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

oranbhoy67

Michael O Toole wrote: »

If that is the claim, it's just bollox. All Gemma had to do was contact me and ask me what happened and I would have told her. I'm not the hardest person to find.

This is what happened: I was in Mullingar for the press briefing when he was arrested. I knew that he was held under certain legislation that meant he had to be released after 24 hours. Back in Dublin the next day we were discussing what to do and it was suggested that one of us should go back and confront him if, or when, he was released back into the custody of the prison service. I said that the cops would probably drive him out and we wouldn't get near him, so we just sent a photographer instead. He waited there all day as we had no idea if he was getting out. Then a car was driven out and he got one frame. He had no idea if it was McMahon as we didn't know he had been released. It was only when the cops said the man they had in custody had been released that we figured it was him. We then spent several hours trying to contact people back out west who could ID him. Eventually we got people who knew him form way back. No conspiracy.

I misunderstood your original question , what you have said here sounds true

Michael O Toole

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

do you mean the accusations about him were fed to the gardai by the suspect

If that's the case I have never heard that before,

McMahons original abuse case is also very suspect and hopefully something that can be covered another time

I am saddened but not shocked to hear that Gemma never replied to you , I would hope that was is contained in the documentary and even what I and others have wrote on here would give any other criminal reporter enough to start their own investigations , im not sure how it works with Journalists but surely no one should have a monopoly on investigating the case? the more the merrier in my opinion.

No, I meant that it was claimed to me, in essence, that McMahon was offered up to us by the cops when he was in custody. It's the exact opposite of what happened, but anyway.

oranbhoy67

Michael O Toole wrote: »

No, I meant that it was claimed to me, in essence, that McMahon was offered up to us by the cops when he was in custody. It's the exact opposite of what happened, but anyway.

yeah i understand that now
What is the general consensus now amongst journalists? is there a wilingness yet to finally cover this story?
id hate to think that some dont want to touch the story "because its Gemma's" for want of a better way of phrasing it, which sometimes is the impression I get..obviously not being in that world I could very well be wrong

Satriale

Michael O Toole wrote: »

If that is the claim, it's just bollox. All Gemma had to do was contact me and ask me what happened and I would have told her. I'm not the hardest person to find.

This is what happened: I was in Mullingar for the press briefing when he was arrested. I knew that he was held under certain legislation that meant he had to be released after 24 hours. Back in Dublin the next day we were discussing what to do and it was suggested that one of us should go back and confront him if, or when, he was released back into the custody of the prison service. I said that the cops would probably drive him out and we wouldn't get near him, so we just sent a photographer instead. He waited there all day as we had no idea if he was getting out. Then a car was driven out and he got one frame. He had no idea if it was McMahon as we didn't know he had been released. It was only when the cops said the man they had in custody had been released that we figured it was him. We then spent several hours trying to contact people back out west who could ID him. Eventually we got people who knew him form way back. No conspiracy.

Thanks, that's fair enough, but do watch it yourself, i might be taking it up wrong. It's only a small issue in the scheme of things anyway, but please do consider taking it up again, the most important thing is getting to the bottom of the disappearance of that child and if there was any political interference in the investigation. Someone knows something and i doubt they are in the demographic that read the Journal and Boards.

Michael O Toole

oranbhoy67 wrote: »

yeah i understand that now
What is the general consensus now amongst journalists? is there a wilingness yet to finally cover this story?
id hate to think that some dont want to touch the story "because its Gemma's" for want of a better way of phrasing it, which sometimes is the impression I get..obviously not being in that world I could very well be wrong

But that's the point; when did it become anyone's story? The Sunday World did heaps on the case; we've done it. All papers have done it. A colleague of mine spent ages trying to do a story on it after I contacted Gemma. We thought our best way was to speak to the two ex-gardai. He repeatedly tried to track them down. I have been up to my bollix with this feud and have not been able to spend the time I would have liked to on Mary Boyle's disappearance. But we haven't ignored it. It's unfair of people to say the media haven't touched this.

Michael O Toole

Michael O Toole wrote: »

But that's the point; when did it become anyone's story? The Sunday World did heaps on the case; we've done it. All papers have done it. A colleague of mine spent ages trying to do a story on it after I contacted Gemma. We thought our best way was to speak to the two ex-gardai. He repeatedly tried to track them down. I have been up to my bollix with this feud and have not been able to spend the time I would have liked to on Mary Boyle's disappearance. But we haven't ignored it. It's unfair of people to say the media haven't touched this.

If you're asking me what the consensus is, it's quite clear that she was murdered and the person who is the reputed suspect has been known for quite some time.
But, and this is what I was trying to tell you on Twitter and it may be unpalatable, most reporters would be of the belief that until her body is found or other physical evidence is recovered, it's a missing person's case.
That doesn't mean I don't believe she was murdered. I don't. I have no doubt about that. But there is a difference between knowing something and proving it. By the same token, I have no doubt in my mind what happened Madeleine McCann, but I can't say it.

oranbhoy67

Michael O Toole wrote: »

But that's the point; when did it become anyone's story? The Sunday World did heaps on the case; we've done it. All papers have done it. A colleague of mine spent ages trying to do a story on it after I contacted Gemma. We thought our best way was to speak to the two ex-gardai. He repeatedly tried to track them down. I have been up to my bollix with this feud and have not been able to spend the time I would have liked to on Mary Boyle's disappearance. But we haven't ignored it. It's unfair of people to say the media haven't touched this.

when I read the Sunday World article was when the lightbulb first went off in my head on who the suspect was, and as I said earlier Im told that Sunday World Journalists rang back to Dublin that day to say they knew within hours of being there who killed Mary.. but why just drop the case there??

This created the vacuum that led to Gemma being brought in, how can one freelance journalist be able to do all this work that no newpaper or TV show has? the 2 retired Gards cant be too hard to track down if Gemma managed to get them in the first place, Why cant RTE be called out for their total lack of investigation into this case.. I can understand that there is complications and obstacles there for the media, I didnt understand a few months ago but I do now but to us ordinary citizens looking for answers and indeed to the International press all they can see is a monumental failure by the Irish media .

If you can't get a hold of the ex gards or you feel that you are being hindered in your investigations then why not report that and ask why ! all publicity is good publicity for this case ! it would look a hell of a lot better on your trade as well than the near complete silence there has been on these recent revelations

Going Forward

Michael O Toole wrote: »

But, and this is what I was trying to tell you on Twitter and it may be unpalatable, most reporters would be of the belief that until her body is found or other physical evidence is recovered, it's a missing person's case.
That doesn't mean I don't believe she was murdered. I don't. I have no doubt about that.

This predicament can be partially solved by moving from describing Mary as being "missing" to describing her as being "missing, presumed murdered".

Michael O Toole

Going Forward wrote: »

This predicament can be partially solved by moving from describing Mary as being "missing" to describing her as being "missing, presumed murdered".

As has been done.

Going Forward

Michael O Toole wrote: »

As has been done.

Do you believe the account of events given by the last person to see her alive?

SafeSurfer

stuar wrote: »

https://www.fiannafail.ie/contact-us/



Any of the 1,000's of lookers can contact FF for justice and drop the cover-up.

To be honest I think the whole "political" cover up is being overdone. A very junior politician would not have the ability to demand an end to an investigation through one phone call.
I feel it is unsettling to see Lynn Boylan championing the case of a disappeared child, holding up her picture in the European parliament. Has she or any member of her party championed the cases of the other disappeared on this island? Some of whom are believed by many to have been disappeared on the orders of her party leader? It smacks to me of shameless hypocrisy and political oppourtunism.

