of law proving your opinion to be the truth? Can you point me to the court case and the verdict please? Ta very much.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
bull****. she threw a temper tantrum because the courts didnt do exactly what she wanted.
then she used the press to label him a paedophile.
she isnt some martyr to the facesless amchine that is the irish justice system, she is a bitter lady with an agenda.
good post. the more I read about it the more I think Mrs Hoolahan in her post verdict comments behaved in a disgraceful way. Altho its hard to be too critical of someone who has been thru so much. very conflicting emotions on this one!
You are as bad as the tabloids
To make a grossly dangerous assumption based on your ignorant opinions is symptomatic of the uneducated, ill-informed and factually-blind people in society....they say "variety is the spice of life" and "everyone's different" but this is ignorance in it's purest form....
"Inflatable hammers and Leprechaun suits, & a chorus of "Here we go" or Olé, Olé"....
You need to look at this from a wide angle as well.
If there is no respect for due process we run a dangerous risk of bringing down the whole judicial system.
The system is not just something that has been thrown together like a government-commissioned health report. It's proceedings are there to see justice is done using a carefully constructed forum.
The addendum to her VIS may only serve to undermine or possibly remove the same opportunity for future victims. If you think that a solicitor draws up the Statement -you're wrong a VIS is supposed to come from the victim(s) - that's why they have been introduced. In the future the court registrar will probably have to read these out as the victim's now cannot be trusted to stay within the confines of this privilige. This may mean that future victims will not be able to speak "from...the... heart" as you put it.
As a state we cannot have a situation where a case is tried with the DPP present (which some people seem to forget), a full book of evidence, a jury and a fair trial overseen by a qualified judge and then have nonfactual stories/convictions published about the defendant in the public press. Now which part of due process are you not satisfied with???? If you ever find yourself on the defence side of a case I guarantee you will be the FIRST person who would want to see a fair trial and due process and then, for example, after a conviction have reems of rubbish printed about you!!!!
Open your eyes to the FULL FACTUAL story before making emotional statements that are not based on fact. Every victim will always have unanswered questions but due process must be at the top.
Last edited by Tired&Emotional; 01/02/2006 at 12:08 PM.
"Inflatable hammers and Leprechaun suits, & a chorus of "Here we go" or Olé, Olé"....
I am referring to FACT that semen was found on roberts body
the reason this FACT was not permissable as evidence as there was not a 100% certainty that a DNA match to w o'd could be made. This has been confirmed on radio 1 by a representative of the DPP.
I feel vindicated because I raised the issue of someone of waynes age having a close friendship with an 11 yr old as suspicious and was practically laughed of the thread it now appears that -and i know its circumstancial evividence-I may well have been right
not quite a conclusive vindication then
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks