Why did Gardai destroy possible burial site of Irelands longest missing child?

tayto lover

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

credibility isn't something that Donegal Gardai haven't exactly smothered themselves in during the years

That's beside the point. It's not going to find Mary.
Facts are facts. Opinions are opinions.
The answers are in the family. No stranger came that day and took her.
The car was parked where the dogs lost the scent. Whoever left in the car has to be the number one suspect. Mary's mother knows who left, you probably do too. That's the person who knows what happened.

dense

tayto lover wrote: »

That's beside the point. It's not going to find Mary.
Facts are facts. Opinions are opinions.
The answers are in the family. No stranger came that day and took her.
The car was parked where the dogs lost the scent. Whoever left in the car has to be the number one suspect. Mary's mother knows who left, you probably do too. That's the person who knows what happened.

And the point is that in another couple of months it will be a year ago that the last garda appeal to the public took place, the usual stupid appeal to people who weren't there on the day, to help them solve the case.

The investigation got off on the wrong foot 40 years ago, it's high time it was put back on track.

A "review" was announced when, 2 years ago?
3 years ago?

What exactly are they reviewing?

tayto lover

dense wrote: »

And the point is that in another couple of months it will be a year ago that the last garda appeal to the public took place, the usual stupid appeal to people who weren't there on the day, to help them solve the case.

The investigation got off on the wrong foot 40 years ago, it's high time it was put back on track.

A "review" was announced when, 2 years ago?
3 years ago?

What exactly are they reviewing?[/QUOTE]
I wish we knew?
They usually have more information than they share to the public.

I still believe that they should re-interview the mother who I feel knows the whole story.

Muahahaha

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

For a link to the petition - please sign and share
https://www.change.org/p/justice-for-mary-boyle-call-on-donegal-coroner-dr-denis-mccauley-to-convene-an-inquest-into-mary-boyle-s-death

Signed, its up to 8,700 signatures now.

oranbhoy67

this is why we want a public inquest for the people who were there that day to be questioned publicly, to clarify everything while these people are still alive.

oranbhoy67

Muahahaha wrote: »

Signed, its up to 8,700 signatures now.

Brilliant, Thank you

by8auj6csd3ioq

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

this is why we want a public inquest for the people who were there that day to be questioned publicly, to clarify everything while these people are still alive.

The penalty for not attending is very small and no guarantee everyone will go. And inquests Inquest "distinguishes itself from other Court processes in that the Coroner cannot consider or attribute criminal or civil liability, or indeed exonerate any party. The purpose of the inquest is to establish the facts surrounding the death and to place those facts on the public record" http://www.aclsolicitors.ie/practice-areas/medical-negligence/inquests

Since there is no body and no proof Mary is dead how will it establish the facts surrounding the death and place it on record? What is to stop the people telling the same story they have for 40 years, that she followed her uncle and turned back etc

I think too much faith is being placed in the inquest

Creol1

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

Since there is no body and no proof Mary is dead how will it establish the facts surrounding the death and place it on record? What is to stop the people telling the same story they have for 40 years, that she followed her uncle and turned back etc

I'm not intimately familiar with the legal bases for holding/not holding an inquest, but it is notable that in Dr McCauley's explanation for not holding an inquest, the opposition of Mrs Boyle was the main reason he cited, rather than issues surrounding jurisdiction.

by8auj6csd3ioq

Creol1 I cannot quote for some reason
This is from the link i gave above
Where a coroner is informed that the body of a deceased person is lying within his district, it shall be the duty of the coroner under law to hold an inquest in relation to the death of that person if he is of opinion that the death may have occurred in a violent or unnatural manner, or suddenly and from unknown causes.

Also if the family think there is a reason they should be one, even if coroner doesn't they can apply to him. But i have not seen a reverse where the family can object to it yet he did say as you say his main reason for not having one is mrs boyle

tayto lover

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

this is why we want a public inquest for the people who were there that day to be questioned publicly, to clarify everything while these people are still alive.

That would be a good way to go and the best of luck with it.
Has there ever been an inquest like this held before though, I mean without a body?

Creol1

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

Creol1 I cannot quote for some reason
This is from the link i gave above
Where a coroner is informed that the body of a deceased person is lying within his district, it shall be the duty of the coroner under law to hold an inquest in relation to the death of that person if he is of opinion that the death may have occurred in a violent or unnatural manner, or suddenly and from unknown causes.

