Beecher Networks - Web Development, Hosting & Domains
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 79 of 79

Thread: Wayne O'Donoghue gets 4 years!

  1. #61
    Banned Roverstillidie's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,377
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    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
    you are implying there was sexual contact between them, something even the DPP and fuzz didnt believe.
    the amount of semen was inconsistant with sexual contact, more likely he used a towel that someone had dried off with after a shower and left residue on.
    bear in mind he wasnt in WO'D's bedroom at 7.30am as was alledged (and again on the steps of the court by ms hoolihan) it was 7.30 pm as the kid had entered the time wrong into his new phone.
    you are sensationalising with facts that were disproven/irrelevant.

  2. #62
    Seasoned Pro Block G Raptor's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ITB campus
    Posts
    3,986
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I dont think the questions raised by majella holohan are irrelevent and they have never been proven or disproven as they were not strong enough for court, that doesn't mean that the evidence was not there to start with
    when I said I felt vindicated it was because when I suggested this on a previous thread I was damn nearly ridiculed, and I think with majella's comments it shows that there is certainly a suspicion of abuse about the incident which was not apparent at the time the verdict was announced

  3. #63
    Seasoned Pro Block G Raptor's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ITB campus
    Posts
    3,986
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Roverstillidie
    DPP and fuzz didnt believe.
    the amount of semen was inconsistant with sexual contact, more likely he used a towel that someone had dried off with after a shower and left residue on
    where did you get this information from? a spokesperson for the DPP speaking
    on morning Ireland on rte radio 1 last week stated that the evidence was not admissable as they could only get a DNA match in the high 80% bracket with WOD. and to permit the evidence would have unfairly influenced the Jury,as with DNA evidence 80-95% matches are considered to be low

  4. #64
    First Team Dr.Nightdub's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Camac terrace, Richmond Park, D8
    Posts
    1,054
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    BGR, the only fact not in dispute in relation to semen was that there was some on his hand. However, whose it was and how it got there could not be conclusively proven one way or the other, hence it wasn't offered as evidence. I defy you to find a reference to "no smoke without fire" in the Rules of Evidence applied by our courts.
    Revenge for 2002

  5. #65
    Banned Roverstillidie's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,377
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    I dont think the questions raised by majella holohan are irrelevent and they have never been proven or disproven as they were not strong enough for court, that doesn't mean that the evidence was not there to start with
    when I said I felt vindicated it was because when I suggested this on a previous thread I was damn nearly ridiculed, and I think with majella's comments it shows that there is certainly a suspicion of abuse about the incident which was not apparent at the time the verdict was announced
    so you are saying its an acceptable tactic to try and enter evidence deemed too flimsy or irrelevant by the leagal pros via a victim impact statement and then call him a paedophile to the press?
    you cant be serious

  6. #66
    Capped Player
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Dublin 7
    Posts
    20,251
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    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
    Strange logic there. Vindicated by circumstancial evidence...
    http://www.forastrust.ie/

    Bring back Rocketman!

  7. #67
    First Team
    Joined
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    2,317
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    82
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    50
    Thanked in
    43 Posts
    There was absolutely no evidence of physical abuse on Rob's body. Enough said let it lie I say.
    The above is all opinion and based on personal experience. Unless stated otherwise it is not a dig at anybody, well probably none of you lot.

  8. #68
    Seasoned Pro Block G Raptor's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ITB campus
    Posts
    3,986
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I am being seriously mis -interpreted. the point I was trying to make was that when I suggested -after following the case closely- that some of the issues raised in the trial made me feel uneasy about the relationship between robert and wayne as something didn't seem right about it I was laughed off this site.
    now with the information that has been revealed in the victim impact statement it seems that I maybe wasn't quite so mad to think this thats all I'm trying to say. Of course the evidence should not have been admitted as the jury would have natrually been influenced by it whether or not the sample could be proved to have come from WOD or not the insinuation would have been there. I was just trying to make the point that maybe my gut feeling at the time wasn't so crazy after all

  9. #69
    Seasoned Pro Lionel Ritchie's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Limerick
    Posts
    4,333
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    194
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    285
    Thanked in
    168 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Tired&Emotional
    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.
    Excellent post T&E.

    The system is not perfect but I think the system and the society that put it there is a better and more mature one for applying the principle that it's better to let a potentially guilty person go unpunished than risk punishing an innocent party.
    " I wish to God that someone would be able to block out the voices in my head for five minutes, the voices that scream, over and over again: "Why do they come to me to die?"