Going Forward

SafeSurfer wrote: »

To be honest I think the whole "political" cover up is being overdone. A very junior politician would not have the ability to demand an end to an investigation through one phone call.
I feel it is unsettling to see Lynn Boylan championing the case of a disappeared child, holding up her picture in the European parliament. Has she or any member of her party championed the cases of the other disappeared on this island? Some of whom are believed by many to have been disappeared on the orders of her party leader? It smacks to me of shameless hypocrisy and political oppourtunism.

Do you believe the account of events given by the last person to see her alive?

NIMAN

SafeSurfer wrote: »

To be honest I think the whole "political" cover up is being overdone. A very junior politician would not have the ability to demand an end to an investigation through one phone call.
I feel it is unsettling to see Lynn Boylan championing the case of a disappeared child, holding up her picture in the European parliament. Has she or any member of her party championed the cases of the other disappeared on this island? Some of whom are believed by many to have been disappeared on the orders of her party leader? It smacks to me of shameless hypocrisy and political oppourtunism.

Well it seems to have happened.

The person who was the last to see Mary alive was never formally questioned. This is so against the grain for missing people investigations, I would say you will struggle to ever find a similar example anywhere in the world.

fryup

SafeSurfer wrote: »

To be honest I think the whole "political" cover up is being overdone. A very junior politician would not have the ability to demand an end to an investigation through one phone call.

i find that hard to fathom myself, unless that politician comes from a very powerful family in that part of the world?

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I feel it is unsettling to see Lynn Boylan championing the case of a disappeared child, holding up her picture in the European parliament. Has she or any member of her party championed the cases of the other disappeared on this island? Some of whom are believed by many to have been disappeared on the orders of her party leader? It smacks to me of shameless hypocrisy and political oppourtunism.

x 100 agree, sickening hypocrisy

cosanostra

It became very clear watching the Documentary that it was extremely unlikely that any outsider was involved in taking Mary.

Someone like Robert Black who has being suggested as the perpetrator would need to have known there was children in that remote location and that one of them would seperate away from sight of anyone and manage to take her without anyone seeing him or his van in the area in the first place.

Another suggestion is that Mary wandered off towards a busier rd and was taken but I can't get around the point that a 6yr old would find it very difficult to navigate the stone boundary walls and bogland all without losing a wellie (which were a size too big) in the bog or the ribbon in her hair.

K-9

fryup wrote: »

i find that hard to fathom myself, unless that politician comes from a very powerful family in that part of the world?

I'd be thinking business interests would have been significant, possibly appointments to state boards, that type of thing.

Going Forward

NIMAN wrote: »

Well it seems to have happened.

The person who was the last to see Mary alive was never formally questioned. This is so against the grain for missing people investigations, I would say you will struggle to ever find a similar example anywhere in the world.

This is what the investigators were told by the last person who is believed to have seen her:

"She was walking behind me alright, that's all I know".

And it was accepted as an explanation for almost 40 years.

That she disappeared, silently, into thin air and some malarkey about a ladder.

Johnboy1951

Were all or some of the family members, who were present the night before, questioned under caution?

Missymoohaa

Michael O Toole wrote: »

If you're asking me what the consensus is, it's quite clear that she was murdered and the person who is the reputed suspect has been known for quite some time.
But, and this is what I was trying to tell you on Twitter and it may be unpalatable, most reporters would be of the belief that until her body is found or other physical evidence is recovered, it's a missing person's case.
That doesn't mean I don't believe she was murdered. I don't. I have no doubt about that. But there is a difference between knowing something and proving it. By the same token, I have no doubt in my mind what happened Madeleine McCann, but I can't say it.

Mick I've long held you in high regard for your reporting, your tweets on the Graham Dwyer case were a must follow for me on the case. You pull no punches and that's for sure. I and many others have been so saddened by this case and that of Fr. Niall Molloy. Something stinks to high heaven in the state of Ireland and somebody in main stream media needs to don the armour and investigate this properly, it needs to be on everyone's lips and every platform and if it topples a political party or two then so be it. A child is missing presumed murdered, there are very serious allegations of political interference by members of An Garda who investigated the case. Yet Enda Kenny and Frances Fitzgerald seem fit to brush it under the carpet. My first question would be Why?

This combined with the Fr Niall case could be potentially a defining moment in Irish political history, I would urge you and your esteemed colleagues to act now. I have being going to bed every night lately very sad and very frustrated by this case.

Dolbert

SafeSurfer wrote: »

To be honest I think the whole "political" cover up is being overdone. A very junior politician would not have the ability to demand an end to an investigation through one phone call.

I agree that this alone wouldn't have been enough, it doesn't make sense. If a politician and say, a senior garda felt it in their best interests to keep something quiet however, it tells a different story. There has to be more at play here than just these two people.

NIMAN

Dolbert wrote: »

I agree that this alone wouldn't have been enough, it doesn't make sense. If a politician and say, a senior garda felt it in their best interests to keep something quiet however, it tells a different story.

But even if there was a local councillor and a senior Guard in the area who didn't want an investigation, surely there are a lot of people more senior to this in the State who would have been asking why an investigation wasn't progressing?

Going Forward

Missymoohaa wrote: »

Mick I've long held you in high regard for your reporting, your tweets on the Graham Dwyer case were a must follow for me on the case. You pull no punches and that's for sure. I and many others have been so saddened by this case and that of Fr. Niall Molloy. Something stinks to high heaven in the state of Ireland and somebody in main stream media needs to don the armour and investigate this properly, it needs to be on everyone's lips and every platform and if it topples a political party or two then so be it. A child is missing presumed murdered, there are very serious allegations of political interference by members of An Garda who investigated the case. Yet Enda Kenny and Frances Fitzgerald seem fit to brush it under the carpet. My first question would be Why?

This combined with the Fr Niall case could be potentially a defining moment in Irish political history, I would urge you and your esteemed colleagues to act now. I have being going to bed every night lately very sad and very frustrated by this case.

You're wasting your time.

He's gone from the thread.

He appeared to explain how he "called out" another journalist for claiming Mary had been murdered and then said he'd no doubt himself that she'd been murdered.

He's gone silent after being asked if he swallowed the account given by Mary's uncle.

About something to do with a ladder.

That the cops lapped up.

Except two of them who claim they were asked to lay off by their superiors.

We could leave any allegations about political interference to one side for a moment and just consider what they claim.

They were asked to go easy.

In the absence of any legitimate explanation of what happened to the girl, they claim they were told to accept what they were told.

And then consider the allegation of political interference.

And the Minister for Justice has washed her hands of it and put the ball back into the local coroner's court advising that the decision to hold an inquest is entirely a local issue at the discretion of the local coroner.

But local coroner doesn't want to upset someone.

The girl's mother. Or the mother's brother.

I can't remember.

Maybe journalists might start asking a few difficult questions and calling out others involved in this case instead of being content to explain how they "called out" a journalist for saying she'd been murdered.

Questions need to be asked about the handling of this case, and as you rightly point out, the Molloy case.

Are our journalists up to the job?

What do you think?

SafeSurfer

NIMAN wrote: »

But even if there was a local councillor and a senior Guard in the area who didn't want an investigation, surely there are a lot of people more senior to this in the State who would have been asking why an investigation wasn't progressing?

That is something that sticks out for me also. There are 140 superintendents in the Gardai. Do all of these, acting alone have the power to direct investigations without review by chief superintendents or assistant commissioners? Could any combination of councillor and superintendent conspire to stymie an investigation anywhere in the country? I find it very hard to believe. I find it hard to believe that a politician who could not prevent his own conviction for a road traffic offence could prevent a murder Inquiry in the same Garda district.

Going Forward

SafeSurfer wrote: »

That is something that sticks out for me also. There are 140 superintendents in the Gardai. Do all of these, acting alone have the power to direct investigations without review by chief superintendents or assistant commissioners? Could any combination of councillor and superintendent conspire to stymie an investigation anywhere in the country? I find it very hard to believe. I find it hard to believe that a politician who could not prevent his own conviction for a road traffic offence could prevent a murder Inquiry in the same Garda district.

If you're right, and you may be, there was still no proper investigation beyond asking someone what happened to the child that was supposedly walking with them.

rightyabe

I see a certain FF councillor has deleted their Facebook account after somebody asked them about the case..

Going Forward

NIMAN wrote: »

But even if there was a local councillor and a senior Guard in the area who didn't want an investigation, surely there are a lot of people more senior to this in the State who would have been asking why an investigation wasn't progressing?

Not necessarily. That was 1977.

Years after the gardai were still able to decide what they wanted to investigate and what they didn't.

Look at the Ferns report.

If they didn't want to "actively" investigate something there was no one going to make them.

Then you have the Morris Tribunal.

For Donegal.

LynnGrace

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/editorial/rot-from-the-top-that-ripped-the-heart-out-of-the-gardai-26223114.html

I think this is worth a read also, to give context to the general era in which little Mary Boyle disappeared.
It seems that political interference was quite usual, in Garda matters.

Michael O Toole

Going Forward wrote: »

You're wasting your time.

He's gone from the thread.

He appeared to explain how he "called out" another journalist for claiming Mary had been murdered and then said he'd no doubt himself that she'd been murdered.

He's gone silent after being asked if he swallowed the account given by Mary's uncle.

About something to do with a ladder.

That the cops lapped up.

Except two of them who claim they were asked to lay off by their superiors.

We could leave any allegations about political interference to one side for a moment and just consider what they claim.

They were asked to go easy.

In the absence of any legitimate explanation of what happened to the girl, they claim they were told to accept what they were told.

And then consider the allegation of political interference.

And the Minister for Justice has washed her hands of it and put the ball back into the local coroner's court advising that the decision to hold an inquest is entirely a local issue at the discretion of the local coroner.

But local coroner doesn't want to upset someone.

The girl's mother. Or the mother's brother.

I can't remember.

Maybe journalists might start asking a few difficult questions and calling out others involved in this case instead of being content to explain how they "called out" a journalist for saying she'd been murdered.

Questions need to be asked about the handling of this case, and as you rightly point out, the Molloy case.

Are our journalists up to the job?

What do you think?

Eh, I went to bed. **** me, that was some rant.

I didn't answer because I don't think it's appropriate. And I thought it was a leading question.
You can defame who you want. I won't.

brooke 2

K-9 wrote: »

I'd be thinking business interests would have been significant, possibly appointments to state boards, that type of thing.

I would also be inclined to think that certain influential member/s of the Gardaí
might have had been involved in 'grace and favour activities'.
It's not as though these kind of things don't happen.

brooke 2

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Were all or some of the family members, who were present the night before, questioned under caution?

The 'instruction' from the politician, allegedly, was that no member of the girl's
family was to be questioned.

brooke 2

Dolbert wrote: »

I agree that this alone wouldn't have been enough, it doesn't make sense. If a politician and say, a senior garda felt it in their best interests to keep something quiet however, it tells a different story. There has to be more at play here than just these two people.

The relationship between the politician and the senior garda is key. Who knows what nest of vipers may have been unleashed if the case had been allowed to proceed?

stuar

SafeSurfer wrote: »

To be honest I think the whole "political" cover up is being overdone. A very junior politician would not have the ability to demand an end to an investigation through one phone call.

Well he did, and while he is a junior politician he's also a multi-millionaire, and even if he wasn't a FF councillor I believe he would still have great influence with Ireland's elite. His businesses span Ireland, employ 15,000+ people.

While all the media outlets are holding back from any meaningful investigative journalism surrounding Mary Boyle, a drug pusher (alcohol) relative of said junior politician gets a photo-op in a national newspaper for buying a laptop for a victim of theft with the local force, all smiles.

stuar

brooke 2 wrote: »

I would also be inclined to think that certain influential member/s of the Gardaí
might have had their wages supplemented by in question.
It's not as though these kind of things don't happen.

Maybe edit that?;)

brooke 2

LynnGrace wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/editorial/rot-from-the-top-that-ripped-the-heart-out-of-the-gardai-26223114.html

I think this is worth a read also, to give context to the general era in which little Mary Boyle disappeared.
It seems that political interference was quite usual, in Garda matters.

That was written in 2004! Fair dues to Garda Tully, one of the good ones. A precursor to Sgt. Maurice McCabe.

'Squaring' and 'grace and favour' - this article reveals a lot of the rot. It might explain, in part, what went on in
the Mary Boyle case. It has been mentioned that the suspect is an ordinary member of FF. An extreme case of
'squaring', perhaps?

LynnGrace

brooke 2 wrote: »

That was written in 2004! Fair dues to Garda Tully, one of the good ones. A precursor to Sgt. Maurice McCabe.

'Squaring' and 'grace and favour' - this article reveals a lot of the rot. It might explain, in part, what went on in
the Mary Boyle case. It has been mentioned that the suspect is an ordinary member of FF. An extreme case of
'squaring', perhaps?

Yes, it was written in 2004. I remembered reading it at that time, and thought it was very interesting.

While it refers mostly to the early eighties, I thought it was worth linking here to give some context to the happenings in the general era of when little Mary Boyle disappeared.

SafeSurfer

stuar wrote: »

Well he did, and while he is a junior politician he's also a multi-millionaire, and even if he wasn't a FF councillor I believe he would still have great influence with Ireland's elite. His businesses span Ireland, employ 15,000+ people.

While all the media outlets are holding back from any meaningful investigative journalism surrounding Mary Boyle, a drug pusher (alcohol) relative of said junior politician gets a photo-op in a national newspaper for buying a laptop for a victim of theft with the local force, all smiles.

It doesn't do much for your posts credibility when you refer to public and as drug pushers. Relatives of criminals are not responsible for crimes. Relatives of those accused of crimes even less so.

NIMAN

Going Forward wrote: »

Not necessarily. That was 1977.

Years after the gardai were still able to decide what they wanted to investigate and what they didn't.

Look at the Ferns report.

If they didn't want to "actively" investigate something there was no one going to make them.

Then you have the Morris Tribunal.

For Donegal.

Fair enough, but its no longer 1977.

We should have moved on and this case is unsolved and open and can still be investigated, especially as there seems to be a lot of speculation that the killer is still walking around unquestioned.

Just because its 40 years ago, doesn't mean we should forget about this little girl.
Jean McConville was murdered over 44 years ago and someone looks like they are going to stand trial
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/07/jean-mcconville-murder-republican-ivor-bell-to-stand-trial-over/

brooke 2

LynnGrace wrote: »

Yes, it was written in 2004. I remembered reading it at that time, and thought it was very interesting.

While it refers mostly to the early eighties, I thought it was worth linking here to give some context to the happenings in the general era of when little Mary Boyle disappeared.

Thank you for posting it. It articulates very well what I had been suspecting
might have been happening in the Mary Boyle case. I had never heard of the
term 'squaring', even though I had often read/heard of cases where it was involved. :mad:

jenny smith

stuar wrote: »

Well he did, and while he is a junior politician he's also a multi-millionaire, and even if he wasn't a FF councillor I believe he would still have great influence with Ireland's elite. His businesses span Ireland, employ 15,000+ people.

While all the media outlets are holding back from any meaningful investigative journalism surrounding Mary Boyle, a drug pusher (alcohol) relative of said junior politician gets a photo-op in a national newspaper for buying a laptop for a victim of theft with the local force, all smiles.

