Michaela McAreavey trial accused 'not guilty'

hondasam

Skid wrote: »

The tone of his comments today stinks of 'someone should have gone to prison for this'.

Also, Here is another stupid comment of his today

The Taoiseach should know that the Government can't interfere in the legal process of this country either. The Courts are separate from the Government. He should know that.

What else could he say? I'm sure he knows well how the legal system works.
No matter what he said someone would not be happy.

sunflower27

hondasam wrote: »

What else could he say? I'm sure he knows well how the legal system works.
No matter what he said someone would not be happy.

I seriously don't know. The guy is clearly thick.

Raiser

hondasam wrote: »

I have to admit in the beginning I did suspect her husband. There should have been some DNA from the killer. What happens now?

hondasam wrote: »

You would expect to find the husband's DNA they were sharing the same room.
I do wonder and a little bit of me still thinks it was him. I'm aware I will get slated for this.

hondasam wrote: »

There was cctv of him waiting at the pool? I don't remember that in the other thread Seamus might know.
We did disagree on how long she was gone before he went looking for her.

hondasam wrote: »

Yes he does but even nice people are capable of crimes of passion.
I don't think you are naive it's more my suspicious mind I think.

Yeah - To be honest your commentary does come across as being very off as you file your nails and speculate on here in a very public and permanent record on your real life, thrilling soap opera plot...... Enjoy, hopefully the next big tragic slaying is only just around the corner all ready to titillate you some more.......

iguana

hondasam wrote: »

What else could he say? I'm sure he knows well how the legal system works.
No matter what he said someone would not be happy.

If I was his speech writer I'd have written something that expresses my sympathy and empathy for how awful it is for her loved ones to have no closure at this point. And my hope that the investigation is reopened so her killer can be found. I'd continue on to offer the Mauritian authorities any help our police force can provide, if they need it. And then so as not to usurp the UK police forces, mention the good job they have done so far in their assistance.

It's all hot air but it does the job of showing support for her family without implying that the two men who have been found innocent are actually guilty. Or implying that a conviction regardless of guilt is desirable.

Paddy De Plasterer

hondasam wrote: »

What else could he say? I'm sure he knows well how the legal system works.
No matter what he said someone would not be happy.

The Taoiseach clearly cant interfere in legal system there, but he can put pressure on government to do something to bring killers to justice, though that may be difficult now.

why do people think there should be DNA fom the killer in the room??

DNA is only one part of evidence. of its there great, if not so be it.

how did we solve crimes before DNA?

too many people watching too much CSI

Dermighty

It is a ****ty situation for all involved.

I have to say that this is similar in some ways to the whole Katie French debacle. A photogenic person dies and how they looked appears in pretty much every statement about them.

That being said in my opinion this is a tragedy, Katie Frenchs death was not a tragedy.

Enda Kenny is a f*cking idiot, his statement to the press sounded like something her national school teacher or a parish priest would say.

Motorist

Dermighty wrote: »

It is a ****ty situation for all involved.

I have to say that this is similar in some ways to the whole Katie French debacle. A photogenic person dies and how they looked appears in pretty much every statement about them.

That being said in my opinion this is a tragedy, Katie Frenchs death was not a tragedy.

Enda Kenny is a f*cking idiot, his statement to the press sounded like something her national school teacher or a parish priest would say.

You forgot to mention the bond holders :rolleyes:

laoch na mona

thank god those men were not convicted
my heart goes out to her family but they were clearly innocent

laoch na mona

bubblypop wrote: »

why do people think there should be DNA fom the killer in the room??

DNA is only one part of evidence. of its there great, if not so be it.

how did we solve crimes before DNA?

too many people watching too much CSI

you tell me how did they catch jack the ripper?

If they had DNA back then they would have

Motorist

laoch na mona wrote: »

thank god those men were not convicted
my heart goes out to her family but they were clearly innocent

The only thing that's clear is that the jury thought they were. A jury acquitted OJ for murder - he is now serving life imprisonment for a separate offence. And these men can not face trial twice for the same crime.

One thing I am certain of is that there will never be justice served in this case.

steddyeddy

bubblypop wrote: »

why do people think there should be DNA fom the killer in the room??

DNA is only one part of evidence. of its there great, if not so be it.

how did we solve crimes before DNA?

too many people watching too much CSI

Well in some cases it can be conclusive. One of the first times DNA was used in court was to exonerate someone who had been convicted of murder. The man was on death row and if not for DNA evidence would have been killed.

It all depends on how well the DNA is collected and preserved. It also depends where the DNA is collected from eg sperm or blood. As far as I know DNA was found in the room but they didnt say where it was found.

laoch na mona

Motorist wrote: »

The only thing that's clear is that the jury thought they were. A jury acquitted OJ for murder - he is now serving life imprisonment for a separate offence. And these men can not face trial twice for the same crime.