  10. #70
    Banned Roverstillidie's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,377
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    I am being seriously mis -interpreted. the point I was trying to make was that when I suggested -after following the case closely- that some of the issues raised in the trial made me feel uneasy about the relationship between robert and wayne as something didn't seem right about it I was laughed off this site.
    now with the information that has been revealed in the victim impact statement it seems that I maybe wasn't quite so mad to think this thats all I'm trying to say. Of course the evidence should not have been admitted as the jury would have natrually been influenced by it whether or not the sample could be proved to have come from WOD or not the insinuation would have been there. I was just trying to make the point that maybe my gut feeling at the time wasn't so crazy after all
    so you are saying you feel vindicated by in your insinuation of an innapropriate/sexual relationship by evidence that, in your own words "should not have been admitted " because it the "insinuation would have been there"!?!

    the fact that its not accurate or relevant evidence proves you are right to believe its true?
    you krazy

  11. #71
    Seasoned Pro Block G Raptor's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ITB campus
    Posts
    3,986
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I simply raised the possibility on the previous thread and was treated with as much disdain as if id said the pope was really elvis pressley or something equally ridicilous all I'm saying now is that my gut feeling (and I'll admit I do think wayne abused robert, but thats just my opinion) doesn't appear to be quite so ludacrious as people thought at the time
    nothing more nothing less



    Quote Originally Posted by Roverstillidie
    so"should not have been admitted " because it the "insinuation would have been there"!?!
    the evidence was not 100% conclusive and there by not admissable
    in lay mans terms it was obviously WOD's but there was an infinitly remote chance that it wasn't and that was enough for reasonable doubt

  12. #72
    Coach John83's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    8,994
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,157
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,301
    Thanked in
    812 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    the evidence was not 100% conclusive and there by not admissable in lay mans terms it was obviously WOD's but there was an infinitly remote chance that it wasn't and that was enough for reasonable doubt
    There was a hell of a lot more than that. The FBI described that particular test as hypersensitive and doesn't allow its use internally, and an Australian DNA testing expert called it suspect too. If it was as likely as you are suggesting, it would have been admissible.
    You can't spell failure without FAI

  13. #73
    First Team Dr.Nightdub's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Camac terrace, Richmond Park, D8
    Posts
    1,054
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    I'll admit I do think wayne abused robert, but thats just my opinion
    That's still your opinion despite the State Pathologist (i.e. a PROSECUTION witness) stating in court that there was no evidence of sexual assault?

    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    in lay mans terms it was obviously WOD's but there was an infinitly remote chance that it wasn't
    No, in layman's terms, it was someone's and they couldn't prove one way or the other whose. You seem to be taking your suspicions as a starting point and then looking for evidence to back that up. The way the courts operate (or should, at least) is to examine the evidence objectively and then draw conclusions from it. There's a big difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Block G Raptor
    and that was enough for reasonable doubt
    And reasonable doubt leads to a not guilty verdict, except in trial by media where you don't have to worry about such trifles as reasonable doubt.
    Revenge for 2002

  14. #74
    Seasoned Pro Block G Raptor's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ITB campus
    Posts
    3,986
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    And reasonable doubt leads to a not guilty verdict, except in trial by media where you don't have to worry about such trifles as reasonable doubt.
    exactly why the prosecution decided not to use the evidence in pursuit of a guilty verdict. No?

  15. #75
    Seasoned Pro Block G Raptor's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ITB campus
    Posts
    3,986
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    DPP to appeal the leniancy of the sentance
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0220/odonoghuew.html

  16. #76
    Godless Commie Scum
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Co Wickla
    Posts
    11,396
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    138
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    656
    Thanked in
    436 Posts
    He should probably get the sentence reduced in light of the media coverage since the witness impact statement.
    If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.

  17. #77
    First Team
    Joined
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    2,317
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    82
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    50
    Thanked in
    43 Posts
    It is being appealed on the basis that his hiding of things and mis leading Gardai. Not as the sensationalists would hope, thankfully.
    The above is all opinion and based on personal experience. Unless stated otherwise it is not a dig at anybody, well probably none of you lot.

  18. #78
    New Signing joeSoap's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    nomadic
    Posts
    5,828
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    18
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    23
    Thanked in
    18 Posts
    The appeal by the prosecution into the leniency of this case started yesterday, and has been put back for a few weeks for deliberation.

    Majella Holohan has, I believe, done her case no favours with her victim impact statement, and the defence have used this to their advantage.

  19. #79
    Banned Roverstillidie's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,377
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    why dont the snouts just charge him with obstruction seperatley so we dont have to listen to block g raptors ramblings agan?

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Similar Threads

  1. Michael O'Donoghue
    By TheOneWhoKnocks in forum Ireland
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 18/12/2014, 8:08 PM
  2. The Donoghue Thread
    By dahamsta in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22/04/2005, 5:06 PM
  3. Shane O'Donoghue...
    By sadloserkid in forum Limerick
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02/01/2004, 11:45 AM
  4. Fergie Donoghue
    By DTS in forum Cork City
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 16/08/2002, 8:26 PM
  5. Fergie O'Donoghue
    By joe in forum Cork City
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09/09/2001, 4:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •