O'Donoghue Not Guilty of Murder

padser

I would just like to make a point to those who dont agere with the verdict and bring up ancillary issues such as participating in searches etc. Everything Wayne did after the event, while it may have caused unnecessary hurt and prolongued the agony for Roberts in no way justifies a finding of murder for a couple of reasons, but mainly because there is a mandatory sentence for murder (life imprisoment).
In effect you would be sentencing a young man to spend the majority of his life behind bars for nothing more then withholding information from the guards and showing no empathy for the family of a young boy who had died. Sure these things are bad, and his sentence does need to be stiffer then it would have been had he rang 999 as soon as it happened, but do they in themselves compare to rape, or murder, or even the case that was discussed a few days ago regarding the 'drug fuelled crime spree'? I think not.

seamus

delly wrote:

But would this not be the case in all murder/manslaughter trials? The heat of the moment is something that cannot be recreated in any courtroom. Even in premedetated murders you would still have to form your opinions from a distance.

Of course, but even "heat of moment" things can find people guilty of murder. If someone punched you in a pub, you completely lost it, screamed, "I'm gonna kill ye!" at the guy, then stabbed him with a broken glass, you'd have a tough time proving that it was an accident that you killed him.
Each case is different, but from what I gathered, the forensic evidence concurred with O'Donoghue's testimony that he had the boy in a headlock for 15-30 seconds. That piece of evidence alone, for me, would be conclusive enough to determine that killing the boy was far from his mind.

nesf

Oral Slang wrote:

I agree with the decision too - I remember years ago, my brothers having dreadful fights - one would have been around 13, the other 18.. In the heat of the moment, who knows what could have happened with them or with many other teenage fights.

That's almost exactly what went through my head when I heard the case.

embee

Some people have commented on how Wayne O'Donoghue appeared to be calm and composed after he had killed Robert. Perhaps he appeared so, but his testimony suggests otherwise. I think he rather kept up a front until it became too much for him. God.. if I had been in his situation, I don't know that I would have been able to keep a level head, or that I would have been thinking straight.

I honestly feel sorry for him. I don't think he thought for a second that getting a wee boy in a headlock was going to kill the child. I remember when I was a kid having physical rucks with older cousins that involved headlocks and all sorts... I would never have thought for a second that it could have killed me and I'm sure my cousins wouldn't have either.

galwaydude

whats all this sympathising with wayne o donoghue.He killed a young boy and now the boys parents will morne his loss for ever. Ok robert was thrown stones at wayne but for christ sake that doesnt mean you strangle the kid afterwards.

Just because wayne is educationed and comes from a well to do family doesnt mean we should be wearing thick glasses when looking at this case. He comitted a serious crime and will have to live with those actions for the rest of his life.

Then what does he do try and burn the body, are these the actions of a normal abiding citizen. He may have lost it but he killed someone and i hope the sentance is fair and just and he goes down for a good number of years.

What would everybody think if that was your little brother that was murdered.
Embee its roberts parents and family i feel sorry for not wayne.

This post may have been harsh but this killing shocked the nation.

nlgbbbblth

galwaydude wrote:

Ok robert was thrown stones at wayne but for christ sake that doesnt mean you strangle the kid afterwards.

Manslaughter was a fair verdict.

Throwing stones at someone is something that should never be condoned and it's important that the jury recognise this as being the sole cause of Wayne O'Donoghue's actions. Put another way - he didn't start this altercation and that needs to borne in mind.

Obviously his reaction after the young boy's death was wrong but it is not surprising that he tried to get away it with it/cover his tracks.

seamus

galwaydude wrote:

Then what does he do try and burn the body, are these the actions of a normal abiding citizen. He may have lost it but he killed someone and i hope the sentance is fair and just and he goes down for a good number of years.

Just to be clear - there's no proof that he tried to burn the body. Perhaps he considered it, but he didn't attempt it. That was something suggested by the prosecution to try and bring out their "cold and calculated" viewpoint.

galwaydude

Manslaughter was a fair verdict.