Also if the family think there is a reason they should be one, even if coroner doesn't they can apply to him. But i have not seen a reverse where the family can object to it yet he did say as you say his main reason for not having one is mrs boyle

In this case, the family is divided, with Ann Doherty supporting and Mrs Boyle opposing an inquest; I'm not sure whether there is a precedent for such a case.

dense

Creol1 wrote: »

In this case, the family is divided, with Ann Doherty supporting and Mrs Boyle opposing an inquest; I'm not sure whether there is a precedent for such a case.

The opinion of those connected to an inquest are irrelevant, there is no basis for their opinions to be taken into account.

The refusal to hold one, based on taking their opinions into account is an arbitrary one, and one which is being made by the coroner.

To my memory it is unprecedented anywhere, for a state official, to take the opinions of relatives into consideration in determining what course of action to take, in refusing OR granting an inquest.

To make public the reason for a refusal as in this case is highly irregular IMO.

dense

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

credibility isn't something that Donegal Gardai haven't exactly smothered themselves in during the years

You have identified yourself as being a relation of Mary's.

Isn't it terrible to think that because of comments like that which you have made, legitimately referencing the Morris Tribunal, they could be counterproductive, with decisions being made about not investigating the case, on order to teach you a lesson for being disrespectful?

One would hope that such vindictiveness is very much beneath a modern Garda force and a thing of the past.

(The past may be symbolised by the likes of retired garda Gerry O'Carroll, who still believes Joanne Hayes had twins in the face of new DNA evidence showing the contrary and a retired Donegal garda reported here voicing upset about criticism of the quality of his former colleague's investigation into the disappearance of Mary Boyle.)

Still, if I were you, I think I'd be a little like Maurice McCabe, constantly watching my back.

I don't know if I'd be as brave as you are, you seem a strong person, and I hope some answers come your way, whatever they are, whenever the current review is concluded.

The sad fact is that the truth may never come out.

Purple Mountain

As a result of this thread, I've signed the petition.
Best of luck with it.
I fear someday in the future, there'll be yet another tribunal into yet another Irish injustice.

by8auj6csd3ioq

"To my memory it is unprecedented anywhere, for a state official, to take the opinions of relatives into consideration in determining what course of action to take, in refusing OR granting an inquest."

It is usual for coroner to consider the application for an inquest by a family member. Even if he has decided not to hold one a memeber of the family can write to him and request one.

by8auj6csd3ioq

cannot edit here: the family request does not mean he will hold one. it is up to him in the final analysis

tayto lover

Anyone know why the mother is against the holding of an inquest?
I cannot figure this out unless she is afraid of something.

clfy39tzve8njq

tayto lover wrote:

Anyone know why the mother is against the holding of an inquest? I cannot figure this out unless she is afraid of something.

Have you not read this thread :-)

tayto lover

Jaylah Grumpy Pile wrote: »

Have you not read this thread :-)

Not all of it. I drop in now and then because i'd love to see Mary's body found. I think the mother knows what happened.

dense

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

"To my memory it is unprecedented anywhere, for a state official, to take the opinions of relatives into consideration in determining what course of action to take, in refusing OR granting an inquest."

It is usual for coroner to consider the application for an inquest by a family member. Even if he has decided not to hold one a memeber of the family can write to him and request one.

Of course they can, there's nothing stopping any family members from putting pen to paper.

But can you show any previous instance where correspondence from a family has been cited by the coroner as the reason for them holding an inquest, or refusing to hold one?

BTW contrary to what you (?) said earlier there are serious repurcussions for not attending an inquest if summoned as a witness:


(2) A person who, having been duly served with a summons requiring him to attend an inquest as a witness, fails to attend on the date and at the time and place specified in the summons shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €3,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2005/act/33/enacted/en/print.html

by8auj6csd3ioq

Of course they can, there's nothing stopping any family members from putting pen to paper.

But can you show any previous instance where correspondence from a family has been cited by the coroner as the reason for them holding an inquest, or refusing to hold one?

once but cannot give any info in public

BTW contrary to what you (?) said earlier there are serious repurcussions for not attending an inquest if summoned as a witness:


(2) A person who, having been duly served with a summons requiring him to attend an inquest as a witness, fails to attend on the date and at the time and place specified in the summons shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €3,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2005/act/33/enacted/en/print.html

Didn't realise it was 12 months 3k. I am corrected but still it is a lot less severe than a murder charge, if going to one would set you up. I still see little point in inquest because there is no body or proof of death. Is someone assumed dead after a certain time? It is true the coroner's reason is very strange in MB case

oranbhoy67

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

once but cannot give any info in public

Didn't realise it was 12 months 3k. I am corrected but still it is a lot less severe than a murder charge, if going to one would set you up. I still see little point in inquest because there is no body or proof of death. Is someone assumed dead after a certain time? It is true the coroner's reason is very strange in MB case

An Inquest will be the first time that those who were there that day will have to speak publicly about what happened, I'm sure their initial statements will also be scrutinised, Statements which I'm told don't match up, it will be on public record what happened that day and ultimately it will put pressure on the people who are responsible for this , she deserves an inquest and so do the citizens of Ireland.
It is farcical they are using the mother's mental wellbeing as one of their excuses not to have one. especially when she is on record saying she knows Mary is dead.. now all of a sudden that is a prospect she cant face and she doesnt want an inquest until she herself has passed away, and the state is facilitating this ... crazy.

dense

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

Is someone assumed dead after a certain time? It is true the coroner's reason is very strange in MB case

Not sure about the first part (it is 7 years in certain circumstances), but the point to remember is that the lack of a body, to be blunt, does not prevent an inquest being held.

Also, the lack of remains is not the reason being given for the refusal to hold one.

Regarding the coroner's reported reasons for refusing to hold an inquest:

This could well be interpreted as the coroner believes Mary is dead, and he is putting Mary's mother's feelings to the fore and doesn't want her to face such upset.

However, if the coroner is of the opinion that a death has occurred and the remains are not present, the Minister may order an inquest. Notice it is "may", and not "shall".


One could sensibly advance an argument that in any particular case it would be wise for the coroner to defer to seeking advice and direction from the Minister and let the Minister take the final responsibility for a decision to hold one or not:


17 Subject to the provisions of this Act, where a coroner is informed that the body of a deceased person is lying within his district, it shall be the duty of the coroner to hold an inquest in relation to the death of that person if he is of opinion that the death may have occurred in a violent or unnatural manner, or suddenly and from unknown causes or in a place or in circumstances which, under provisions in that behalf contained in any other enactment, require that an inquest should be held.



23.—Whenever a coroner has reason to believe that a death has occurred in or near his district in such circumstances that an inquest is appropriate and that, owing to the destruction of the body or its being irrecoverable, an inquest cannot be held except by virtue of this section, the Minister may, if he so thinks proper, direct an inquest in relation to the death to be held by that coroner or another coroner, and thereupon the coroner so directed shall hold an inquest in relation to the death in like manner as if the body were lying within his district and had been viewed by him.

dense

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

An Inquest will be the first time that those who were there that day will have to speak publicly about what happened, I'm sure their initial statements will also be scrutinised, Statements which I'm told don't match up, it will be on public record what happened that day and ultimately it will put pressure on the people who are responsible for this , she deserves an inquest and so do the citizens of Ireland.
It is farcical they are using the mother's mental wellbeing as one of their excuses not to have one. especially when she is on record saying she knows Mary is dead.. now all of a sudden that is a prospect she cant face and she doesnt want an inquest until she herself has passed away, and the state is facilitating this ... crazy.

Is she on record anywhere saying she believes the child is dead?

Not being pedantic, but has her belief that a death has occured ever officially been reported to the coroner or the gardai by anyone?

If no official record of someone claiming that a local death has occurred has been logged it could impede things.

oranbhoy67

dense wrote: »

Is she on record anywhere saying she believes the child is dead?

Not being pedantic, but has her belief that a death has occured ever officially been reported to the coroner or the gardai by anyone?

If no official record of someone claiming that a local death has occurred has been logged it could impede things.

yes she says it here in the following video

she has also in the past told many people including myself in front of others

and she has in fact told many people in the past who she believes Killed Mary. amongst people she told this to was gards on the case.

by8auj6csd3ioq

@dense just because you have not head of a coroner taking family considerations into account and i only know of one case , it does not follow it did not happen. Do coroners come under FOI? Maybe it would be possible to find out

tayto lover

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

yes she says it here in the following video

she has also in the past told many people including myself in front of others

and she has in fact told many people in the past who she believes Killed Mary. amongst people she told this to was gards on the case.

Does she have any proof though?
I'm sure from reading the thread we all have a suspect but none of us can have proof because we were not there at the time.

I would like to know if there was anyone at the house gerry Gallagher was going to when Mary allegedly followed him?
Apart from Gerry who is to say that Mary turned back on that day?
Did the Garda investigate if Mary turned back at all?

by8auj6csd3ioq

she has in fact told many people in the past who she believes Killed Mary

I can tell people who i believe sell drugs near me but that is not good enough for court

dense

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

I can tell people who i believe sell drugs near me but that is not good enough for court

Why not?

The road to getting them to court could depend on you reporting their activities to begin with.

dense

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

@dense just because you have not head of a coroner taking family considerations into account and i only know of one case , it does not follow it did not happen. Do coroners come under FOI? Maybe it would be possible to find out

Are you definitely saying that a coroner has previously refused to hold an inquest based on pleas from a family? Not wanting specifics but how do you know?

What was to be gained for the family by not holding an inquest?

Would it have been something sensitive or embarrassing for the deceased?




On reporting a death to a coroner:

"This category identifies those who are obliged to report a death. However, it
should be noted that ANY person who has reasonable grounds to believe
that a reportable death has not been reported may inform the coroner"

https://encrypted.google.com/url?q=http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/coronersfulljob.pdf/Files/coronersfulljob.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiiq-HT9enYAhWJBsAKHQcFCvQQFggYMAQ&usg=AOvVaw19NeioigDjdpD3CiLJQ3MR

clfy39tzve8njq

dense wrote:

Are you definitely saying that a coroner has previously refused to hold an inquest based on pleas from a family? Not wanting specifics but how do you know?

Would doubt that ever happened maybe the other way round where the family push for one and it's granted.

dense

Jaylah Grumpy Pile wrote: »

Would doubt that ever happened maybe the other way round where the family push for one and it's granted.

Yes, apologies to Jack, that would make more sense alright.

Interesting newspaper report on some aspects of the service from 12 years ago:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/inquest-required-1.1023961?mode=amp


Edit: From the Coroners.ie website

"In some deaths, inquests are legally required. In other cases, the holding of an inquest is at the discretion of the Coroner and the next-of-kin can make their views known to the Coroner, if they so wish."


http://www.coroner.ie/en/cor/pages/inquests

The rest of that page doesn't give much hope for an inquest in this case.

oranbhoy67

tayto lover wrote: »

Does she have any proof though?
I'm sure from reading the thread we all have a suspect but none of us can have proof because we were not there at the time.

I would like to know if there was anyone at the house gerry Gallagher was going to when Mary allegedly followed him?
Apart from Gerry who is to say that Mary turned back on that day?
Did the Garda investigate if Mary turned back at all?

yes the owner of the house said that the Uncle Gerry did arrive with the ladders and that they spoke for a short while

dense

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

yes the owner of the house said that the Uncle Gerry did arrive with the ladders and that they spoke for a short while

If you have heard nothing from the Guards about the review that started a few years ago, and considering that the next anniversary is coming up soon, have you thought about how it's going to be marked this year?

Go on to the Journal and send a "tip" to each of the juvenile "journalists" there asking them if they've heard anything about this famous case review ever concluding, if any progress has been made, because you certainly haven't and your calls and emails are going unanswered.

by8auj6csd3ioq

dense wrote: »

Jaylah Grumpy Pile wrote: »

Would doubt that ever happened maybe the other way round where the family push for one and it's granted.

Yes, apologies to Jack, that would make more sense alright.

Interesting newspaper report on some aspects of the service from 12 years ago:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/inquest-required-1.1023961?mode=amp


Edit: From the Coroners.ie website

"In some deaths, inquests are legally required. In other cases, the holding of an inquest is at the discretion of the Coroner and the next-of-kin can make their views known to the Coroner, if they so wish."


http://www.coroner.ie/en/cor/pages/inquests

The rest of that page doesn't give much hope for an inquest in this case.

no problem

by8auj6csd3ioq

dense wrote: »

Jaylah Grumpy Pile wrote: »

Would doubt that ever happened maybe the other way round where the family push for one and it's granted.