One thing I am certain of is that there will never be justice served in this case.

there was feck all evidence against them

Motorist

laoch na mona wrote: »

there was feck all evidence against them

Perhaps, perhaps not. I disagree with you though - one thing that is not clear to me is that they were innocent. Shame that the police botched this so badly, and shame to see defense shamelessly misleading the jury - the CCTV, sex guide, etc, accusing John, etc.

Rasheed

up for anything wrote: »

I don't. I feel sad for them but I don't feel some invisible connection, nor would I let it stop me going there and I wouldn't be reminded of her constantly.

Well thats your opinion. I, on the otherhand, think differently would not be able to go there without being reminded of them.

steddyeddy

Motorist wrote: »

Perhaps, perhaps not. I disagree with you though - one thing that is not clear to me is that they were innocent. Shame that the police botched this so badly, and shame to see defense shamelessly misleading the jury - the CCTV, sex guide, etc, accusing John, etc.

Why was the sex guide brought out I wonder?

Rasheed

steddyeddy wrote: »

Why was the sex guide brought out I wonder?

The defence is it? I think they were trying to put forward the theory that Michaela died in some erotic asphixia game or rough sex

laoch na mona

Motorist wrote: »

Perhaps, perhaps not. I disagree with you though - one thing that is not clear to me is that they were innocent. Shame that the police botched this so badly, and shame to see defense shamelessly misleading the jury - the CCTV, sex guide, etc, accusing John, etc.

the spouse is always a suspect initially in cases like this

but you have your opinion and i have mine both are equally valid

Nodin

steddyeddy wrote: »

Why was the sex guide brought out I wonder?

Muck throwing. Standard practice.

steddyeddy

Rasheed wrote: »

The defence is it? I think they were trying to put forward the theory that Michaela died in some erotic asphixia game or rough sex

Didnt the cctv show them heading to the restaurant and her leaving to go to the room?

mitosis

For all that there are people suffering, surely it is best if there is a doubt that no innocents go to jail.

Rasheed

steddyeddy wrote: »

Didnt the cctv show them heading to the restaurant and her leaving to go to the room?

Ya you are right there , I don't really know where they were going with it but when John wemt up to the room with the porter when Michaela didnt come back, he went in on his own so I suppose they wanted to cast doubt in the jurors minds that maybe something happened then. So hard for the families to have to hear that I'd say.

Rasheed

mitosis wrote: »

For all that there are people suffering, surely it is best if there is a doubt that no innocents go to jail.

Yes, very true. I just hope they catch the real killer/s now.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Rasheed wrote: »

The defence is it? I think they were trying to put forward the theory that Michaela died in some erotic asphixia game or rough sex

Quite possibly, the defence team always trawl ever possibility for a potential angle to win the case. Its not pleasant for anybody to hear and its the reason I believe why defence lawyers are often branded as soulless and without morals.
Its part of the job though, no potential evidence can ever be omitted no matter how farcical it seems.

bob50

i am sorry for that beautiful girl to lose her life Yet i never tought the 2 men charged carried out the murder i tought they were put on trial as patsies to take the heat away from whoever was involved The media here in particular RTEs Tommie Gorman should be ashamed in relation to this crime, He all but had these 2 men "Hung Drawn & Quartered"

Bad journlisim

Pantsface

Just as well they didn't have a copy of 50 shades of gray with them.

charlemont

Very sad for both the families, We can only hope the truth comes out eventually, Its obvious Michaela, her husband their families are good honest decent people and it's a shame they have not yet got justice.

carbon nanotube

Rasheed wrote: »

The defence is it? I think they were trying to put forward the theory that Michaela died in some erotic asphixia game or rough sex

had this hotel any CCTV, this whole thing is just an epic fail tbh.

how much do this hotel charge for honeymoon packages..:rolleyes:

mind you Johns lawyer must have been as useful as homeless plaque riddled person.

Motorist

carbon nanotube wrote: »

had this hotel any CCTV, this whole thing is just an epic fail tbh.

how much do this hotel charge for honeymoon packages..:rolleyes:

mind you Johns lawyer must have been as useful as homeless plaque riddled person.

He wasn't on trial though.

The hotel has changed it's name to Lux and is still raking in profits despite the probability one of it's staff was involved in the murder.

bedirect

very easy to say shambles of an investigation, just shows how everybody believes what the lawers wanted them to believe. How could there be DNA on her body when they put her in a bath of water, everybody is watching too much CSi.
I see one of those lawery wants John Mc Areavy questioned before he leaves the country. Dont forget we had a similar result here when a Mayo farmer was founf not guilty of killing a traveller a few years ago