It is pretty easy to get the original image of this where you accuse one of drug pushing

NIMAN

He is a publican, and the poster obviously considers it a drug. Most don't.

jenny smith

NIMAN wrote: »

He is a publican, and the poster obviously considers it a drug. Most don't.

why did he not just say he is a publican then .? Don't see why the relative is brought into it. will only cause trouble for the thread

ancapailldorcha

This isn't the first time this thread has required cleaning up. I'm going to ask that posters refrain from posting potentially libellous information from here on.

Going Forward

Michael O Toole wrote: »

Eh, I went to bed. **** me, that was some rant.

I didn't answer because I don't think it's appropriate. And I thought it was a leading question.
You can defame who you want. I won't.

I was overly harsh about you leaving the thread, and I did have a bit of a rant.

About the "leading question". It leads from you saying you believe she was murdered.

And the next truly "leading question" would have been who do you think murdered her.

But I haven't and won't ask you that.

I wanted to know if you, as a crime reporter, thought that the account that was given was plausible.

Theres no automatic link between you saying whether you think the account was implausible and you assigning murderer status to the person who gave it.

Bearing in mind that according to the gaurds it could have been anyone.
Such as the guy they arrested in 2014.

If you're not permitted to have an opinion on it for legal reasons that's fine, I won't hound you about it.

K-9

brooke 2 wrote: »

That was written in 2004! Fair dues to Garda Tully, one of the good ones. A precursor to Sgt. Maurice McCabe.

'Squaring' and 'grace and favour' - this article reveals a lot of the rot. It might explain, in part, what went on in
the Mary Boyle case. It has been mentioned that the suspect is an ordinary member of FF. An extreme case of
'squaring', perhaps?

The practice of Ministers for Justice squashing driving bans was going on until a couple of years ago.

stuar

SafeSurfer wrote: »

It doesn't do much for your posts credibility when you refer to public and as drug pushers. Relatives of criminals are not responsible for crimes. Relatives of those accused of crimes even less so.

Hang on there, alcohol is a drug, the person in question had a price war for the lowest cost drug in the town (alcohol), he bought a laptop for a victim of crime, and got a photo-op in a national newspaper with smiling gardai all around.

All I was trying to state was relatives of criminals shouldn't get national attention with smiling gardai because they filled a box on the bar with other peoples money and took full credit for it.

Make a "Find Truth For Mary" box on the bar and see how long it lasts and see if the cnut will take a photo-op then.

stuar

Michael O'Toole write a book about this similar to "The Beast Of Baltinglass", you know enough, and know enough how not to make it libellous, you could do do it in your spare time when the fued is not active.

It would really give you credit as a crime reporter as this is a crime greater than any gangland assassination, and the players are higher, but the price may be your job seeing as Denis O'Brien is your boss and may be cozy with FF councillor I understand your reluctance.

oranbhoy67

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This isn't the first time this thread has required cleaning up. I'm going to ask that posters refrain from posting potentially libellous information from here on.

not backseating modding here but please I urge every one to take this into account , there was a great 49 page thread on Politics.ie deleted because of similar

Esel

Stuar, are you actually trying to have the thread closed or deleted? You are again posting identifying and possibly defamatory information. I purposely have not quoted the posts in question. Please, please think before you post.

stuar

Esel wrote: »

Stuar, are you actually trying to have the thread closed or deleted? You are again posting identifying and possibly defamatory information. I purposely have not quoted the posts in question. Please, please think before you post.

I am not, Sherlock Holmes may suss what I'm on about but the average politician, gardai, judge, wouldn't, if they can untangle my bullsh1t they should be on top of this case years ago.

Esel

stuar wrote: »

I am not, Sherlock Holmes may suss what I'm on about but the average politician, gardai, judge, wouldn't, if they can untangle my bullsh1t they should be on top of this case years ago.

You may think you are not. However, Sherlock was a figment of ACD's imagination. The topic here is real, so real rules apply.