Yes, apologies to Jack, that would make more sense alright.

Interesting newspaper report on some aspects of the service from 12 years ago:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/inquest-required-1.1023961?mode=amp


Edit: From the Coroners.ie website

"In some deaths, inquests are legally required. In other cases, the holding of an inquest is at the discretion of the Coroner and the next-of-kin can make their views known to the Coroner, if they so wish."


http://www.coroner.ie/en/cor/pages/inquests

The rest of that page doesn't give much hope for an inquest in this case.

no problem

by8auj6csd3ioq

sorry re double post. keeps happening to me here don't know why

oranbhoy67

dense wrote: »

If you have heard nothing from the Guards about the review that started a few years ago, and considering that the next anniversary is coming up soon, have you thought about how it's going to be marked this year?

Go on to the Journal and send a "tip" to each of the juvenile "journalists" there asking them if they've heard anything about this famous case review ever concluding, if any progress has been made, because you certainly haven't and your calls and emails are going unanswered.

We are marking it the weekend beforehand by having a Vigil outside the County coroners office asking for an inquest
more details here :
https://www.facebook.com/events/525742234463745/

At this time as well as a personal letter from some of us extended family members and Marys twin to the coroner we will be handing him a petition which has over 9 thousand signatures and we hope to get it to 10 in time for the vigil
you can sign and share that here : https://www.change.org/p/justice-for-mary-boyle-call-on-donegal-coroner-dr-denis-mccauley-to-convene-an-inquest-into-mary-boyle-s-death

by8auj6csd3ioq

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/time-is-running-out-call-for-inquest-in-case-of-mary-boyle-1.3422546

dense

Addilynn Wooden Saloon wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/time-is-running-out-call-for-inquest-in-case-of-mary-boyle-1.3422546

That is the kind of coverage that is required.

It would be no harm if Joe could cultivate a relationship with that journalist to do an indepth piece from his perspective now after the anniversary has passed again, perhaps focusing on how if it had happened today the disappearance would have been investigated much differently in a 21st century childhood protection policing framework and what the 2 ex Gardai "appear" to have alluded to in that documentary.

This journalist could approach them for some clarity on their previous flip flopping.

If they refuse a request from him, so be it.
It wouldn't look great though.

BlackWitch

I can't post links, I'll just copy and paste this article from village magazine alluding to the goings on in Donegal, Mary Boyle and this whole cover up, it's a disgrace.

villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2017/11/boiling-over/

Boiling Over
Mary Boyle murder and its cover-up may be linked to Anglo-Irish paedophile ring, of which Lord Louis Mountbatten was an alleged member
by Gemma O'Doherty 21 November, 2017, 3:21 pm

This March marked the 40th anniversary of Mary Boyle’s disappearance. Ever since she vanished on St. Patrick’s weekend in 1977, a veil of secrecy has shrouded the case of the Donegal schoolgirl who is Ireland’s longest and youngest missing person.

There are few scandals that embarrass the establishment more, not least because of the sinister role played by senior political, Garda and media figures in suppressing the truth about what happened to the six-year-old. Yet despite a virtual blackout by the mainstream media on all of the astonishing new revelations in the case, the lid is slowly being lifted on this sad and sordid story, and the public is hungry for justice.

My 2016 documentary ‘Mary Boyle: The Untold Story’ has been viewed almost 600,000 times on YouTube. A recent petition to the Donegal coroner’s office requesting an inquest was signed by thousands in a matter of hours.

There is growing frustration and fury that justice has not been done and little doubt that the case involves a cover-up of enormous magnitude.

Few believe the story as it was spun in 1977 when Mary went missing during a visit to her grandparents’ home in Cashelard, Ballyshannon. It is implausible that a little girl, who was born in Birmingham, could simply vanish without trace on an isolated farm while in the company of at least 10 members of her family.

A ‘Cold Case’ review, set up in the days immediately after the documentary’s release, has resulted in nothing almost a year and a half on, and there is no conclusion in sight.

It appears now that this review – one of several that have led to nothing – was established to placate public outrage over allegations contained in the film, especially those made by retired gardaí who claim that Fianna Fáil politician Sean McEniff tried to stop their investigation in its tracks.