Throwing stones at someone is something that should never be condoned and it's important that the jury recognise this as being the sole cause of Wayne O'Donoghue's actions. Put another way - he didn't start this altercation and that needs to borne in mind.

Mainslaughter was the correct verdict in this case.

How can one explain when wayne was involved in the search for roberts body when he knew full well where the body was. In that time he could have come forward instead of putting roberts family through torture.

I know he didnt start this altercation but what does one do if a kid is thrown stones at you.you walk away. Robert didnt know any better because of his condition. He was murdered remember.

Maybe he didnt try and burn the body but he kept it well hidden that it took a good number of days for the guards to find robert.

nlgbbbblth

galwaydude wrote:

I know he didnt start this altercation but what does one do if a kid is thrown stones at you.you walk away. Robert didnt know any better because of his condition.

If everyone walked away from/said nothing to a kid throwing stones at them then the kid would quickly get the idea that this sort of behaviour was acceptable.

If everyone brought up their kids in this way there would anarchy.

galwaydude wrote:

He was murdered remember.

He was killed. Accidentally. Not the same thing

seamus

galwaydude wrote:

Maybe he didnt try and burn the body but he kept it well hidden that it took a good number of days for the guards to find robert.

Indeed. But that has very little do with the notion of murder -v- manslaughter.
It's extremely regrettable that the uncertainty had to be drawn out for 12 days, but could you say for certain that you wouldn't have done the same thing in Wayne O'Donoghue's shoes?
Afaik, he could also be charged with any of a number of offences relating to withholding evidence/obstructing justice/etc but they tend not to.

Andy-Pandy

A mate of a mate of mine is Portlaise, and is only a few cells away from him. He says that the bloke is destroyed, massive feelins of guilt for what he has done. My heart really go's out to the guy. Granted he did a bad bad thing, but i beleive it was just one of things, a situation that many people have been in that just turned out for the worst. Remember the kid he killed was his freind, the press described them as like 'brothers', and i think the personal torment that he is going to suffer the rest of his life, will be punishment enough. Ithink its shows how the public feeling is towards the case when you take into account there was know mob at the courts baying for blood, and that the majorety of comments ive heard both here and with people ive talked to just think it was a tragic case.

whiskeyman

What do people think how the Indo and Star headlines?
"Killer next door" was one on the Indo (haven't seen it, but heard on Newstalk106).
After the Liam Lawlor scandal, you think they'd approach such a story with a bit more tact.
I know many people who refuse to buy the Inod (or any of IN&M rags) after the Lawlor death reporting, and this just backs their reason.

andy-pandy wrote:

Ithink its shows how the public feeling is towards the case when you take into account there was know mob at the courts baying for blood, and that the majority of comments I've heard both here and with people I've talked to just think it was a tragic case.

This is a very interesting point.
No one I know had ill feelings towards the then "accused murderer" and all saw it as a tragic case for all involved, yet some of the papers (from above) are reporting as if public opinion wanted revenge.

galwaydude

After the whole liam lawlor stuff the star and the indo should be ashamed of themselves. They won no favours in the wayne o donoghue case either. This was a tragic case to everyone involved.

RoundyMooney

Indeed. Manslaughter was the inevitable outcome, and happily most of the contributers here know the difference between murder and manslaughter in a legal context. Perhaps now, those concerned can begin to move on in some shape or form. My thoughts are with the families and friends involved this Christmas.

Angels

Sully04 wrote:

and I suppose if you killed a good friend in a freak accident you would be good and run and call 999 and admit u killed him straight away?

Fair play to you, must be a strong person!

Thats a pretty lousy comment to make.

I am entitled my opinion.

I don't know what was going through his head i never claimed i did.

I am a strong person, but sur i haven't a feckin clue how id react in that situation do you???

Im sure you don't either.

Well,
This scumbag is being let out this week. I am amazed that so many people dont know about the strange texts they found between Wayne & Robert, not to mention they found semen on the poor boy they couldn't identify. Something was going on here, the boy threatened to reveal all & Wayne flipped(Well thats what I think). Only thing that makes sense from what I've read.

seamus

None of the items you mention were used as evidence in court, presumably because they were unreliable as evidence. "Strange Texts"? Depends on what you consider strange texts from a nine year old. Semen? Could easily have come from anywhere or anyone, even Robert himself.

From what I've read, the case facts make the most sense, not the speculation from Magella Houlihan's cold and calculated attempt to paint Wayne as a paedophile.

prendy

the court ruled against him, he served his time. let it go.theres alot of guilty people out there that are never caught.

cornbb

Whoa! Can is open, worms everywhere.

The guy was convicted and has served his time.

Seamus wrote:

From what I've read, the case facts make the most sense, not the speculation from Magella Houlihan's cold and calculated attempt to paint Wayne as a paedophile.

Agreed, any accusations of anything like that at this time are unfounded, unfair and designed to sell tabloids.

Morlar

KaG1888 wrote: »

Well,
This scumbag is being let out this week. I am amazed that so many people dont know about the strange texts they found between Wayne & Robert, not to mention they found semen on the poor boy they couldn't identify. Something was going on here, the boy threatened to reveal all & Wayne flipped(Well thats what I think). Only thing that makes sense from what I've read.

He was released this morning apparently -

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mheyeyojqlau/

' Wayne O'Donoghue was freed just before 7am after serving three years of a four-year sentence for manslaughter.'

There is no way that that family got justice there. 3 years for taking a life is ridiculous.

Squiggle

KaG1888 wrote: »

Well,
This scumbag is being let out this week. I am amazed that so many people dont know about the strange texts they found between Wayne & Robert, not to mention they found semen on the poor boy they couldn't identify./QUOTE]

Low count DNA profiling showed that there was a 1 in 77000 chance that the semen came from someone other than Wayne, though crucially excluding his relatives. Subsequent Full DNA profiling on the semen showed that it was a perfect DNA match for one of Wayne's relatives. The DPP made the correct decision imo.

Maximilian

In my opinion it wasn't murder. Its a very sad case with a lot of people's live ruined, including O'Donoghue's. Assuming he didn't mean to do what he did, he is paying a very heavy price for a mistake that almost anyone could conceivably have made given the same circumstances.

LadyJ

seamus wrote: »

None of the items you mention were used as evidence in court, presumably because they were unreliable as evidence. "Strange Texts"? Depends on what you consider strange texts from a nine year old. Semen? Could easily have come from anywhere or anyone, even Robert himself.

From what I've read, the case facts make the most sense, not the speculation from Magella Houlihan's cold and calculated attempt to paint Wayne as a paedophile.

Wholeheartedly agree with this.

I obviously have no idea what exactly happened but I genuinely don't think O'Donoghue meant to kill Robert. I hope he doesn't get too hard a time when he leaves prison though I'm sure he probably will.

Morlar wrote: »

There is no way that that family got justice there. 3 years for taking a life is ridiculous.

Manslaughter not murder. He took the life accidentally. How long would you like to be locked up for if you accidentally killed someone? 3 years is fair enough imo, especially at his age.

beanyb

Anyone who still believes that Wayne O'Donoghue maliciously killed Robert Holohan, or is a paedophile really should have watched Prime Time last night. It completely rubbished all of those claims. He should win big with his libel action.

He has served his sentence, and repaid the debt that the legal system determined that he owed. Understandably, this is painful for Robert's family but the guy has the right to move on with his life and to be left alone. Though judging by the attitude of the editor of the Evening Herald on Questions and Answers on Monday night, and some of the tabloid headlines this morning that wont happen.

Morlar

LadyJ wrote: »

Manslaughter not murder. He took the life accidentally

He killed an 11 year old with his bare hands - then hid the body 12 miles away and played innocent. 3 years is not enough - 15 would be a good start in my book.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

None of the items you mention were used as evidence in court, presumably because they were unreliable as evidence. "Strange Texts"? Depends on what you consider strange texts from a nine year old. Semen? Could easily have come from anywhere or anyone, even Robert himself.

From what I've read, the case facts make the most sense, not the speculation from Magella Houlihan's cold and calculated attempt to paint Wayne as a paedophile.

Well,
It wasn't allowed in court because it was in the middle of the trial & they couldn't identify it in Ireland because it was a small sample & it was sent away to America(Read into it). Robert was 11 at the time, most kids wouldn't of developed like that at that age. From what I remember one of the texts from Robert said I love you or something in the lines of that.

What do you have against the mother? Are you saying she made it up?

Hrududu

Anyone who still believes that Wayne O'Donoghue maliciously killed Robert Holohan, or is a paedophile really should have watched Prime Time last night. It completely rubbished all of those claims. He should win big with his libel action.

I missed this, can you give a quick rundown of some of the things they rubbished?

I think he should be left alone. From all reports it looked like an accidental killing and he panicked. Nobody knows what they would have done in that situation.

How Can You All Be So Defensive To Someone Who Killed A Small Boy With His Bare Hands & Then Threw Him In A Ditch Like He Was Nothing? Makes Me Sick

LadyJ

Morlar wrote: »

He killed an 11 year old with his bare hands - then hid the body 12 miles away and played innocent. 3 years is not enough - 15 would be a good start in my book.

It was manslaughter, not murder. That was the charge. I don't care if the kid was 11 or 30, makes no difference. It will never be easy for the family to get over this but objectively speaking Wayne paid his dues.

It was not proven that he intended to kill Robert and if I was in his shoes then I would feel justice hadn't been done if I got 15 years for something I didn't do with any malice behind it.
Also, he acted foolishly afterwards but it seems to me like the actions of someone who panicked and had no idea what to do.

beanyb

You can watch it here: http://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/

Maximilian

KaG1888 wrote: »

How Can You All Be So Defensive To Someone Who Killed A Small Boy With His Bare Hands & Then Threw Him In A Ditch Like He Was Nothing? Makes Me Sick

Seemingly Makes You Capitalise Every Word You Type Too. We're defensive because we all like to kill the odd baby from time to time because everyone here is an asshole. A.H. really stands for Assholes.

It was meant to be all in caps but it wouldn't let me ^.

Thanks for your concerns Rupert

Dudess

Mairt, your post has been deleted due to its defamatory nature. Any more comments like that and you will be banned.

Genghiz Cohen

The legal system determined the length of time he should be confined in jail, he served his time, he has paid his debt, as far as I'm concerned, he is now just another person in the tabloids for the wrong reasons.

seamus

KaG1888 wrote: »

What do you have against the mother? Are you saying she made it up?

I have pity for the mother, but that doesn't excuse her actions in court. She made a cold and calculated attempt to paint him as a paedophile by revealing "evidence" to the media. I'm not saying she made it up, but you can twist facts to prove whatever the hell you want. She made a clear attempt to get the media rumour mill started and impose her own revenge, ignoring the obligation of the court.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

I have pity for the mother, but that doesn't excuse her actions in court. She made a cold and calculated attempt to paint him as a paedophile by revealing "evidence" to the media. I'm not saying she made it up, but you can twist facts to prove whatever the hell you want. She made a clear attempt to get the media rumour mill started and impose her own revenge, ignoring the obligation of the court.

How are you so sure mate? I honestly think there is more to all of it then meets the eye. Why would a mother make up something like that?

Dudess

Because she was angry and hurting deeply and wanted to hurt him for what he did to her and her family. Understandable yes, right no.

Peared

LadyJ wrote: »

Wholeheartedly agree with this.

I obviously have no idea what exactly happened but I genuinely don't think O'Donoghue meant to kill Robert. I hope he doesn't get too hard a time when he leaves prison though I'm sure he probably will.

Manslaughter not murder. He took the life accidentally. How long would you like to be locked up for if you accidentally killed someone? 3 years is fair enough imo, especially at his age.

I hope he does get a hard time. I hope every day of the rest of his life is a living hell. Accidently killing a child is one thing. What he did afterwards and put the family through is another. I cannot believe people here are trying to demonise that childs poor mother. I was hoping a special kind of justice would be doled out inside tbh.