Expert legal opinion suggests the Gardaí have ample evidence to make charges, yet nobody has been arrested.

The last person known to have seen Mary, her uncle and local Fianna Fáil stalwart Gerry Gallagher, has given several unconvincing and inconsistent accounts of what happened the day she went missing.

His claim that his niece simply vanished into thin air after accompanying him along a laneway on his farm holds no credibility. Gallagher’s failure to admit when initially asked that Mary had been with him is suspicious at the very least. Statements given to gardaí at the time by him and certain other family members are laden with contradictions.

Some officers who were first on the scene that day say they are in no doubt Gerry Gallagher was responsible for Mary’s disappearance.

Retired sergeant Martin Collins describes one encounter with Gallagher, where Collins put it to him that he was responsible for his niece’s disappearance. Gallagher, he says, sat in silence and made no attempt to rebuke it.

Collins, who was initially refused entry to the cottage by the family, also claims he was told numerous times by Ann Boyle – Mary’s mother and Gerry Gallagher’s sister – that she believed Gallagher was responsible.

Mary’s twin sister Ann Doherty and country singer Margo O’Donnell, a distant cousin, say Mrs Boyle told them the same story. Mrs Boyle appears to have now retracted this belief, and says the matter should be addressed privately not publicly. She has been scathing about the justice campaign for her daughter, and has told Donegal coroner Dr Denis McCauley she does not want an inquest into her death, an astonishing position but one that the coroner supports, depriving Mary, her twin sister and the public of a key mechanism for justice and closure in the case.

Sergeant Collins also alleges that another close relation of Mary came to him in tears at Ballyshannon station in the days after her disappearance, repeating the claim that he believed Gallagher was responsible.

Retired detective Aidan Murray, one of the lead Gardaí in the original ‘investigation’ supports Collins’ theories. He claims that during an interview with Gallagher, he was on the brink of getting a confession when he got a ‘nudge’ under the table from his superior officer who ordered Murray to leave the room and get water for the suspect.

More disturbingly, both officers say they are in no doubt Mary was sexually assaulted before her death. Ann Doherty makes the same claim and says Mary was going to blow the whistle on the alleged abuse and had to be silenced.

The retired Gardaí also allege that Fianna Fáil’s longest-serving councillor, the late Sean McEniff, made a phone call to Ballyshannon Garda station ordering that none of the Gallagher family were to be made suspects in the case.

Shortly before his death earlier this year, McEniff denied their claim yet Aidan Murray, the former head of Special Branch in the area, has stated on camera: “I know that as a result of that phone call, certain people were not allowed to be interviewed. It was all hands off them and we were to look somewhere else”.

Given the power McEniff wielded in almost every aspect of Donegal life, there is little doubt his intervention could have derailed the investigation.

His legacy of corruption is notorious and was well documented in a recent obituary of him in Village magazine, not least because of his close relationships with Gardaí whom he seems to have been able to order around with impunity, especially where his illegal gaming operation in Bundoran was concerned.

A 1985 RTÉ documentary ‘Law and Order in Donegal’, reveals the control McEniff had over local superintendent Dom Murray, who was in charge of the Mary Boyle investigation and who told a number of lies about the case in media interviews through the years.

It offers a damning insight into the incestuous relationship between Fianna Fáil and the Gardaí, which has been used to protect the party from scandal on numerous occasions, not least in the aftermath of the Fr Niall Molloy murder in Offaly in 1985.

Gerry Gallagher was a crony of Sean McEniff who canvassed for the politician with his brother Michael in the rural townlands of Ballyshannon.

Like the archetypal mafia don, McEniff’s modus operandi was to acquire dirt on people who might be a threat to him, walk them into compromising positions and dangle the threat of exposure in their faces.

Superintendent Dom Murray’s wife had a gambling habit which McEniff is claimed to have nurtured while she ran up debts in his Bundoran casinos. This ensured the politician had the officer in his pocket and could use him to bend the law when required.

In recent months, more disturbing allegations have emerged about McEniff. a young woman has come forward making claims that he groomed and sexually abused her as a child. She says he also forced her to have sex with other men in some of his hotels, while he looked on.

The woman, who has never spoken publicly about the abuse but is a contributor to RTÉ and other media about another aspect of her life, also says a complaint she made to Gardaí about the abuse went nowhere.

For decades, there have been rumours that a powerful paedophile network operated in south Donegal involving politicians, businessmen, and other VIPs.

Its most southerly town Bundoran was home to two notorious industrial schools which housed many vulnerable children who could have been preyed upon by local and visiting abusers.

St Martha’s, which was run by the St Louis nuns, was dreaded for its brutality. The institution became infamous for the ‘Bundoran shave’, following an incident in 1963 in which eight girls caught trying to escape had their heads completely shorn as punishment.

Meanwhile, in the neighbouring Sligo village of Mullaghmore, the once-cherished legacy of Lord Louis Mountbatten, mentor and godfather to Prince Charles, is gradually being revised as allegations persist about his possible links to the Kincora Boys Home scandal and paedophilia.

His bizarre friendship with predatory sex offender Jimmy Saville, whom Mountbatten introduced to the inner circle of the British royal family, has added fuel to the claims.

Belfast writer Robin Bryans was considered at length in an article by Joseph De Búrca last month in Village. His family connections to the Orange Order gave him access to the secret lives of some members of the British aristocracy. In 1990, he claimed that Mountbatten was involved in an old-boys’ network that held gay orgies in country houses.

There is growing disquiet about what really went on behind the austere walls of Mountbatten’s Sligo castle, ‘Classiebawn’, where he employed young boys to work for him.

One of them, Paul Maxwell from Enniskillen, Fermanagh, was his waiter and ‘boat-boy’.

He was just 15 when he died alongside Mountbatten (79) in an IRA bomb attack during a fishing trip in august 1979.

Maxwell attended Portora Royal College in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland’s most hallowed school, about which allegations have been made that vice rings were able to procure some of its well-bred students.

On summer trips to his imposing Victorian castle, Mountbatten got to know locals with influence and similar interests.

Sean McEniff was one of the first on the scene in Mullaghmore harbour on the day of the explosion. Eyebrows were raised when the Donegal councillor later called for the erection of a memorial to Mountbatten in sligo, generating consternation in some quarters as to why a Fianna Fáil politician from outside the area would take such a stance, and questions were asked as to who exactly he was trying to impress.

Fianna Fail’s connections with Mountbatten’s close friend Jimmy Saville are well documented. The ‘Top of the Pops’ host who sexually abused hundreds of children at the height of his fame in the 1970s was a regular visitor to Charles Haughey’s Dublin home ‘Abbéville’ in Kinsealy.

Another close associate of Mceniff, Bundoran beef baron Hugh Tunney, became an unlikely friend of Mountbatten during his stays in Sligo.

The former butcher’s apprentice, who went on to own the Gresham Hotel in Dublin, came to his aid when he could no longer fund the running of Classiebawn.

In 1976, a leasing agreement was put in place between the pair which allowed the British royal to visit the 3000-acre estate every August.

Reported to be a devout Catholic, Tunney was said to be present in the castle saying his rosary on the day the explosion struck.

Local affection for Tunney, who died in 2011, is thin on the ground.

Within the castle grounds, a graveyard containing the remains of dozens of unbaptised infants has become the subject of controversy in recent years. In 2006, a group of locals asked Tunney if they could erect a memorial to the children in the burial ground known as Cill na mBochtan, but he turned them down.

They were forced to place it on the roadside outside the estate instead, leaving a sour taste in the community for the millionaire cattle-dealer. Questions linger as to why he would not grant permission for it.

Earlier this month, Mountbatten’s murder again came under scrutiny when it emerged that a former British military police officer who worked as his security guard in Sligo had warned superiors several times that his old fishing boat was vulnerable to a bomb attack. The officer, Graham Yuill, said his concerns met deaf ears.

He was removed from his post shortly before the bombing and was told that Gardaí would be looking after Mountbatten from then on, an unusual decision given his status in the royal family.

These revelations add credence to theories that his IRA killers may not have acted alone and that he may have been killed for reasons that went deeper than the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Was a darker side to Mountbatten’s life in Sligo about to be revealed? Did others, apart from the Provisionals, want him dead? Why was security around him so lax given the fact that he was such an obvious target?