Peared

Peared wrote: »

I hope he does get a hard time. I hope every day of the rest of his life is a living hell. Accidently killing a child is one thing. What he did afterwards and put the family through is another. I cannot believe people here are trying to demonise that childs poor mother. I was hoping a special kind of justice would be doled out inside tbh.

Here here

Dudess

Nobody is trying to demonise the mother. That is nonsense.
I love the self-appointed legal experts here. No wonder judges always appear so grumpy, when their decisions are constantly being undermined by people who haven't got a clue.

And apparently there was a special justice administered inside - well attempts were made anyway - by his fellow "pillars of society". Naturally because of the unfounded paedophilia rumours. Thank god for Chris Morris for showing us how idiotic some people can be in the face of anything remotely related to paedophilia - no matter how unsubstantiated.

seamus

Peared wrote: »

I was hoping a special kind of justice would be doled out inside tbh.

Sure, why bother with a legal system at all? Why don't we just stone every offender to death, whether or not they're actually guilty?
Anyone who thinks that somehow their brand of justice is more "fair" than the sentences imposed by the courts should be shipped off to the depths of Sierra Leone or somewhere to enjoy their barbaric existence.

Peared

seamus wrote: »

Sure, why bother with a legal system at all? Why don't we just stone every offender to death, whether or not they're actually guilty?
Anyone who thinks that somehow their brand of justice is more "fair" than the sentences imposed by the courts should be shipped off to the depths of Sierra Leone or somewhere to enjoy their barbaric existence.

No no you misunderstand. I was happy to see justice done in the courtroom. I was hoping for some prison justice. As well as not instead of.

LadyJ

Peared wrote: »

I hope he does get a hard time. I hope every day of the rest of his life is a living hell. Accidently killing a child is one thing. What he did afterwards and put the family through is another. I cannot believe people here are trying to demonise that childs poor mother. I was hoping a special kind of justice would be doled out inside tbh.

I'm not trying demonise anyone.

Also, I'm sick of people wanting revenge rather than justice.

event

KaG1888 wrote: »

Why would a mother make up something like that?

maybe she knew what happens to paedo's in jail

panda100

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

The legal system determined the length of time he should be confined in jail, he served his time, he has paid his debt, as far as I'm concerned, he is now just another person in the tabloids for the wrong reasons.

I couldnt agree more. He's repaid his debt to society. If I saw him on the street he would just be another normal person as far as Im concerned.
Also its quite alarming looking at the pictures of him before and after he went to prison. He look like a 40 year old man now,not the ripe old age of 23.

dresden8

Ah the poor chap. Now he has plenty of time on his hands you can invite him round to babysit.

Maximilian

Peared wrote: »

I was hoping for some prison justice. As well as not instead of.

ie. Murder. So you think the best way to deal with murder is murder?

sickpuppy

Are you people for real? paid his debt me hole.
He gets 3 years for killing a child dumps him like an unwanted pet in a ditch
and will probably get liable againest the newspapers.
The sentencing in irish courts is a joke heinous crimes like murder and rape get petty sentences.
If i was a relative of that child that was manslaughtured id accidentally end
Mr o Donoghues then the debt would be paid.

seamus

Peared wrote: »

No no you misunderstand. I was happy to see justice done in the courtroom. I was hoping for some prison justice. As well as not instead of.

Therefore you believe that the justice system is inadequate and you know better. You're about 500 years too late for that kind of thing. Come live with us in a civilised society.

Peared

I think a lot of people dont feel that 3 years counts as justice for taking a life. But ok we have to accept that it was manslaughter. Thats the act itself. But burning a wee boys body and hiding it while the parents went through a hell that hopefully people here never have to understand is another thing entirely. It makes people angry. It makes people want revenge. Its human to not always want the pc solution. Its human to want to see somebody who has done something hideous and awful suffer consequences. I make no apologies for feeling that way. We have to trust that the courts will get it right. But there is a difference between what is technically and legally right and what the man on the street sees as fair.

Also, and this is a personal opinion I realise most wont agree with, I think if it was a girls body the repulsion for this man would be on a different level.