There’s little doubt that powerful forces were involved in Mary Boyle’s disappearance and the cover-up that followed. Is it possible that the sordid world of Anglo-Irish child abuse trafficking networks in London and Belfast, and of associated secret-service blackmailings, outlined in recent months by Joseph De Búrca in Village, had tentacles that reached into Cashelard in Donegal? This might explain the baffling failure by so many Garda commissioners, justice ministers and Irish governments to deal with a case that many believe could easily be solved. it could also provide an insight into why the British authorities have turned their backs on Mary Boyle, even though she was one of their own who went missing, abroad.



Gemma O’Doherty

ok, now i understand why this is in the conspiracy theory thread!

BlackWitch

bubblypop wrote: »

ok, now i understand why this is in the conspiracy theory thread!

Maybe because there isn't a Conspiracy thread.

dense

bubblypop wrote: »

ok, now i understand why this is in the conspiracy theory thread!

I think you'd like it to be so. Brush it under the carpet like.

It might be a stretch, but on first glance some of the details mentioned do stack up.

https://amp.independent.ie/regionals/sligochampion/news/hugh-tunney-was-one-of-countrys-top-businessmen-27582641.html

http://www.thejournal.ie/savile-haughey-thatcher-1212851-Dec2013/

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/541793/SNP-activist-killed-over-child-sex-files

Sometimes truth IS stranger than fiction.

Can you give an explanation for the seemingly endless and open ended "reviews" of the case of Mary Boyle??

The autonomous "local coroner"?

The ministerial washing of hands of this case?

Its all a bit too Fr. Molloy.
Dark Ireland.

The cops don't want to touch it because it'll bring their colleagues who investigated it originally (poorly and haphazardly) into disrepute.

That wouldn't do, there's enough cràp on their plate from Donegal without bringing more unwanted attention onto themselves.

Clair4

I wish this and other stories like this were all made up jesus christ and to think people worship these people in power and the royals and to think that corruption is only for the feckers on the dole . My dad's friend was in letterfrack his mother left him there as she wanted to marry a new man , she later had more kids. He was sold to work in a factory at 14 he never told my dad anything else he just said you don't want to know that ,&please don't ever ask me that again. Just horrendous what went on

BlackWitch

BlackWitch wrote: »

Maybe because there isn't a Conspiracy thread.

You do realise that this thread is in conspiracy theories yea?

mikeymouse

bubblypop wrote: »

You do realise that this thread is in conspiracy theories yea?

Theories as opposed to actual ?

tayto lover

Unfortunately this thread is full of theories, innuendos, accusations, wishful thinkings and half truths. Very little fact.
Certain posters just use this thread to fling mud and not to get at the truth.
I have always said that the full truth lies within the family.
We will never get to it unless those family members who know what happened finally come out and tell the truth. I have a feeling that they will take it to their graves and a poor innocent girl will never get justice or a decent burial and that's the pity of it all.

oranbhoy67

tayto lover wrote: »

Unfortunately this thread is full of theories, innuendos, accusations, wishful thinkings and half truths. Very little fact.
Certain posters just use this thread to fling mud and not to get at the truth.
I have always said that the full truth lies within the family.
We will never get to it unless those family members who know what happened finally come out and tell the truth. I have a feeling that they will take it to their graves and a poor innocent girl will never get justice or a decent burial and that's the pity of it all.

this is the one thing we are sure off, & it is where we are trying to put pressure, I know why you are sceptical about us getting answers and you are probably right to be but a few of us are doing everything in our power to make sure that these people cant keep hiding the truth, nor take it to their grave .

There may be FF involvement, I certainly believe McEniff attempted it, but I don't know how serious he thought things were at the time, the Garda are definitely guilty of poor police work at the time, not wilfully they were just undertrained I believe.. something we could forgive them for if their modern counterparts would put more pressure on the guilty party,

but truthfully and realistically the one thing I am 100% certain of is it is a family cover up and we will keep at that family until something gives.. if nothing does give and these people are allowed to die with their secrets then we will turn our attention to the government and Gardai and demand answers on why they didn't listen to us whilst they were alive.

dense

tayto lover wrote: »

Very little fact.

I have always said that the full truth lies within the family.

Well how does the case progress from the standstill its been at for 40 years?

It's stuck in a time warp, for reasons that do not need to be even discussed.

Being realistic, unless the state urges the cops to get real and produce a non whitewash report of the garda handling of the original investigation nothing changes.